In a message dated 8/28/2009 7:34:17 P.M. Central Daylight Time, rnossaman at cox.net writes: PAULREVENKOJONES at aol.com wrote: > Well, nobody asked, but in case at least that many care - in > my world, David's got it right. > > Well, Ron, nobody did, but David has a perspective, as do you, which is > not "right" but self-informed, and so also not "wrong". Self informed? What's your authority? Speaking truth to power yet again! > I see no reason, presuming the > piano's tunable in the first place, that it can't be left in > an acceptable > > So, "acceptable" = "adequate" or "fine"? Which is it? > > Do these words mean nothing? Is there no distinction? > > > state of tune after a pitch raise. If, during > the process, every realistic effort is made to pound the slack > out of the back scale, followed by a real attempt to leave a > stable string as you typically would, there's no reason you > shouldn't end up with a piano as in tune as if you hadn't done > a pitch raise. > > Can you substitute the word "stable" in place of "in tune" and make the > same flat claim? (no pun intended) > > I agree with everything else you say, but I don't know what kind of > tuning you are describing. Only because you're not trying. Rats, and I thought I was very trying. P Ron N -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20090828/6670727b/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC