[CAUT] WAPIN Installation

[Otto Keyes]

Ric, Jim & all,

No, my post was not directed at anyone, just the penchant we humans (& piano
tuning ones in particular) seem to have for jumping all over ideas which go
against our pre-conceived notions -- often without giving it much thought.
Good research is always welcome, and more power to those who have the
knowledge and drive to undertake it.

Jim, as I said, the comment was not directed at anyone, let alone you, so I
am doubly sorry for your resentment.  Keep up the valuable research!


----- Original Message -----
From: "RicB" <ricb at pianostemmer.no>
To: <caut at ptg.org>
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 10:49 AM
Subject: [CAUT] WAPIN Installation


> Friends:
>
> Please, lets not stretch out our spine-pins and jump into respective
> corners waiting for the bell to ring.  Jim, I agree that some very good
> questions have been put forward and deserve a good answer.  I am sure
> given the spirit of you last sentence that you will agree that the
> absence of any studies shows nothing in itself.  As far as Ottos post is
> concerned.  I did not see that it was directed at anyone in particular.
> Perhaps there are things hidden from me, but I cant see how these
> remarks, nor those of Michaels could be directed at you.  On the other
> hand... there has been and no doubt will continue to be commentary from
> some that *are* deserving of such reaction. Indeed, and quite so.
>
> I agree there is much about Wapin that seems interesting and needs
> closer scientific scrutiny. I also have had first hand experience and
> was left with the impression that there was a clear difference in sound
> character, tho I'll be the first to admit my impressions thus are far
> from conclusive evidence.  From a speculative standpoint... it would
> seem to me that altering the semi-clamp that the bridge pin / bridge
> surface combine to enforce upon the string such that it becomes
> significantly less clamp-like would very likely cause some change in how
> the system performs... ultimately affecting the overall sound. I would
> think the added mass of the extra pins to be less significant... after
> all... we are only talking around 50 grams for the whole piano... less
> the removed mass of the wood drilled out to make room for them.  But...
> this is all speculation based on a few bits I think I know about
> things.  Nice for discussion... perhaps good to put down on paper before
> planning any real science.... but otherwise quite useless.  Certainly...
> none of our speculations are worth arguing about. And certainly... none
> of the attempts at any real science are worth simply discarding without
> further ado.
>
> Cheers
> RicB
>
>
>     COMMENT:  Then I examined the 1929 Wapinized D in Cincinnati and
>     compared
>     it with the 1984 a few years ago, I did like the 1929 better.  The
>     sustaining quality in the upper octaves did sound better to me, and
>     I said
>     so to Michael Wathen at the time.  However, I could not determine if
the
>     difference were because of the WAPIN, of simply a result of the total
>     rebuilding the piano had been given.  I did not notice the peculiar
>     characteristic in note D3 that shows up in the web site spectrums.
>
>     COMMENT:  The questions that some of us have recently reased have
>     been good
>     questions, neither for nor against the WAPIN, but merely asking for
more
>     scientifically acceptable data than those that have been presented.
>     I just
>     read Otto Keyes November 5 post.  His reference to posts such as mine
as
>     "authority of ignorance" and "pigeon pooh" is off limits, does not
>     belong
>     on this list, and I resent it.
>
>     COMMENT:  Michael Wathen's disparaging remarks about the piano
>     industry are
>     not very well received either, nor was I talking about subjective
>     opinions.
>      I was talking about data that are supposed to show that the Wapin
>     either
>     does or does not make a difference - data that in my opinion, show
>     neither,
>     and leave the question wide open.
>
>     Sincerely, Jim Ellis
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.13.29/520 - Release Date: 11/6/2006
>
>