soundboards improving with age? The End!

[Richard Brekne]

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment


Delwin D Fandrich wrote:

>      Subject: Re: soundboards improving with age? or what
>      else?
>           (snip) Richard wrote at some point:
>      Grin... I know you dont aggree Del... and hey.. thats
>      cool. Its one thing to suppose this, to observe that..
>      to hypothosize, reason, conport, and constertate.. to
>      agree or disagree...  its another thing entirely to
>      declare "I have the answer"
>
>      To the best of my recollection, I have never claimed to
>      "have the answer." After many years of research,
>      experimentation and trial and error, I do have some
>      answers. You are, of course, quite free to either accept
>      them or not.
>
>      which you follow by:
>
>      I am one of the most questioning people around, have
>      been for some time. As to whether I am wise or not is
>      probably open to debate. But I chose to not waste my
>      time on things that have no possibility of either
>      improving my work (specifically) or the piano
>      (generally).
>
>      Del... I am not going to spend a lot of time dwelling on
>      this... but your "answer" is found in your second
>      statement. Its such an obvious self contridiction its
>      quite absurd. You declare much to have no "no
>      possibility of either improving my work (specifically)
>      or the piano (generally)"  that others declare are
>      valuble in our persuit of understanding piano sound.
>      When they discuss these things you simply brush off
>      these things as meaningless without having any proof
>      whatsoever that they are. And your only real  handholds
>      to justify this stance are to point out that these
>      things havent proved or measured,  that what existing
>      knowledge cannot explain or measure them. Solid
>      scientific stance... whooaa...
>
>
>      Grin... Del you shoulda been a politician.  As you have
>      answered your own question in nearly the same breath
>      that you posed it... I will say no more.
>
>      No, Richard, politicians can rarely back up what they
>      say. I generally can--even if you choose to twist it
>      around and try to confuse things.
>
>      Its not me who did the flip flop, then executed a clever
>      manuver to cover my bobble... nor is it me who has
>      attempted to put words in your mouth. I have been
>      consequent from the begginning. Any my point has been
>      simple.
>
>      As for the stuff you write below.. nothing I could say
>      could possibly underline better why I took the position
>      in this discussion that I did. That of cautioning
>      against being too sure of ones own perception of what
>      is.... or is not true...especially when waving the flag
>      of science around. You begin with a personal slant about
>      my grin,, continue by acussing me of attacking your
>      technical credibility (which I have not... not ever!)
>      then you turn 180 degrees and attack MY
>      credibility..directly...followed up by yet another
>      mis-reference to the violin tanget (The point of that
>      was quite obviously through several posts by several
>      different people in the direction of wood aging in
>      itself not the manner in which the two are constructed,
>      you can refuse to deal with that but the fact remains):
>      You continue on and on and on in an apparent effort to
>      justify your own position and ridicule mine, and
>      apparently in the same breath ridicule once again those
>      who believe in other explanations or models about the
>      soundboard. You even go so far as to directly say that I
>      know obviously nothing about soundboard contruction, or
>      have not any fantasy at all about how to use what little
>      I know. Grin... and then you have the gaul to say that
>      its me attacking you ?? In earlier posts you imply that
>      I obviously need to do more reading on the subject
>      matter and point me to at least two pieces of literature
>      which say absolutely nothing directly related to the
>      subject matter of aged wood relating to acoustics...You
>      brush off literature that I in return point you towards
>      as being simply irrelavant drivel that you disagree
>      with, and then continue on your merry way.
>
>      I quote you from below...
>
>      "The age of the wood used to make a piano soundboard
>      panel has nothing of consequence to do with the
>      performance of a piano soundboard....
>
>      I say ... prove it. Or suffer the same criticism of all
>      who come with such unsubstantiated assertions suffer.
>      And Delwin... I am indeed sorry if you find that so very
>      difficult to deal with. But there you have it. There are
>      plenty of people in this world that take a different
>      take on the matter... and they arent simply stupid or
>      uneducated or idiots.
>

"The greatest fate an hypothesis can suffer is to be proven wrong"

Albert Einstein... or somebody like him...  It would seem you have
difficulty with this idea.


Now as you have found it so very neccessary to drag this otherwise
interesting exchange of human views and ideas into the personal
slurs areana... I will refuse further escalation in that direction.
So bash away since you seem to need to... I hope its er... good for
you..

Grin.

Richard Brekne
RPT, N.P.T.F.
Bergen, Norway
mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no


---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/fe/83/b6/94/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--