At 12:53 AM 4/17/2005, "William R. Monroe" <pianotech@a440piano.net> wrote: >I think Alan hit this on the head by saying that this new improved tuning, >as it were, is quite likely not so improved over the way the rest of the >world tunes (and perhaps not so original, as others have alluded). > >Think for a moment, how many clients, (performers or otherwise) know their >instrument is out of tune. Consider now, how many of those can tell the >difference from one temperament to the next. Consider now, those who can >discern if some of your thirds are not quite right. Consider now, how many >can tell if Bernhard Stopper tunes their piano, or anyone else in the world. >Consider now, how many of these who say they can tell the difference at any >of these levels really can. Bernard's delusions do not end here. I ran his scheme and his financial numbers past a marketing executive. After she finished laughing, she said that his financials do not add up to a small fraction of what it would take to promote a brand name to retail clients on a worldwide scale - or, for that matter, even in a limited territory. The willingness to pay a premium price for a service is mostly dependent on name recognition - and there is no way that this scheme can supply that kind of name recognition without pouring millions of dollars into a visibility campaign in advance of rollout. But then, perhaps, Bernard has Bill Gates bankrolling his scheme... :-) His projected revenue also will not be sufficient to legally protect any patent infringement - especially on an international scale - and the projected revenue increase from a possible $10 premium on the price of a tuning will not yield sufficient revenue for his licensees to undertake legal action on their own to protect their license. (Larger premiums are impractical). There just isn't enough revenue here to motivate an attorney to work on a contingency basis, so any legal costs for protecting this license would have to be paid up front. So, a license that cannot be protected legally is essentially worthless. Caveat emptor, folks - Bernard has no legal obligations towards his licensees if the promised additional income does not materialize or if unlicensed imitators steal your clients... General Motors would not have any dealers if it could not legally protect its trademarks and brand names - but it has the resources to do so. Bernard will not have the resources to protect his licensees... Then again, is Bernard vetting his licensees or training them in basic tuning methodology? Or is he just offering to sell the license to all comers? Because the most wonderful tuning system, in the hands of a poorly trained practitioner, will still yield imprecise temperaments and intervals, poor unisons and unstable tunings. Since the most likely initial buyers of Bernard's license are likely to be tuners who are desperately looking for gimmicks to help with building clientele - that is, beginners or poorly trained tuners - his system is just as likely to develop the reputation as a gimmick used by charlatans to pry more money out of people for no good reason. So, if anyone pays attention to this system at all on the retail level, it is just as likely to be negative - as a gimmick for incompetent tuners to impress rubes... I certainly don't see where concert venues and promoters are going to drop their relationships with their current technicians and go hiring some unknown (at a premium rate, no less) just because he or she can flash a license for a gimmicky-sounding tuning scheme. And as far as artists - well, Bernard, when you have 100 artists make your tuning system a condition in their performer's contract, who have the kind of clout that can motivate a concert hall or promotion organization to fire their technician in favor of your licensee let us know, we might take you half-way seriously. So it seems that anyone who sends Bernard $400 up front for his license (if a patent ever happens) would be buying a pig in a poke - a license of questionable utility that cannot yield sufficient revenue even for adequate legal protection of the license itself. If you find yourself in need of cash, Bernard, I suggest you sell your licensee list (when you have one) to some marketing outfit that sells bridges in Brooklyn, real-estate in Florida and investment opportunities on the Internet for a share of their profit - you might do quite well... By the way. Don't hold your breath to be invited to demonstrate your "method" at any PTG convention. Since you are promoting a commercial product for sale, you would have to pay for a booth and - of course - pay your own expenses. If you do that, you could be given an opportunity to teach a "sponsored" class - along with the other manufacturers and distributors of products and services who have been exhibiting at the PTG conventions for years and years. Only those who are willing to share their knowledge and experience with no strings attached are sometimes subsidized by the PTG when they teach and demonstrate their knowledge. This open sharing of knowledge for the good of the entire profession is one of the basic tenets of this organization, and so perhaps it is time to think about a legal effort on the part of the PTG to oppose your patent application... We do have a lawyer, you know, and it appears that in the opinion of quite a few PTG members your licensing scheme is not in the best interest of the profession... Israel Stein >Seriously - and no, Bernhard, we are not joking around hear to allay fears - >the number of clients in the world, let alone in my area, that could >possibly tell the difference, is so absurdly small (nonexistent here), as to >be laughable. The end result of your trying to patent this method is to >alienate many in the industry by your pretensions. And for what. I say >again, people who cannot differentiate on this level sure as hell aren't >going to pay more for that Stopper Tuning. Those who might pay more, in >most cases, are paying for ostentation and tongue fodder, "I have this >instrument tuned in the Purely Whatever, it is the best in the world." > >Even when you can tell, by analyzing intervals etc., see what happens during >the performance. I doubt anyone will hear a thing, except that your unisons >are not clean. > >Just my not so humble opinion. > >William R. Monroe
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC