[CAUT] A clarification and a response to David Poritt

[Porritt, David]

Whatever!

dp

David M. Porritt, RPT
dporritt at smu.edu


-----Original Message-----
From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of
ricb at pianostemmer.no
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 8:10 AM
To: caut at ptg.org
Subject: [CAUT] A clarification and a response to David Poritt

Hi David

First let me say thank your for your kind spirited response. 

Honestly tho... I really fail to see how any of what I have written
in the past frew notes should have provoked anyone... let alone the
violent response from David Love.  I felt, and still do that the
context of that which was written was dead on target within the
context of the discussion, the standpoints I cited that I assert
David Love takes arewell documented, and not one iota of my posts
were directed even slightly as criticisms of these standpoints. 
Quite the opposite I underlined my disdain at the comment made to me
by the SF tech.  I went on further to state that this kind of thing
simply goes to show how wide the field of acceptable piano voicing
indeed is. 

The passion evoked here if anything simply underlines that this width
is far greater then many of our own individual perspectives includes.
I fail to see how anyone could possibly conclude otherwise when it
comes down to it. Nor do I see why this should be veiwed as a flame.

Let me clarify a point, since it seems neccessary after all.  About
the SF tech which David Love took so illy.  I also happen to know
three technicians in that same area, one of them a bit personally,
who have the greatest respect for Davids work... not the least his
voicing styles.  I personally do not know David Love... and would
never draw any direct conclusions as to how much he does or doesnt
know... how good his work is... or any of the rest of it.  I see no
reason to doubt his dedication to our trade or to do what he feels is
the absolute best for pianos.  Someone may someday show me such
reason... but I rather doubt it. I do reserve the right to disagree
with his stated standpoints in any polite and topical way I see fit.
And, I must in turn afford that same respect to him and anyone else
for that matter.

I had thought it rather obvious that my comments were not pointed in
a personal direction, but rather in the same path of the discussion
as a whole. 

David Loves position on voicing, duplex, soundboard design, and other
issues that ultimately describe a preference for piano sound and
performance are well documented. This is to be commended and
respected as far as that goes.

The only thing I ever raise my finger about is when one starts to
assume that ones own perspectives are somehow better then others, or
that when others perspectives do not fit ones own they are in some
way or another always managed to be discounted in a variety of ways. 
Often enough... as seems evident by the present discourse... this
kind of thing happens without one even being aware of it.

I stand by my origional assertion that there seems to be a tendancy
amoung some techs to opt for a much quieter rounder voice at the
expence of what some others find to represent brilliance.  I see no
reason why anyone should take offence at that statement, question the
its obvious validity, nor find reason for criticism one way or the
other. Indeed... part of the beauty of our trade is exactly the large
degree of variance in what piano sound can be.

As for the D++ .... If I am in error then I am indeed sorry. But I
remember rather clearly a comment or two in a not so distant past
post where you mentioned some bitterness that some pianists would not
give this instrument a fair chance because it was <<not a real
Steinway>> anymore... and I also remember offering you support on the
matter.  I will look through the archives and see if I can find the
post.  I do not believe I said in my last anything about you
personally finding any fault with the instrument. Quite the opposite,
it your continued enthusiasm for it and indeed my experience with the
Nossaman instrument in Rochester that makes me very wishfull that I
could find the time and resources to come and visit you, and have a
thorough look see.

All this said... I simply must insist on the right to voice my
considered opinions without being accused of not knowing what I am
talking about... or of attacking people, or of any of the rest of it.
I hold people to their word and documented standpoints... pass really
no value judgement on them beyond the <<being acceptant of others>>
bit.

At least this is in my mind, and this is what I strive to accomplish
to the very best of my abilities.  

Best
Richard Brekne


Ric:

When you send out these flames it would help if you gave full names to
the targets.  You stated below "Secondly... it was not just a couple
three months back David did indeed 
air frustration......" There are several Davids on this list so some
indication of which one you meant would be helpful.  I know I have not
complained about the D+ so you must be referring to some other David
about some other problem with some other piano.  

Better yet, try a little harder not to send out these unnecessary
flames.

dp

David M. Porritt, RPT
dporritt at smu.edu