<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: = Arial" bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><FONT id=rol= e_document face=Arial color=#000000 size=2> <DIV> <DIV>  Yes of course a C but I see soo few of those as for the infoto t= o be lodgedin the  instant in the short term recall.</DIV> <DIV>   But I did see one last week & it had this as well</DIV= > <DIV> Dale</DIV> <DIV>   </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><= FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial color=#000000 size= =2><BR>Hi Dale.<BR><BR>This was not a D, at least I am pretty sure I remember this b= eing a C.  I will make sure and double check when I go back for the master= s course in October. I did check the two B's at the school and they were different. The notch width on the leading edge of the bridge in both cases= was very short compared to the back edge in the diskant, and in the treble sec= tion both widths were about the same. Also both B's had no really obvious difference in the width of the section that comes in contact with the strings.  But in this 1911 S&S in the Museum the change in widths= both in how much of the bridge is in contact with the bridge, and in the widths of the notch sections was very obvious. For some reason struck me a= s something I hadnt seen (more probably... noticed) before. Heres another sh= ot of the instrument.  They had another older Steinway in primo shape as= well... a B I think from the late 1800's. I'll post a couple shots later o= n tonite.<BR><BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV> </DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>