June Journal and FW's

[Bill Ballard]

At 2:17 PM +0200 5/30/02, Richard Brekne wrote:
>The same thing goes for BW component proportions really. Too much UW can be
>just as detrimental as too little.

That's the neat thing about the adjustable WAS. In the space of one 
afternoon the pianist can have 30 minutes with a half dozen different 
BWs.

At 1:47 PM +0200 5/30/02, Richard Brekne wrote:
>What I fail to see (and am waiting anxiously for a good 
>argumentation) is how anyone
>could be less then enthralled really by the ability to solve for FW's that
>match so perfectly the ratio and SW's employed.

 From what I gather, the response to David Stanwood's ideas come from 
two groups of people: those who don't quite yet get it, and those 
with real engineering backgrounds who would really only be happy with 
a dynamic model. David's, being built on tared, static weights, would 
to real engineers seem naive and quaint. An example of the dynamic 
model would be the one which Stephen Birkett proposed building. (He 
was hoping for a grant from the PTG Foundation, as it would have been 
an extensive piece of work. And well worthwhile, in my opinion.) You 
can tell the people who don't yet get it. They're the ones using DWs 
as the measure of an action.

Flame suit? Me? Don't waste your gasoline. I don't smell good charred.

Bill Ballard RPT
NH Chapter, P.T.G.

"No one builds the *perfect* piano, you can only remove the obstacles 
to that perfection during the building."
     ...........LaRoy Edwards, Yamaha International Corp
+++++++++++++++++++++