Hi folks Had to just grin and chuckle at the last round of back and forths about the historical pianos debate printed in the journal. The "panel" which evidently was picked to represent some kind of <<expert opinion>> ended up simply repeating what is essentially identical standpoints to the ones tossed back and forth on these lists through the years by list participants from all walks of our industry. Given the chasms of disagreement evident in the journal segment on some of the basic issues in this subject matter... I can imagine the results had the debate taken place in an open forum such as these lists. Business as usual. Putting the recent condemnations by some here about certain design issues put into this perspective is an interesting exercise with regard to whose argumentations stay intact with the context shift. It all goes to underline the value of keeping that big wad of humility in ones pocket and understanding that ones own perception of what is good sound, good design, good whatever,.. is just that... ones own perception. Nothing more and nothing less. It gives no right or authority to sneer at others who differ. It also goes to show that the Q & A segment of the Journal was every bit as interesting in the past when it simply and without much effort drew upon the discussions from techs of all levels of experience that proliferate these two lists. One can alway edit out the ...er... more heated language when it pops up. Cheers RicB
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC