[pianotech] [CAUT] More Bohemia

[David Ilvedson]

Take it outside...

David Ilvedson, RPT
Pacifica, CA  94044

----- Original message ----------------------------------------
From: "Richard Brekne" <ricb at pianostemmer.no>
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Received: 4/28/2009 12:36:22 PM
Subject: Re: [pianotech] [CAUT]  More Bohemia


>Bernhard

>No, the point is that you just dont seem to be able to accept that I 
>came up with my own P-12ths idea without any knowledge of you or your 
>work nor being influenced by you in any way.  It was nearly 10 years ago 
>now and it does matter exactly given the kind of accusations you keep 
>leveling at me. Since you were unwilling to see the obvious truth of 
>this from reading my early posts on the subject and pressed me to 
>produce some evidence of other influence I did so.  How anyone could 
>read Gary's article and conclude anything else then that he was working 
>with 12ths and 19th priority tuning rather then octave priority is 
>beyond me...  And indeed... he says this outright himself.  It is no 
>feat of genius to go from there to simply tuning the whole piano by 
>twelfths, dividing some middle 12th up into the 19th root of three as a 
>starting point.... just a cute idea that happened to work. And yes... I 
>shared this idea with others.... naturally enough.

>As I said... I dont give a hoot about who's first and have never claimed 
>to be first myself. To what degree Garys article or any other that 
>surfaces constitutes prior knowledge in the context you are concerned 
>about is not for me to judge... nor do I care. Gary's article would have 
>no doubt stayed hidden in its 1982 journal had you not just accepted 
>that I didnt know anything about you or your work. So whatever 
>authenticity issues there are now out in the world are things you have 
>yourself to thank for I am afraid.

>Once again... for my part I acknowledge that you were ... what 12 years 
>ahead of me with this idea ?  But I will not accept these insinuations 
>that I deliberately and knowingly pirated this idea from you or have 
>tried to "construct a prior art myth" of any kind.   Garys article 
>stands on its own.

>Can we stop this now ?
>RicB


>        The point is, that you came out on the list with this "new"
>        tuning  idea about six years ago (+-, it doesn´t matter
>        exactly). As i jumped  on the list to enlighten you that there
>        was published work by me on  the matter, it was apparantly quite
>        hard for you to accept this fact.  All your writing about the
>        matter in return had the intention to  "construct" a prior art
>        myth before my work in return. You did not  even hesitate to
>        twist the truth for that attempt. In no place in Gary  Schulze´s
>        article he expresses his intention to set up a pure twelfth 
>        temperament. He is presenting an equal temperament of the 31th
>        root of  six, to achieve as much as intervals as pure as
>        possible. The formula  you formerly presented on the CAUT list
>        as "prove", simply expressed  not what you wanted to interpreted
>        from it.


>        Bernhard Stopper