David, Interesting post. David, Ron, Dale, Del, etal, At this point in the discussion that we need mp3 capability! We need a clear understanding of what aesthetic assumptions are driving each contributor's design approaches, otherwise its just an hopeless exercise in conflicting verbosity. All of what you are saying David, what Dale was saying yesterday, What Ron has been saying, and Del's voice when he chimes in, as well as mine and whoever else contributes or lurks in this discusssion, only has meaning in relation to the aesthetic tonal goals we are looking for in the tonal palette. Words are useless, unto counterproductive, after a point, in describing these aesthetic goals. For example, when I read what David has described in terms of tonal goals, which I read as more complexity and range of tonal palette which includes greater noise at the attack (I could be wrong about what David's getting at...but that's my point, we need the sound), these words have been used endlessly to describe sounds I can hear in any conservatory performance instrument; instruments whose sound and touch I have no desire to reproduce in my own shop. What venue(s) are the instruments designed for? What types of music, as my experience of "full expressive range" always means, when push comes to shove, bloody Lizst and Rachmaninoff (and then I have to leave the room). In many ways Mozart, Bach and lots of Jazz, music conceived for small venues, or popular music, very well suffocate under this targeted late romantic "full expressive range". So please, we've talked about this for years! Lets create a library of sounds to accompany your posts. We could link to the main PTG.org in all its non-functionality, but still the sounds would be there. It would be a lot of work for the contributors, but I really think the discussion can only advance with this aural info. What say? Jim Ialeggio -- Jim Ialeggio jim at grandpianosolutions.com (978) 425-9026 Shirley, MA
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC