<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML style="FONT-SIZE: x-small; FONT-FAMILY: MS Sans Serif"><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; =
charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1226" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080 =
size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000080 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=clark@evola.com href="mailto:clark@evola.com">Clark =
Sprague</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=pianotech@ptg.org
href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">Pianotech</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> October 14, 2003 2:57 =
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Longitudinal mode =
info</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Del, Then, if the longitudinal mode frequency =
built in
to a bass string is hit or miss, how come the class I just went to in
Milwaukee, given by a bass string maker, said that he can design-in =
the
longitudinal mode, so that it is a more in-tune frequency than the =
"off the
rack" string makers? Smoke up our collective dresses? Or a =
real
advance in string making technology? I am hoping for an =
improvement, as
I just got finished tuning a S and S M that had a few that were =
(now that
I know what it was) really unpleasant, and impossible to tune or voice =
out.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Clark Sprague, RPT</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080 size=3>I =
assume you mean
Arledge. We do use strings from him and we like them a lot. They are =
nicely and
precisely made, but he wraps to my core and wrap specifications and I =
make no
attempt to tune the longitudinals. Perhaps I just have different =
priorities -- I
want uniform and clean power response for consistent and clear tone and =
easy
voicing. I want uniform inharmonicity for good tunability. And unless =
Arledge
has come up with some new techniques both of those are not available
simultaneously with tuned longitudinals. I also want tight and =
consistent wraps
that don't rattle and buzz. Frankly, I'm not all that worried about =
those things
real pianists rarely, if ever, complain about. And, in my opinion at
least, longitudinals are among those -- they seem to bother piano =
tuners
more than they bother pianists. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080 =
size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080 size=3>I =
have not seen any
of the data Arledge uses to tune longitudinals, my experience with this
technology was gained at Baldwin. And even there I probably never heard =
any
strings that were properly done to Conklin's designs. Compared to the
SynchroTone strings we were getting from Mapes the conventionally scaled =
bass
sections sounded better. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080 =
size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080 size=3>I =
do know Arledge
has studied Conklin's work on the subject and I assume he has adopted at =
least
part of Conklin's methodology but I'll be sticking with more =
conventional bass
scaling until somebody shows me how to achieve uniform core and wrap
progressions while also tuning the longitudinals.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080 =
size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#000080
size=3>Del</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>