DAG vs. 1708

[Alan]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

---------------------- multipart/related attachment

------=_NextPart_001_0012_01C53245.4D4580E0
Nice work! What piano is that?
=20
Why are the backside pins notched like the front? Wouldn't seem like it
would really be necessary unless you have a sounding duplex. Just =
wondering
...
=20
Alan R. Barnard
Salem, MO

-----Original Message-----
From: pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] On =
Behalf
Of Terry
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2005 8:29 PM
To: Pianotech
Subject: Re: DAG vs. 1708


Agree. No need for DAG. It's yucky and messy. And keeping things clean, =
lets
that quarter-sawn-medula-ray beauty shine through!
=20
Terry Farrell
=20

=20
> > Sooooo, no surface dressing on your bridges?  How finely sanded?  =
You
find
> > it eliminates the need for DAG or the like?
> >=20
> > Respectfully,
> > William R. Monroe
>=20
>=20
> There never was a need for Dag, graphite, or any other sort of=20
> lubricant on bridge tops. Making them black does make it easier to=20
> see where you are when notching though.
> Ron N=20


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.8.3 - Release Date: 03/25/2005





--=20
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.8.3 - Release Date: 03/25/2005
=20
 =20

------=_NextPart_001_0012_01C53245.4D4580E0
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/5f/2a/33/a9/attachment.htm

------=_NextPart_001_0012_01C53245.4D4580E0--

---------------------- multipart/related attachment
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 86743 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/17/93/54/b2/attachment.jpe

---------------------- multipart/related attachment--