Ron Nossaman wrote: > >Oh baloney.. number one.. you are taking this far to serious.. > > Oh? Is this all just for your entertainment then? Well... maybe this part... between you and me that is... I mean it has to be good for something doesnt it ?? > > >Sorry Ron.. > >I know you dont like it when somebody dissagrees...with you. > > Not so. That's when I learn something if they can make sense at me. Yes... the "they cant hear" gambit with a twist. Problem is that nobody makes any sense to you when you dissagree with them. And then... well its gotta be something wrong with them... like not understanding a thing thats been said for these past several years.... > > >So.. lets see... the compression soundboard does NOT necessarilly cause any > >compression damage that renders the soundboard inferior in performance to rib > >crowned boards ?? > > Is that what you meant to say there with the reference to "absolute"? I > thought that's what you have been claiming all week. We've all heard the > old compression crowned board that sounds wonderful long after many more > made about the same time have died. Who has ever claimed anything > different, other than the claims that boards don't age at all? > Nice duck... but out of context... the quote was in reference to you first saying they do.. then saying they dont. So whats it gonna be there Ron ?? Do you or do you not believe the Compression Crowned Soundboard Design is seriously enough flawed from the start off to warrant not employing its use... period. Do you or do you not believe that the Rib Crowned Board is superior from a structual point of view, and every bit as good from an acoustic (direction musicality) point of view ? > Ron N > -- Richard Brekne RPT, N.P.T.F. UiB, Bergen, Norway mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html http://www.hf.uib.no/grieg/personer/cv_RB.html
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC