Well, since I seem to be the only "one" who is reluctant to concede, let me say (or concede?) that the clarity of terms which has been achieved is significantly greater than when we started, at least it is for me, and I'm grateful for most everyone's evenhanded participation. There were a variety of questions and observations asked by several that were not germane to the original question, and would have led to asides in the discussion and represent no avoidance. The "physics" aspect of the discussion is a small part in the equation of how we each determine the difference between acceptable (at the time) and fine tunings, represent them to our clients, and plan future remediation after radical pitch alteration. My only point from the outset was that there was a distinction to be made, and a distinction worth discussing. It has, to me, showed its merit in the variety of responses. Paul In a message dated 8/29/2009 11:07:28 A.M. Central Daylight Time, rnossaman at cox.net writes: Gerald Groot wrote: > Well, all you guys are doing is going back and forth trying to win something > that none of you is willing to concede on except asking questions to avoid > answers... Or, at least one of you is anyway.... That's right - one. So how is it everyone in a discussion who has been making a real attempt to make sense is automatically lumped in with the one who refuses to try? I've always wondered, since it invariably happens sooner or later in long discussions. Discussions where everyone involved is making an attempt to make sense tend to be short, and don't draw criticism from non-participants. Ron N -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20090829/1f0f8bf5/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC