Hi again.. Just a couple more thoughts. In all fairness I would like to point out that one of the most respected techs in all of Europe, and a fellow that Steinway Hamburg relies on very heavily for some of their most critical work is of like mind (by all reports I get)to our new friend Mike. Mike by no means stands alone in this thinking, nor does the teacher he referes to with so much respect. I'd also point out that this procedure was one I ran into very early on and used for several years before some of the guys and gals at Sherman Clay in Seattle pointed out to me that perhaps I might think about a few of the consequences that perhaps might not be so desirable that result from this procedure. Then came the Nossaman thinking along in my own life... which took things to the far extreme on the other side.... yet there was a good deal about his reasoning I found and still do quite compelling. My own nature is to seek middle ground... because usually thats where truth lies nearest. So after quite a bit of pondering I wrote the article that appeared in the journal a couple years back which pretty clearly sums up the problem and what the controversy is all about. I left it up to each reader to decide whether a string could be unseated in the face of positive downbearing. The initiative I took in starting this post... was the discovery of a very clear and extremely easy way of proving to oneself that that last mentioned can indeed occur. In which case strings actually do need seating. That said, whatever seating procedure that is used should not be of character that creates an indentation in the bridge that lies below the strings line of deflection. I'll leave it up to the individual to judge whether or not ones own methods and means do or dont. Cheers RicB
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC