<html> <body> It was inevitable.   Maybe it's occurred before and I haven't caught it.  My history communicating with Ron hasn't been stellar, and I could see it coming down the pike again.  Fortunately, it occurred to me to check whether what I thought could not happen, in fact, had.  It had.  Kent double posted the topic regarding B 458198 to both pianotech AND Caut...a reasonable measure when trying to engage the distinct constituencies of each list, though a bit of a bother for those subscribed to both.  Using Eudora, I filter my mail so that each is directed to its own mailbox.  I have seen such double postings develop differently in the past.  This time, there was a leak, a breech, if you will.  RonN  (mind you, I'm not playing the blame game here), posting on Pianotech, responded to information (the restringing and use of CA on the pins) that Kent had only mentioned in a resopnse  on CAUT!  My impression from seeing only the Pianotech discussion, and thus my responses, were that RonN was making unfounded assumptions about the piano's history that had never been stated.  If I were not subscribed to both lists, or had not thought to check, our exchanges would have probably continued on their ignoble, downward spiral. So, what's my point.  In the past, I have tried to make clear and apologize in advance for such double posting, recognizing the annoyance it can cause those who subscribe to both.  It seems that, perhaps it should be the responsibility of both the original poster, as well as the responder, that any cross-list references are made clear. So as not to hijack the original posting subject, I'll not include any discussion of the technical substance in this post.  Anyway, I'm glad we cleared that up. Peace (in honor of our temporarily absent data-cruncher), David Skolnik At 11:29 PM 9/21/2005 -0500, you wrote: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite=""> <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">I'm not sure what Ron means by the angle "self-correcting" unless he is alluding to the rear pin's inevitable migration westward, as the bridge splits become more pronounced.</blockquote> That's right, responding to Kent's comment on that very thing. <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Wouldn't epoxy address the present conditions?</blockquote> Not with CA already in there. From a practical standpoint, it doesn't much matter how cracked the bridge is on the back pin row, as long as the resulting offset angle is enough to clamp the string to the speaking length bridge pin, and the speaking length bridge pin is solid, you won't hear the problem. Ron N _______________________________________________ pianotech list info: <a href="https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives" eudora="autourl"> https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives</a> </blockquote></body> </html>