compression ridges in New Baldwin grand

[Farrell]

Hey Richard - I'll trade you 22 of the 23 Steinway grands I service for your
singing "beat to crap old turn of the century Steinway thats been shimmed
once.... and otherwise left to decompose". I'll bet your opinion might
change.

That's just been my observation.

Terry Farrell

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Delwin D Fandrich" <pianobuilders@olynet.com>
To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 2:08 PM
Subject: Re: compression ridges in New Baldwin grand


>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Richard Brekne" <Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no>
> To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Sent: September 25, 2003 9:45 AM
> Subject: Re: compression ridges in New Baldwin grand
>
>
> >
> > Now I will be the first to say, and have many times now.. that Del and
> others
> > make a real convincing argument about the whole issue.... except for the
> fact
> > that there are so very very very many people who seem to dissagree...
and
> so
> > very very very many pianos out there that simply do not fit the mold.
> They have
> > not self imploded, turned sour, lost power and sustain to the point of
> being
> > hoplessly muslexic. I have a beat to crap old turn of the century
> Steinway thats
> > been shimmed once.... and otherwise left to decompose... and it still
has
> 8
> > seconds of sustain at A6. Lots of power... and no where is that thinned
> out dead
> > soundboard sound apparent. Lots of false beats mind you... but thats
> another
> > story. If the compressionist theory was so signficant, and so correct...
> this
> > kind of exception simply could not happen. Something doesnt wash here.
> >
> > RicB
> >
>
>
> And I would argue that, relative to the numbers built there aren't all
that
> many working as well as you suggest. This is called establishing the rule
> by looking at the exceptions.
>
> Del
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
>