V Pro discussion

[Richard Brekne]

Ron Nossaman wrote:

>
> I don't think anyone said the plate didn't have much to do with it, I think
> the contention was that the *composition* of the plate didn't have a lot to
> do with it, as long as it met the structural requirements. What I'm saying,
> at least, is that there are way too many other factors involved for one to
> be able to point to the plate material as the "cause" of a particular make
> and model's overall quality of sound.

I still have to wonder if the composition contributes in a significant amount. On
the surface of it, it seems likely enough. But this is beyond me, no doubt.


> It's just like me not noticing those
> laminated shanks all that time in the Yamahas. You aren't seeing everything
> that is responsible for that characteristic sound. Relying on what you think
> you remember someone saying once, regarding such things won't help you any
> more than the same kind of "information" helps me. It's mostly just
> misleading and confusing. The annoyance here is trying to remember what the
> current logical status of any given "fact" is, since so much of what we were
> taught, or "know" gets scrapped and updated with better information at an
> ever increasing rate, it's hard to know what you really "know", since it
> doesn't stand still long enough for you to get used to it before it moves on
> you again.

Grin.. It wont be the first time I have been guilty of that, proooobbbly not the
last time either.

> I just don't think you have enough information to make the
> judgement and conclusion. That's all.

Well you will get no argument for me there. My only hard "knowledge" if you will on
the subject comes from Ed's book. That view has been generally met with nodding
heads over here, but I will be the first to admit that none of those have ever
backed up their statements with any documentation. Hmmm... I always kinda took this
for granted. More to rethink.

>
>
>  Ron N

Richard Brekne
I.C.P.T.G.  N.P.T.F.
Bergen, Norway