Don I see your point, but you must understand Don, first you said and I quote "because of budget problems".... so I took your words at face value. If you are making the point that no room control system can be sufficient to provide a stable enough climate then of course thats another disscussion entirely and probably needs a few qualifiers to make sure we are all talking about the same things. For example what tolerances are we operating with. I think personally that a damp chaser system would have a hard time improving significantly on a room that was always between 45 % and 55 % RH. I could very easily be wrong about this, but if so I would like to know just what studies have been conducted that shows this to be true. And I cant see that a system that can hold inside climate within these tolerances is going to be quite as expensive as you seem to point at. Tho again I could easily be wrong, and no doubt this is contingent somewhat upon outside conditions in the first place. Perhaps this is some of what Roger Wheeler wants to gather data for in his soon to start project which several of us are participating in. But for the moment, I would think that a room that was constantly within the above parameters would be better for a piano, then an uncontrolled room in which a DC unit was the only climate control for the piano. Of course a DC system is cheaper in the end, and quite a bit so. I dont think anyone would argue that. But I dont think that was part of the origional question here. -- Richard Brekne RPT, N.P.T.F. UiB, Bergen, Norway mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC