Stephen, What's the dip/blow on the Cristifori? David S. At 02:13 PM 11/2/02 -0600, you wrote: > >>Looking at widely separated points on the parameter spectrum will provide >>an in-depth understanding of the generic "piano" system that cannot be >>achieved by looking with blinkers at one particular example, or even a set >>of very closely related examples ["modern piano"]. >> >>Stephen > >Fair enough. Then please unblinker me with a description of what is so >sobering about the thought that Cristifori's instrument had a 10:1 action >ratio in light [sic] of the weight of the hammers used, and in the context >of the discussion of the relationship between action ratios and hammer >weights. I made the comment on the hammer weight because I thought it was >pretty obvious and didn't see anything particularly insightful about it. >But I could very well be mistaken. Please clarify. > >And as far as my emblinkerment being made obvious by my comment that >Cristifori's piano was not a modern piano, haven't you pointed out that >very thing more than once on this list in support of how things were done >then against how they are done now? Perhaps I just imagined it. No matter. >I'm sure you can clear it all up for me. > >Eagerly awaiting vision enhancement. > >Ron N
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC