<html> <body> At 04:48 PM 9/14/05, you wrote: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Quentin (Sam Quentin? From California?)</blockquote> It's SAN Quentin. <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite=""> said: "Isn't it sufficient to have "only" one tuning hammer??? If it is necessary, we can change the tips, but why carrying more than one?   Well, the answer to this is oblivious, </blockquote> Oblivious??? I thought it "might" be obvious! <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">but I'll try anyway:</blockquote> OK. <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">  This is the problem that Einstein* wrastled </blockquote> "WRASTLED" with? <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">with in his later years: The effect of a singularity in hammerness is not universal</blockquote> Man, this sounds like you've been working for the government too long! <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">--at least not univeral in this universe. Specifically, generally speaking, my Uncle Max and Aunt Min, relatively speaking, and many odd sorts and even sports have examined this mummified unified uniform unicorn (why not?) theory of tuningness but found flaws related to the space-time continuum, that is to say, the space in your trunk and the time it takes to decide which one to carry or use and ....   ... shall I continuum or quittum while I'm behindum? Heap Ug. </blockquote> Please quit! :-) <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Anyway ...   Even the aboriginal arboreal arbitrarily trivial tribe, the Jerkin Tuneans of the South Tunean Islands--who subsist largely on a diet of wrest plankton, hammerhead sharks (#2 tips, usually), bass bass ... which can be caught without trouble on a treble hook, left hook, right uppercut, wrong underwear, goggle-eyed naked-ladyfish-shaped artificial bait, that is to say, ensnared from their lair with lurid leering lures, disnested and bested by Artifice (Melvin's brother-in-law) and subterfuge (an undersea type of trefuge) but I digress somewhat ...   ... have never  come to grips with the oneness of multiplicity, the duality of the singular experience, the group singularity of multiple but plural onenessess, nor, finally, last and least of all, pant pant, thank goodness, the existential (whateverTHAT means) existence of exhaustive examinations of the proverbial but anti-adjectivial tuning lever question: Are two heads really better than one?   Really now, I ask you. And since, technically, no two tuners know nor nary care nor ne'er concur (since it can't be answered), why not have three? Or four? Or more? Hammers Galore!</blockquote> I thought you said you were going to quit! Oh well, I've been disappointed more than one time in my life! Avery </body> </html>