Perfection-Piano?

[Joe & Penny Goss]

Ho Bob,
Interesting idea, that made me do a little research. In the meantime the
question may have been answered in a different way. Eliminating all
inharmonicity would result, IMHO in a dull lifeless instrument incapable of
great contrast of sounds. Here is a list of some piano stretch numbers that
are Dr.S tunings for the SAT. First are the low numbers then the high With
one in the middle with low in the bass and high treble.  They are not ment
to indicate any preference for any piano on my part. Joe
C1     C2     C3     C4     C5     C6     F6      C8
-4.3    -0.4   -2.1    1.6    1.6     1.4    2.9     26.5   Kawai CX4  41"
console 
-5.8    -0.9   -2.0    1.8    1.8     2.3    11.0   19.4   Kimbal 462S 46"
console
-4.7    -0.0   -1.3    5.6    4.1     6.2    10.6   30.7   Kimbal 3092  37"
spinet
-11.3  -3.6   -2.8    3.5    3.5     4.2     7.5    44.0   Steinway 1098
46" studio
-11.7  -4.1   -2.5    3.9    3.9     4.4     8.0    49.0   Weber 7'3" grand
-12.5  -4.2   -2.8    4.0    4.0     4.8     8.3    40.9   Steinway B 85
note grand
-6.2    -1.6   -1.8    2.9    2.8     3.6     6.3    36.3   Steinway B 88
note grand ( the B's are not the same)
-11.7  -4.1   -2.5    3.9    3.9     4.4     8.0    49.7    Weber 7'3"
grand 


From: Bob Sadowski <rls@ncinter.net>
To: pianotech@ptg.org
Subject: Perfection
Date: Saturday, August 15, 1998 9:45 AM

Dear list,
     I'm curious.  If cost were no object and given the technology and
materials at hand, Would it be possible to build the ideal piano - one with
little or no inharmonicity?  How long would it be?  A different shape
perhaps?  Anyone care to jump on this one?

Bob Sadowski
Erie,  PA