<div dir="ltr"><br><br> <div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:42 PM, David Ilvedson <<a href="mailto:ilvey@sbcglobal.net">ilvey@sbcglobal.net</a>> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">I have no problem with either system.   We might want to remember the Steinway pedal system within the pedal has not be duplicated by other manufacturers and it clearly is the superior system...imho.   Would the patent still be in effect?<br> <font color="#888888"><br>David Ilvedson, RPT<br>Pacifica, CA  94044<br></font> <div> <div></div> <div class="Wj3C7c"><br>----- Original message ----------------------------------------<br>From: "Fred Sturm" <<a href="mailto:fssturm@unm.edu">fssturm@unm.edu</a>><br>To: "College and University Technicians" <<a href="mailto:caut@ptg.org">caut@ptg.org</a>><br> Received: 7/18/2008 6:17:38 PM<br>Subject: Re: [CAUT] Sostenuto mounting (was Re:  Forum format)<br><br><br>>On Jul 18, 2008, at 4:19 PM, Ron Nossaman wrote:<br><br>>> Seems odd to me that something lying out there in the open,<br> >> figuratively speaking, unprotected by patent, wouldn't be stolen by<br>>> at least one manufacturer in all those years unless no one else<br>>> thought it worth stealing.<br><br>>       I dunno, doesn't seem odd to me. Suppose, for the sake of argument,<br> >the person at Yamaha in charge of making technical changes became<br>>convinced that the Steinway mounting system was superior, and wanted<br>>to implement it. Marketing would ask some questions:<br>>Q Does this improve the function of the piano?<br> >A No, function is identical, assuming both designs are well regulated.<br>>Q So how can we market this?<br>>A It makes it easier for techs to service the damper system.<br>>       Okay, this could actually make sense from a marketing point of view.<br> >Yamaha has a history of making changes that are "service-friendly,"<br>>and as a result techs are positive toward Yamaha and recommend the<br>>brand to their customers. But now comes the rub: try to market the<br> >Steinway mounting system to the average tech as being "service-<br>>friendly." Hahahahaha! the 90 percent or more of techs for whom the<br>>Steinway system is a mystery with connotations of extreme frustration<br> >and failure wouldn't buy that argument in a million years. End of story.<br>>       There is no question the Steinway system is less intuitive to<br>>regulate, and that it is more difficult to teach and to learn than the<br> >more common system. Hence there is a majority view that it is<br>>inferior. Steinway is forced to make a large investment in education<br>>to try to see that its pianos have sostenutos that are at least close<br> >to correct.<br>>       I look at the difference as analogous to the "hammer rest rail"<br>>versus the wippen with individual pillows. Both designs have pluses<br>>and minuses. No question the rest rail has more potential for fine<br> >adjustment, and is probably a bit cheaper. No question the pillow<br>>design makes it easier to remove and replace a wippen for service.<br>>Which is better? I'd choose the pillow design, but it isn't a big<br> >deal. Same thing for the sostenuto mounting system. If I were a<br>>manufacturer, I'd choose the belly mounting system, because it would<br>>make me more popular with more techs, and I wouldn't have to invest so<br> >much in education. As a tech, I'd give a slight advantage to the<br>>action mounting.<br></div></div> <div> <div></div> <div class="Wj3C7c">>Regards,<br>>Fred Sturm<br>>University of New Mexico<br>><a href="mailto:fssturm@unm.edu">fssturm@unm.edu</a><br></div></div></blockquote></div> <div><br> </div> <div> </div> <div>On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:42 PM, David Ilvedson <<a href="mailto:ilvey@sbcglobal.net">ilvey@sbcglobal.net</a>> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">I have no problem with either system.   We might want to remember the Steinway pedal system within the pedal has not be duplicated by other manufacturers and it clearly is the superior system...imho.   Would the patent still be in effect?<br> </blockquote> <div> </div> <div>Hi David,</div> <div>If that were the case it would have to be as old as the Steinway action patent and we've all seen how that's been copied, with"minor" changes in order to "get around" the patent laws.</div> <div> </div> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid"><span id=""></span>That patent is about as effective as the Schwander action patent which last I heard was owned by Kimball but is in almost every vertical piano being built today, with those "minor variations".</blockquote> <div>    <grin></div> <div> </div> <div>Mike</div> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid"><span id=""></span><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>I feel sorry for the person who can't get genuinely excited about his work. Not only will he never be satisfied, but he will never achieve anything worthwhile. <br> Walter Chrysler <br><br><br><br>Michael Magness<br>Magness Piano Service<br>608-786-4404<br><a href="http://www.IFixPianos.com">www.IFixPianos.com</a><br>email <a href="mailto:mike@ifixpianos.com">mike@ifixpianos.com</a> </blockquote> </div></div>