I've always thought of the "uniquely different" line as a euphemism for "we can't really control with great reliability what will happen". Since we are assuming that the RC&S boards are able to reduce the range of variability (I'll assume no system is entirely perfect), to what degree do you think there are differences within the RC&S boards due to basic differences in the, for example, piece of spruce that ends up being the panel itself, or other things that I can't think of at the moment. David Love davidlovepianos@comcast.net -----Original Message----- From: pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] On Behalf Of Ron Nossaman Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 5:05 AM To: Pianotech Subject: RE: More CC vs RC questions was RE: Killer Octave & Pitch Raise >However, what I would like to know (without having to take on the >impossible--for me at present--task of trying to build two boards in >order to compare), is whether, all other things being equal and for the >period that they are functioning to their capacity, the RC&S and the CC >board are acoustically equivalent. What two CC boards coming out of the Steinway NY factory are acoustically equivalent? Much mileage is given to the concept of the uniquely individualistic nature of each piano produced by these methods. Why do you suppose that is? Why don't we turn this around and see if anyone can produce CC boards that are acoustically equivalent to a good RC&S board? Whatever that may be. Again, if there is a meaningful acoustic difference between these two construction methods, one should be able to tell by listening, which method was used. If they both sound good, they both sound good. Ron N _______________________________________________ pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC