<html>
<body>
Hi Dave, <br><br>
At 04:29 PM 10/5/05, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">
<font face="Times New Roman, Times">Dale:<br>
<br>
So far everyone has loved it. What’s not to love? As to the
people who ask if it is still a Steinway I confess to them that I really
don’t understand the question. It is still a piano. It was
originally built by Steinway and it has now been redesigned as a better
piano. I just don’t know what they mean by the question.
</font></blockquote><br>
Of course, it's not still a Steinway. It's not the "original"
instrument! If you don't believe it, just ask Steinway! Just kidding! :-)
<br><br>
Avery <br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">
<font face="Times New Roman, Times"> If my Ford has been modified
with a racing engine is it still a Ford? I don’t know what that
means.<br>
<br>
dave<br>
<br>
</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times" size=2>David M. Porritt<br>
<a href="mailto:dporritt@smu.edu">dporritt@smu.edu</a><br>
<hr>
<div align="center"></font></div>
<font face="Tahoma" size=2><b>From:</b> pianotech-bounces@ptg.org
[<a href="mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org" eudora="autourl">
mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of
</b>Erwinspiano@aol.com<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, October 05, 2005 2:55 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> pianotech@ptg.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Rebuilders gallery at national in Rochester (was News
andRochester)<br>
</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times"> <br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2> Dave<br>
Well now that you have a bona fide Nossaman /Steinway D I
believe you have braggin rights about the overall performance
enhancements such a thing can produce. <br>
But Dave, they'll say ,is it still a Steinway. & your response
will be ............? <br>
Who cares ,.... just listen to it. What says the faculty?
You?<br>
Love your tude ,dude<br>
Dale Erwin<br>
</font>
<dl>
<dd><font face="Times New Roman, Times">Soapbox warning --------<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>I have been energized by the possibility of improvement in our chosen
instrument for a while. Now that we have a real, improved,
better-than-you’re-used-to piano here on campus I have some hope that
this spirit of further development can really catch on. One of the
many problems with thinking that the piano is now as good as it can be is
that you can’t innovate. If you change something, that is a tacit
admission that the piano wasn’t perfect before. Fortunately most
industries don’t have that approach to their products. Yes, the
overhead valve engine is an admission that the flat head engine was not
perfect. The MRI is an admission that x-rays and CT scans were not
perfect. How on earth did we get to the point where we thought the
piano had fully evolved? That really is a true mystery to me!<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>--------off soapbox.<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>Sorry!<br>
<dd> <br>
<dd>dp<br>
<dd> <br>
</font><br>
</dl><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2> </font></blockquote>
</body>
</html>