[CAUT] Re 1/4 Tone Sharp

[James Ellis]

Eric Wolfley mentioned my coming to Cincinnati in regard to litigation over
a broken plate.  Yes, I remember.  It was a very pretty piano, but one that
was out of warranty, and one whose maker had since gone out of business.
But those circumstances were entirely different from the one discussed
here.  In that case, it was a pirch raise following the procedures many
technicians now use.  The problem arose when one area technician claimed
that the plate broke because the technician did not raise the pitch in
small increments over an extended period of time instead of all at once.
The tiny-small-increment philosophy had it's day many decades ago, and has
since been proven to be nonsense, but that was the basis of the law suit.

The facts were something completely different.  I examined how the plate
was made, and how it broke.  After I came back home and did an analysis, I
concluced that I did not understand why the plate had not broken when it
was first brought up to pitch at the factory.  One man who had worked at
that factory said that as a matter of fact, the plates of some of those
models did break at the factory when they were brought up to pitch.  I was
told that the law suit was dropped less than 24 hours before it was to be
heard in court.

The current discussion is about something entirely different.  The piano in
question might do just fine, but again, it's possible that it might not.
If I were the technician, I would handle it the easy way.  I would simply
say that I did not recommend it, but that I would to it if the institution
insisted, and if I did, I would NOT accept ANY responsibility WHATSOEVER
for ANY damages that might occur as a result.  I would accept NONE of the
risk, if any.

Personally, I think it's absurd that someone writes "music" that must be
played on an instrument that's tuned outside of its normal range.  This, in
my opinion, is nonsense - "The Emperor's New Clothes", etc.

I hope this helps.  Sincerely, Jim Ellis