<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> <html>   Farrell wrote:  > > Well, that might be.... and it might not... depending on your viewpoint. What is a VW bus with a Corvette engine then ? A fast VW microbus! And what is it if you in addition pull out the stock front suspension and put some other makes in ?? A funky VW microbus   Well.. I dunno about you... but most people I know who actually do this kind of thing call such vehicles hybrids. And while they might for convience call it the "VW",,, they are just as likely to call it something else. But regardless of what they "call" it... they will be the first to tell you what it really is if first asked...and proudly so. They wouldnt just call it a VW.... for that matter... you didnt either... even tho you tried. You had to add something to describe it. > > We may have gone through all this in the past... but its a long way from resolved. I have a big problem accepting an instrument that does not have a Steinway scale, and does not employ a compression board as a Steinway myself. Thats not what Steinways make, and such a piano will not represent the Steinway sound. Well, I would always agree that a rebuilder selling a piano that is modified from original should divulge changes, just as the owner of the VW bus should indicate that the audible rumble at the rear of the vehicle is a 400 h.p. 310 c.i. V8. However, I would still keep the metal VW thingee in the front of it! Not all do... and  often enough  when they do its because they think it looks neat... I would to... but I would make it quite clear to any and all that this was no VW.    > > IMHO, all this is much ado about nothing. > > > > Terry Farrell > > NIMV NIMV? Not in my view? Well, it seems from the above, we agree on everything. Unless of course you think that if you change the stringing scale of a Steinway and install a rib-crowned board, that you should not put a Steinway decal on the fallboard. Yes... not in my view. I dont think we are all that far apart... but I wouldnt go so far as to say we are in agreement. I got no problems perse with leaving the name on the piano, or even the decal. What I dont feel comfortable about is the lack of anything in addition that denotes its so significantly modified that it no longer represents the Steinway building philosophy or sound. And I dont feel comfortable with deliberate misrepresentation (if it comes to that in some cases) at all...regardless of who built it origionally. I see your point - it is not then a FACTORY Steinway. Of course not. What about an 80 year old ALL ORIGINAL Steinway. Should that have a S&S sticker on it? It is most certainly not as made in the factory (inverted soundboard, cracked bridges, dull corroded strings, alligator finish).   Ahh.... this is a new tact..... the fact that nature runs its course removes the origionality of an instrument. I'd just love to see this one applied to an origional Cristophi... :) No no no no... this is off on a completely diferent tangent Terry. There is no comparision to taking a stock rim, and building a completely different type of piano inside. At least not in my book. I would dare say a nicely rebuilt Steinway with a modified stringing scale would be closer to the factory job than an old worn out all original Steinway. I think the sticker says what the piano started out to be and that is it. NIMV, not if it was rescaled, with a soundboard that doesnt even come close to the Steinway type of panel. Heck... even Overs makes much to do of his modifications of that Yamaha he posted a whiles back. There is no way that deserves to be called anything less then an Overs modified Yamaha. And really... you could just as well drop the Yamaha part. And why shouldnt he be proud enough of it to put his name on it ... eh ?? I think if it has the major components of the original piano - case, plate, etc. it gets the original sticker, but anyone selling a modified piano should divulge the schedule of changes made. I know you think that way... and you know I think that the difference in scale and soundboard design qualifies as a major type component. Leave the name and sticker on it... but put your own there as well. And make no bones about it. Its not even close to an origional after such alterations... and it should not be represented as such.  In every other area I can think of there is no concern about modifying things. I used to goof around a bit with boats. If someone told me they have a Sparkman & Stevens NY 32, the first thing I would be curious about is all the changes/modifications the boat has had over the years - not to decide whether it is still a Sparkman & Stevens NY 32, but just because I know that unless someone was preserving it as a museum piece, it will almost never be as originally constructed. In fact, different builders would modify a designers plans a bit for a new owner during the initial building process - then it would be a Sparkman & Stevens NY 32 with a ketch rig, or wheel steering, or whatever, but it was still a NY 32!  Perhaps its not an issue with you and your boats.... perhaps for some it is. Perhaps its more relevant an issue for certain things then for others. Lets see how you would apply the same kind of thinking on the Cristophi... or better yet.... how bout a modified Monet ?? or what does a beebopped Bach piece become ?? The thing that bothers me about all this is how a thing is in the end represented. I believe it should be represented truthfully... and with pride. RicB >-- Richard Brekne RPT, N.P.T.F. UiB, Bergen, Norway <A HREF="mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no">mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no</A> <A HREF="http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html">http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html</A>  </html>