<html>
<br>
Bob,<br>
<br>
At 12:08 PM 12/10/99 -0500, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite cite>Greetings, Horace,</blockquote><br>
To yourself, as well!<br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite cite>Three things. First, I assume they used
alcohol as a solvent, but did they <br>
ever also use anything hotter, like acetone, as a diluent?
</blockquote><br>
I do not know that they did or did not. My experiments with acetone
were less than successful<br>
in that the solutions became unpredictably "clumpy"; rather
like whey with really, really <br>
small curds. I am not sure why that happened, but have simply
assumed (yes, I know) that <br>
it had to do with some chemical incompatability in what I was
using. Maybe one of the <br>
chemists out there can explain what I did wrong.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite cite>Second, I don't see why bleached shellac
wouldn't do in this application.</blockquote><br>
It probably would. Reality is a matter of perception. We went
through the same kind<br>
of political thing between shellac and lacquer as has happened between
lacquer and<br>
"keytop" (which, by the way, is not what is used at
S&S). The difference is that,<br>
as to shellac and lacquer, the tone produced was (with practice)
virtually identical.<br>
Most of the acetone/keytop jobs I have followed have been pretty darned
poor, tonally.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite cite>Third, it seems to me that shellac belongs in
the category with some sanding <br>
sealers and really cheap lacquers in that it has low cohesive strength,
and <br>
is easier to break up when voicing. The "better" lacquers are
more toward the <br>
keytop/acetone end of the very high cohesive strength continuum. I think
<br>
there's a difference in tone, and I suppose one could argue that it comes
<br>
both from the way the two types bind the felt together as well as the way
<br>
they react to needles.</blockquote><br>
I think that the difference in the media is the difference in their
designed purpose.<br>
That is, sanding sealer (I do not know about cheap lacquers) fills
(sorry) a different<br>
purpose than lacquer itself. While I would agree that the better
lacquers have<br>
a higher cohesive strength, they still, to my ear, produce a very
different sound,<br>
and react very differently over time than does acetone/keytop.<br>
<br>
Also, while I tend to agree with your last sentence (certainly as to
there being<br>
a difference in tone), I am not sure that I do not want to express it
somewhat <br>
differently. Right now, the best I can come up with is that, with
lacquer, you<br>
can fairly easily move it around, even after some years have
passed. With keytop,<br>
once even the lightest solution is applied and allowed to dry, it takes
great effort<br>
to make substantive changes. This has to do with how long it takes
to emulsify<br>
the keytop.<br>
<br>
I am not sure how much sense this latter makes...sorry. I'll see if
I cannot come<br>
up with a better explanation.<br>
<br>
Best.<br>
<br>
Horace<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite cite>Bob Davis</blockquote><br>
<div>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++</div>
<br>
<div>Horace Greeley,
<x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab> </x-tab>email:<x-tab> </x-tab>hgreeley@stanford.edu<x-tab> </x-tab></div>
<div>CNA, MCP,
RPT<x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab> </x-tab></div>
<div>Systems
Analyst/Engineer<x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab> </x-tab>voice:<x-tab> </x-tab>650.725.9062</div>
<div>Controller's
Office<x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab> </x-tab><x-tab> </x-tab>fax:<x-tab> </x-tab>650.725.8014</div>
<div>Stanford University</div>
<div>651 Serra St., RM 100, MC 6215</div>
<div>Stanford, CA 94305-6215</div>
<br>
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
</html>