[CAUT] FW: Celesta regulation

[Fred Sturm]

------ Forwarded Message
From: Douglas Wood <dew2@u.washington.edu>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 13:40:38 -0800
To: Fred Sturm <fssturm@unm.edu>
Subject: Re: Celesta regulation

Fred,

I've unsubscribed from the CAUT email--it was taking too much time just
to throw out the ones--well you know which ones. So my email to CAUT
was rejected. If you think it's appropriate, perhaps you could post
this for me?

Thanks,

Doug Wood


Whew, time flies. I thought I'd report on my encounter with the
Schiedmeyer celeste as a thanks to those of you that were so helpful
last summer.

I charged the Symphony $1000, and they and I are delighted. They didn't
have to buy a new instrument (something like $30000??), and I got paid
adequately. It must be a durable instrument, as the only parts that got
replaced were the keybushings and some front rail punchings. Those were
for other reasons:

The complaint on the instrument was with repetition. What I think had
happened was that someone had attempted to get more volume out of the
instrument by maximizing hammer blow distance. This meant that the key
dip was something outrageous. The regulation was far enough from what
was in the Journal article that I was a bit worried as I worked through
it.

But I'm good at following a recipe, and the recipe seems a good one, as
the player finds that not only is the repetition vastly better, but
everyone agrees that the volume is up noticeably.

So, thanks to Steve, and thanks to the rest of you for your comments.
I'm sorry to have dropped off the listserve, but it was taking way too
much time to sift through the volume of stuff for the few items that
help with the work here at the UW. Half-time is not much time.

Doug Wood

------ End of Forwarded Message