[CAUT] coupled motion and other myths

[Keith Roberts]

I don't get some of this. I see nothing disproved. The coupled motion thing
seems to be an issue of semantics as well as the para inharmonicity. I also
disagree with the statement that tuning devices have shortcomings, They are
just measureing devices and if there is a sound there, it measures it. How
the data is interperted and used by the operator is where the shortcomings
are. You know, a man can be a 5 time divorcee loser or a man who is not
afraid to make a committment. Depends on how you word it.

Keith Roberts


On 6/10/07, Remoody <remoody at midstatesd.net> wrote:
>
>  Was posted........
> """The bridge is not a ridged termination. (coupled motion of piano
> strings).
> If the rigidity changes with humidity then the string may appear longer or
> shorter thus affecting pitch. Dean Reyburn refers to this effect as "para
> inharmonicity"i.e.""""
>
> I would like to offer some arguments to disprove the idea of coupled
> motion, and  para inharmonicity, and to look at inharmonicity in a new
> light.
>
> "Coupled motion" is  dispelled when the definition of it is given.  It is
> not logical, rational, nor holds up to the Scientific Method of proof by
> experiment.
>
> "Para inharmonicity" is a myth to explain (or excuse) the short commings
> of tuning machines.
>
> Inharmonicity seems to be a valid scientific phenonenom but still eludes
> consistant measurement.
>
> --Richard Moody
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/20070610/f418d307/attachment.html