In a message dated 9/30/2009 10:23:44 P.M. Central Daylight Time, rnossaman at cox.net writes: > Wow, they sure may. > > We have a lot of pictures of the results of using differing tools on the > inside of the agraffe. The countersink tool creates a very rough surface > because of uncontrollable chatter. > > P Of what detriment are chatter marks parallel to the string, in real world practically detectable terms? They are not parallel to the string, they generally cross the string at 90 degrees in multiple lines, some deeper than others, but all creating a cross ridge line to the direction of the string. . If the result produces no detectable penalty, has the sin occurred? This is not the battle of good and evil, folks. This is an audible (to me and others) improvement in tone quality (measurable I am hoping as we continue to put together the research). I'd recommend we all (you, Ron, Fred, Jeff) quit putting up stalking horses until we have data. If the data are negative or neutral, then clearly a different conclusion might be reached. But part of the data so far is experiential and incontrovertible. That it is subjective and not quantifiable yet doesn't obviate it. Cheers, Paul Ron N -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20091001/2be06261/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC