On Sep 30, 2009, at 3:48 PM, PAULREVENKOJONES at aol.com wrote: > > > In a message dated 9/30/2009 4:22:09 P.M. Central Daylight Time, amccoy at ewu.edu > writes: > Your results may vary. > > Wow, they sure may. > > We have a lot of pictures of the results of using differing tools on > the inside of the agraffe. The countersink tool creates a very rough > surface because of uncontrollable chatter. > > P Well, I know it borders on heresy, but I am a well known heretic anyway, so I am going to ask the question: at what point in treatment of agraffes does one get beyond what really matters? How perfect is perfect enough? Is there an actual, perceptible sonic result from this microscopically visible chatter caused by a carefully used countersink? I grant the polished profile from various recommended treatments looks wonderful, and probably is an ideal to aim at. But how much time is it really worth? After all, the capo is probably more pitted and scratched, looked at through a microscope, than a badly chattered agraffe hole. And those terminations are far more critical, it seems to me. Regards, Fred Sturm University of New Mexico fssturm at unm.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20090930/ee736d68/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC