[CAUT] Brodmann pianos

[Richard Brekne]

Just wanted to offer compliments on this and you last post. That 
expressed exactly the sentiment I attempted to convey. 

I thought I'd also dip into your second paragraph below.. the bit about 
the second of the two "false premises".  Is this a false premise ??   If 
you strike the word "obviously"... then the sentence could easily be 
reflecting someones honest opinion about resultant sound. If on the 
other hand it is an attempt at declaring that longer string lengths 
"enhance" sound regardless of anyone elses idea of sound and regardless 
of any other design considerations... then the statement is on very thin 
ice indeed.

That said.. what you follow up with about "doing the right thing for the 
wrong reasons"... is spot on.  Our world (and most others) are more 
complete with this kind of stumbling in the dark then not me thinks.  In 
the end much of what these resurgent ideas packed in new explanations 
declares will probably be revealed to be likewise.  Grin... ever read 
any of the debates around Cosmology ???.. 

Thanks for two very level headed posts.

Cheers
RicB


    Okay, I guess if somebody says that having no cantilever, and longer
    back scale, is "better" and that this is something that should be
    accepted as a "fact" I get the impression that it implies that 
    everyone else is wrong <G>. No big deal, I really admire and prefer 
    the attitude that constantly challenges assumptions and authority.
    But  sometimes there are dangers lurking in having "proven" the
    other side  wrong.

    Granted, the pro-cantilever crowd justify their design on false 
    premises: "it puts the bearing out in a more resonant part of the
    soundboard;" "it allows for longer string length, which obviously is
    to be preferred." This is twaddle, as you have very ably pointed
    out.  But that doesn't necessarily make shorter back length and
    cantilever a  bad design feature per se. Lots of people do the
    "right" thing for the  "wrong" reason - and vice versa <G>.

    Regards,
    Fred Sturm
    University of New Mexico
    fssturm at unm.edu