[CAUT] Response to RB: was Tone "contrast"; Was - The "new" S&S Hammers.

[David Love]

I was going to send this off list but the attack was so personal and
inaccurate that it must be addressed publicly.  It was a very low blow, Ric,
even for you. To quote some unknown tech who alleges to know my voicing
style (characterized as mush by you) is the worst kind of hearsay reporting
that I can imagine.  You don't really know anything about what I do, the
number of concert venues who have asked to come "rescue" their instruments
or the level of people I work for.  My customers make as wide a variety of
requests for tone as pianos are capable of delivering.  And I don't hesitate
to give them what they want.  Some of those requests are quite dark and some
are quite bright.  Ironically, I've probably made my reputation over the
years delivering quality voicing as much as anything else.  You simply don't
know what you're talking about and as far as your source goes, if you are
going to quote them, do us a favor and use their name.  Otherwise, it looks
like you just made it up--which is what I'm inclined to believe.  

You clearly are not reading carefully but rather have some agenda in mind.
My comments were not a personal attack on you, they were a simple
clarification of the motives of the people you indirectly referred to.
Neither does my editorial outline a narrow definition of tone.  While I do
state my own personal tastes, the editorial has more to do with the
structural basis of tone production and how to consider those factors than
it does what I think is right.  It suggests only that people should
recognize that a piano' tonal signature is, to a large degree, inherent in
the design.  The article closes with "Vive la difference", intended to
celebrate the wide variety of tastes both by listeners and manufacturers.
It's unfortunate that you let your own petty quarrels get in the way of your
professionalism.  But somehow, I am not surprised.  



David Love
davidlovepianos at comcast.net 
www.davidlovepianos.com