[CAUT] coupled motion and other myths

[Ron Nossaman]

> Is this pitch drop that Virgil Smith mentions, is it the same as "coupled
> motion"?  Did he call it that?  Who then came up with the name? 

Who cares what it's called, and why would what it's called 
have any bearing on the veracity of the effect? Call it 
antiresolutionisticpartialis, and it would still be the same 
thing.


> I can demonstrate the opposite.  I can tune a unison that will show the
> pitch rising from the first string tuned.  And this would be a unison that
> agrees with any RPT.   Lets do it at a convention.  I will pay for the booth
> if each visitor chips in a dollar.  (As an added truth, I can also
> demonstrate it can go down in an acceptable unison.)  That ought to make it
> worth $2.00 a visit.    Richard Moody 

I'd pay $2 to have this demonstrated to my satisfaction - $10 
if you can explain it coherently. Let's do it at *this* 
convention. Call or fold. See you in KC tomorrow.
Ron N