[pianotech] What is bloom,

[Nicholas Gravagne]

On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 11:10 AM, John Delacour <JD at pianomaker.co.uk> wrote:
> At 10:25 -0700 19/03/2011, David Love wrote:
>
> Well I suggest you stick to bloom because I already complained you were
> hi-jacking my original bloom to talk of something different and started a
> new thread titled "SWELL   was What is bloom", now just "SWELL" for
> discussing the original phenomenon.  You lot keep 'bloom' and leave SWELL to
> me, Ron Nossaman and others who are sticking to the subject.!
>
> JD

JD --- really now, this is insulting, beneath you and inconsistent
with your own behavior on these pages . For starters, you "hijacked"
your own thread, originally entitled "tuning the duplex" (Mar 14), and
if this didn't originate with you, then you hijacked that one with a
slight, but critical, turn in the subject matter that began with your
phase,

"I had a surprise the other day which I hope to be able to understand
in due course. I've mentioned once or twice in the past that the sound
of certain pianos will blossom and flourish noticeably when all the
dampers are lifted _after_ the notes have been played and held
down..." (See Mar 14).

As a judge might say in a court of law when an objection is made per a
line of questioning, "Overruled, Mr. Delacour, you introduced this
line yourself." Very soon after your introduction of the rare
experience of "blossom and flourish" several posters began jumping in
relative to this tangential idea. The original subject of tuning the
duplex had forever shifted at that point. David L. had twice tried to
change the subject heading, not hijack it; the first on Mar 17 had Del
jump in, but no others joined in. The second was also by DL on Mar 17
and that one took off under the new heading "What is bloom". If you
can't see that others made a sincere attempt to move things primarily
in a different direction, but only partly related to your bloom idea,
then please check the history before you begin scolding us as
children.

Now the crux of the matter for me. This list is open and un-moderated
as to its subject matter and its many iterations. Short of crossing
some line, it needs to stay that way for all its faults, including
many of the silly arguments that ensue. Many veteran posters are keen
to the need of changing the subject matter and re-posting under a new
or slightly modified heading. This is imperfectly applied as it is
poster-driven by many of us working stiffs. This has come up before as
far as you and I are concerned (even though you have never directed
any impatience at me). I value your input, your intelligence, your
passion, skills, artistry, intensity, insights, willingness to share
and elevate. The overall package you bring to the table is mpressive
and sometimes brilliant.

So tell me now, do you wish for your postings to be read-only or do
you desire replies? Only intelligent replies? Should we live in fear
that we might ask a wrong question, misunderstand your post or reply
to it with inappropriate insight or else modify it with a tangential
idea, only to be humiliated by a public scolding? There are a few on
this list that I read but do not reply to. Do you wish to be on that
list? For me, should you continue in such impatient an attitude you
will eventually get what you apparently want --- a small coterie of
elitists. You can read each other posts and I might check in
occasionally to see if there is anything of interest. That's me; I
make no claims of speaking for anyone else.

You are British, historically from a land of enormous turmoil, even
mystical and mythical underpinnings; a fomenting crucible out of which
sprang a most powerful and comprehensive system of jurisprudence, much
of which was exported to America. The legendary debating skills and
high intelligence of Brits in action hold no superiors. Often
thick-skinned and tough speaking, your countrymen, past and present,
pride themselves in being able to take it as well as dish it out. I
trust this is true of you.

You may argue your defense. I expect it, but I am done with this
thread or any thread that begins sincerely then degenerates into
personality, cult of personality, or else the thread is dismissed as
insignificant because if fails to live up to "serious inquiry" or
"real science".

So, alright, I have gotten this off my chest. Now, as for me, I  have
something to do which is far more uplifting --- I am going for a walk
in the forest. I leave you to have the last word.

Most respectfully,

-- 
Nick Gravagne, RPT
AST Mechanical Engineering