Kimball Bosendorfer pianos
Michael Sayers
mich...@mindspring.com (Mike Wu) wrote:
>When I was early into my piano search last year, I played a large
>Kimball grand at Grafton's in Pennsylvania. According to Glenn
>Grafton, this was actually a Bosendorfer labeled as a Kimball for
>promotional use. Perhaps Glenn (who is an occasional poster to RMMP)
>can fill in some more about this piano.
I remember those when they first came out. I think they even called it
a Kimball Imperial or something. I can't swear it was identical in
every way to what you get when you buy a Bosie, though it was in the
gross features, and it was certainly far and away better than any
regular Kimball by a long shot. I would have been more than happy to
own one.
Regards,
Rick Clark
*****************************************************
note from MJS: in relation to another thread, the word "Kawai" should
have been used, not "Kimball".
Michael Sayers
news:20000503224322...@ng-fd1.aol.com...
> >The salesman
> >said that Kimball had Bosendorfer (who they own, of course) build a
> >number of such pianos for promotional purposes. He had a letter from
> >Kimball (dated 1993) attesting to this.
>
> He is telling you the truth. I was a Kimball/Bosendorfer dealer at the time
> these promotional Bosendorfers were built. Kimball didn't have any rim presses
> bigger than 6' 7", so id a bigger piano was needed they just used a
> Bosendorfer. They had promotional deals with several outfits, such as the
> Tonight Show, The Grand Ole Opry, The Nashville Network, and some others. The
> contract called for using the Kimball name on the pianos, and for the most part
> it was Kimball 6' 7" grands that were used (which weren't that bad, actually. I
> played on a couple in Nashville that would blow you away).
>
> There were a couple of venues that required bigger pianos on occasion, so
> Kimball took some 7' Bosendorfers and put the Kimball name on them. They were
> straight Bosendorfer pianos, though. The only venue that was allowed to use the
> Bosendorfer name was the Tonight Show, and that was just on the 9' 6" they used
> with Doc Severenson's band. All the pianos used by the guests on stage were 6'
> 7" Kimballs.
Gary Rimar
"Michael Sayers" <mjs1...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:219226cd.0410...@posting.google.com...
Larry
>> There were a couple of venues that required bigger pianos on occasion, so
>> Kimball took some 7'
What is your point, Sayer? What does this have to do with your claim that Kawai
sold Bosendorfers with the name Kawai on them?
The Bosendorfers that said Kimball on them were custom units built for a
promotional and marketing program. There were only a few built, they were not
for public consumption.
But that *still* has nothing to do with your ridiculous claim that Bosendorfers
were sold with the name Kawai on them.
Larry
The Wizard of Ahhhhs
Michael Sayers
Do you NEVER tire of arguing just for the sake of arguing?
My posts are about Bosendorfer and Kimball.
The first post in the thread reads at its base:
note from MJS: in relation to another
thread, the word "Kawai" should
have been used, not "Kimball".
I couldn't resist checking r.m.m.p. one last time, to see if I might
have wanted to respond to one or two things, in case my announced
departure would cause some people to think it was really time to empty
their clips on Michael Sayers.
It has had this effect, and my responses will go through shortly.
Maybe I just won't go away at all.....
But I probably will, so I now sincerely wish you the best.
Larry
>My posts are about Bosendorfer and Kimball.
> note from MJS: in relation to another
> thread, the word "Kawai" should
> have been used, not "Kimball".
Read your own writing, Sayer. It plainly says "the word Kawai should have been
used, not Kimball". That's exactly what you *did*, Sayer. You said Kawai sold
Bosendorfers with the word Kawai on them.
If you now want to claim the other case, you should have said "the word Kimball
should have been used, not Kawai".
That's a major difference, Sayer. You are arguing that when you said Kawai sold
Bosendorfers with the name Kawai on them, it should have said Kawai, not
Kimball. That's a totally illogical statement.
>Do you NEVER tire of arguing just for the sake of arguing?
I'm not arguing with you for the sake of arguing. You long ago lost all
credibility regarding having a normal functioning ability to use logic, common
sense, or even normal thinking processes. You have used this mental illness to
try to hawk a Samick as a handbuilt piano worth tens of thousands of dollars,
and insist on refusing to accept the obvious truth of the matter. I'm simply
making sure that wherever you post this nonsense, there's a nice long trail of
information behind it to help keep some unsuspecting individual from actually
falling for your madness, and losing their ass in the process.
I've accomplished that, past that, it's like eating peanuts. As long as they're
there, one just can't stop picking them up.
Michael Sayers
> >From: mjs1...@yahoo.com (Michael Sayers)
>
> >My posts are about Bosendorfer and Kimball.
>
> > note from MJS: in relation to another
> > thread, the word "Kawai" should
> > have been used, not "Kimball".
>
>
> Read your own writing, Sayer. It plainly says "the word Kawai should have been
> used, not Kimball". That's exactly what you *did*, Sayer. You said Kawai sold
> Bosendorfers with the word Kawai on them.
If one looks at the subject thread title, and the various messages
that are reposted (which includes one of your's), it can be plainly
seen that the Kimball Bosendorfers are the subject.
I was hoping that you would add some information to what is already
stated, as the messages don't go into very many specifics about the
Kimball Bosendorfers.
I genuinely am seeking information on those pianos. I consider it
possible that you know more than was revealed.
> >Do you NEVER tire of arguing just for the sake of arguing?
>
> I'm not arguing with you for the sake of arguing. You long ago lost all
> credibility regarding having a normal functioning ability to use logic, common
> sense, or even normal thinking processes. You have used this mental illness to
> try to hawk a Samick as a handbuilt piano worth tens of thousands of dollars,
> and insist on refusing to accept the obvious truth of the matter. I'm simply
> making sure that wherever you post this nonsense, there's a nice long trail of
> information behind it to help keep some unsuspecting individual from actually
> falling for your madness, and losing their ass in the process.
There is no such thing as "normal" or "abnormal" logic - this was one
of the points Ludwig von Mises made against Marx's notion of a
"bourgeoisie logic".
Saying that there is a flaw in someone's reasoning is one thing:
identifying the flaw is another. The facts are a) that Bernhard
Steiner C-8s are $46 000 from the factory, and b) that this piano is
the prototype C-8, and is a very, very good piano. Only the best
Bechstein ENs can beat it, where German piano manufacture is
concerned.
Here is what the Handbook of Texas Piano Manufacture says in regard to
Bernhard Steiner:
In 1991 there were four piano manufacturers
with offices in Texas, all of them German:
August Forster Piano Company and Zimmermann
Piano Company in Houston, and Bernhard Steiner
Piano Company and Dietmann Pianos Limited in
Dallas.
There is nothing whatsoever - in the Handbook of Texas Piano
Manufacture, in the Bernhard Steiner court filing and decision, or at
the Samick website - that suggests in any way that the pianos are made
by Samick, much less that they are merely Samicks with "Bernhard
Steiner" stenciled on the fall board.
It is absolutely possible that, at one time, Kahn might have allowed
Samick to issue some Samick line pianos with the Bernhard Steiner name
stencilled on. But I have never seen one of these. The fact is that
Bernhard Steiner pianos have been in production since 1886. They are
German pianos.
One can tell that they are German pianos, by how they sound. Even if
they were made in Texas, they would still be German pianos - just as,
Bostons are American pianos, even though Kawai makes them for
Steinway.
On another subject, that of the Samicks, I don't see the basis of the
derision. Samicks aren't what they used to be. If I had a Samick
concert grand, and went over it real well, it would be a very fine
piano.
A piano doesn't have to equal an American Steinway D to be a fine
piano....just as a car doesn't have to be an Aston Martin to be a fine
car.
Do you think that Lafite, Latour, Margaux, and Y'Quem, are the only
four good wines, and all the rest are lacking in those qualities which
make for a superior wine?
Talking about a Samick, in a nuts and bolts sort of way, you can do.
But it says nothing about how good (or not) a Samick piano is, just as
a chemist's spectragraphic analysis of a wine would say nothing about
how good (or not) a wine is.
Leave the wine evaluations to the wine connossieurs.
Leave the piano evaluations to the pianists.
You don't know enough about pianos, to have a viable interpretation of
when a piano is or is not satisfactory.
> I've accomplished that, past that, it's like eating peanuts. As long as they're
> there, one just can't stop picking them up.
In parallel with YOUR reasoning:
As long as there are banks, some people just
can't seem to stop robbing them.
As long as there are Britons in Iraq, some
people just can't seem to stop executing them.
Your use of logic is like that of a criminal. Don't ever criticize my
"logic, common sense, or thinking processes" again.
Larry
>The facts are
>a) that Bernhard Steiner C-8s are $46 000 from the factory,
No Sayer, that is not a fact. Either you are a liar, or the salesman was a liar
and you are an idiot. There is not other option.
>Here is what the Handbook of Texas Piano Manufacture says in regard to
>Bernhard Steiner:
The handbook is wrong. You have to uproot the entire body of knowledge
regarding this in order to make one single man's mistake fit. He is wrong, and
I have contacted him regarding his mistake.
>In 1991 there were four piano manufacturers
> with offices in Texas, all of them German:
> August Forster Piano Company and Zimmermann
> Piano Company in Houston, and Bernhard Steiner
> Piano Company and Dietmann Pianos Limited in Dallas
These companies didn't have offices in Texas. They had distributors who were
located there. Bernhard Steiner is not, and never was, a German piano.
>There is nothing whatsoever - in the Handbook of Texas Piano
>Manufacture, in the Bernhard Steiner court filing and decision, or at
>the Samick website - that suggests in any way that the pianos are made
>by Samick, much less that they are merely Samicks with "Bernhard
>Steiner" stenciled on the fall board.
You have had all these perversions of reality explained to you. Anyone can make
a mistake, only a liar would continue to repeat it. You are a liar.
>It is absolutely possible that, at one time, Kahn might have allowed
>Samick to issue some Samick line pianos with the Bernhard Steiner name
>stencilled on.
The only Bernhard Steiner grands ever made anywhere in the world at any time in
history were made by Samick in Korea.
>The fact is that
>Bernhard Steiner pianos have been in production since 1886. They are
>German pianos.
This is not a fact. It is a lie.
>One can tell that they are German pianos, by how they sound. Even if
>they were made in Texas, they would still be German pianos - just as,
>Bostons are American pianos, even though Kawai makes them for
>Steinway.
You're pathetic and ill, Sayer. You wouldn't know a German piano from a banjo.
Look behind the right front leg of your piano and find the Samick sticker.
>Leave the piano evaluations to the pianists.
First, you're not a pianist. You're a mentally ill hack who can play a couple
of tunes poorly. Second, pianists can tell you if they like the way a
particular piano plays and sounds, but they deal in the purely subjective areas
of pianos. Being a pianist is not enough when talking about how, or where, they
are built.
>You don't know enough about pianos, to have a viable interpretation of
>when a piano is or is not satisfactory.
>
Right, Sayer. You're a mentally ill half assed banger who eats cat food, and
you know more about pianos than the industry that builds them. You really don't
realize your stupid you present yourself to be.
>Your use of logic is like that of a criminal. Don't ever criticize my
>"logic, common sense, or thinking processes" again.
>
No, my statement stands, and this post is proof. As long as you hang around
dropping your demented scribbling of lies and preverted logic, I will respond
correcting you.
Michael Sayers
> >From: mjs1...@yahoo.com (Michael Sayers)
>
> >The facts are
>
> >a) that Bernhard Steiner C-8s are $46 000 from the factory,
>
> No Sayer, that is not a fact. Either you are a liar, or the salesman was a liar
> and you are an idiot. There is not other option.
Bernhard Steiner C-8s are $46 000 from the factory.
> >Here is what the Handbook of Texas Piano Manufacture says in regard to
> >Bernhard Steiner:
>
> The handbook is wrong. You have to uproot the entire body of knowledge
> regarding this in order to make one single man's mistake fit. He is wrong, and
> I have contacted him regarding his mistake.
>
> >In 1991 there were four piano manufacturers
> > with offices in Texas, all of them German:
> > August Forster Piano Company and Zimmermann
> > Piano Company in Houston, and Bernhard Steiner
> > Piano Company and Dietmann Pianos Limited in Dallas
>
> These companies didn't have offices in Texas. They had distributors who were
> located there. Bernhard Steiner is not, and never was, a German piano.
These offices are in Dallas. In case you forgot, I am from Dallas. I
have seen these offices, and these pianos.
What do mean, by saying the Bernhard Steiner "is not, and never was, a
German piano" ? The company was founded in Germany by Kahn's family
in 1886.
> >There is nothing whatsoever - in the Handbook of Texas Piano
> >Manufacture, in the Bernhard Steiner court filing and decision, or at
> >the Samick website - that suggests in any way that the pianos are made
> >by Samick, much less that they are merely Samicks with "Bernhard
> >Steiner" stenciled on the fall board.
>
> You have had all these perversions of reality explained to you. Anyone can make
> a mistake, only a liar would continue to repeat it. You are a liar.
As I said, it is a FACT that there is no mention of Bernhard Steiner
in a) the Samick website, b) the Bernhard Steiner court filing, or c)
the Handbook of Texas Piano Manufacture.
It is a FACT that Bernhard Steiner began production in Germany in
1886.
It is a FACT that the various components of the Bernhard Steiner (such
as the Abel Hammers, Renner actions, German strings) are German.
It is a FACT that the pianos are German. There is no "lying" to it.
> >It is absolutely possible that, at one time, Kahn might have allowed
> >Samick to issue some Samick line pianos with the Bernhard Steiner name
> >stencilled on.
>
> The only Bernhard Steiner grands ever made anywhere in the world at any time in
> history were made by Samick in Korea.
There was no Samick in 1886, when Bernhard Steiner was founded in
Germany. The court decision about Bernhard Steiner even lists the
date of founding. The decision is at:
http://www.txnb.uscourts.gov/opinions/hdh/02-32294_20030115.pdf
Get the facts, before you issue wild and extreme pronouncements. I
keep reminding you of the facts, and repeating them, but you just
won't listen.
You are only going to end up embarrasing yourself, by obstinately and
perversely maintaining these things about Bernhard Steiner pianos
which are not true.
As I said, I think your modus operandi is argument for argument's
sake. That having been said, you should lose all evidential and
refutational credibility.
> >The fact is that
> >Bernhard Steiner pianos have been in production since 1886. They are
> >German pianos.
>
> This is not a fact. It is a lie.
Read the court decision. Learn about how the Kahn family was involved
in the history of German piano manufacture. Then make your decisions
- and not before you do these preliminaries.
> >One can tell that they are German pianos, by how they sound. Even if
> >they were made in Texas, they would still be German pianos - just as,
> >Bostons are American pianos, even though Kawai makes them for
> >Steinway.
>
> You're pathetic and ill, Sayer. You wouldn't know a German piano from a banjo.
> Look behind the right front leg of your piano and find the Samick sticker.
It's not there. Those stickers only go on Samick manufactured pianos.
As I said, one can tell that they are German pianos, by how they
sound. Even if they were made in Texas, they would still be German
pianos - just as, Bostons are American pianos, even though Kawai makes
them for Steinway.
If, for the sake of argument, you really are going to insist that
Bostons are Kawai pianos, then that will only further reinforce my
assessment of your modus operandi in this - that your are arguing just
to argue.
There is an amoral element to your behaviour too. Please read on.
> >Leave the piano evaluations to the pianists.
>
> First, you're not a pianist. You're a mentally ill hack who can play a couple
> of tunes poorly. Second, pianists can tell you if they like the way a
> particular piano plays and sounds, but they deal in the purely subjective areas
> of pianos. Being a pianist is not enough when talking about how, or where, they
> are built.
You have never heard me to perform, and are not able therefore to
evaluate the quality of even one of my public performances.
I don't doubt that you have a nuts and bolts comprehension of pianos -
describing a type of wood, or estimating market value, is very
different from knowing if a piano is worth practicing, playing, or
performing.
Of course, the two are related - but your expertise seems to solely
relate to the nuts and bolts end.
Your evaluations of piano tone are confined to naivity.
> >You don't know enough about pianos, to have a viable interpretation of
> >when a piano is or is not satisfactory.
> >
>
> Right, Sayer. You're a mentally ill half assed banger who eats cat food, and
> you know more about pianos than the industry that builds them. You really don't
> realize your stupid you present yourself to be.
The industry knows a great deal about what is or is not a good piano.
I am sure that the staff of Bosendorfer - which caters to Austrian
tastes - wish privately they could make pianos with the bass of a good
American Steinway D.
If they can't detect that their pianos have sound boards that are too
small, then MAYBE I DO KNOW MORE about what makes a good piano, than
do at least some persons in the piano industry.
If you liked the Bosendorfers which you sold at one time, and thought
that those overpriced "harps" were good pianos, then - as I have read
- then you probably are not able to have a viable interpretation of
when a piano is or is not satisfactory
> >Your use of logic is like that of a criminal. Don't ever criticize my
> >"logic, common sense, or thinking processes" again.
> >
>
> No, my statement stands, and this post is proof. As long as you hang around
> dropping your demented scribbling of lies and preverted logic, I will respond
> correcting you.
In your other post, you stated specifically that the reason you were
doing this is because you can't stop. I don't think you would have
used this description, if it wer not apt. And so far, you haven't
been able to stop - so it seems to be quite apt indeed.
You can moralize all you want to about the reasons you are doing this
- but the fact is, that you can't stop doing it, and that is the
reason you keep on going. Criminals are very good at making up
excuses for their crimes.
Jack the Ripper might have thought that what he was doing was okay,
because he couldn't stop doing it.
So, as you can see, there is plainly an amoral component in your
behaviour, if you think that having the reason of not being able to
stop doing something, makes it okay for a person to do it.
I have read your remarks about women, and am starting to wonder if the
only reason you don't kidnap and rape them, is because you don't want
to be in prison. Maybe you do kidnap and rape them, but just have not
been apprehended.
Michael Sayers
> >From: mjs1...@yahoo.com (Michael Sayers)
>
> >The facts are
>
> >a) that Bernhard Steiner C-8s are $46 000 from the factory,
>
> No Sayer, that is not a fact. Either you are a liar, or the salesman was a liar
> and you are an idiot. There is not other option.
Bernhard Steiner C-8s are $46 000 from the factory.
> >Here is what the Handbook of Texas Piano Manufacture says in regard to
> >Bernhard Steiner:
>
> The handbook is wrong. You have to uproot the entire body of knowledge
> regarding this in order to make one single man's mistake fit. He is wrong, and
> I have contacted him regarding his mistake.
>
> >In 1991 there were four piano manufacturers
> > with offices in Texas, all of them German:
> > August Forster Piano Company and Zimmermann
> > Piano Company in Houston, and Bernhard Steiner
> > Piano Company and Dietmann Pianos Limited in Dallas
>
> These companies didn't have offices in Texas. They had distributors who were
> located there. Bernhard Steiner is not, and never was, a German piano.
These offices are in Dallas. In case you forgot, I am from Dallas. I
have seen these offices, and these pianos.
What do mean, by saying the Bernhard Steiner "is not, and never was, a
German piano" ? The company was founded in Germany by Kahn's family
in 1886.
> >There is nothing whatsoever - in the Handbook of Texas Piano
> >Manufacture, in the Bernhard Steiner court filing and decision, or at
> >the Samick website - that suggests in any way that the pianos are made
> >by Samick, much less that they are merely Samicks with "Bernhard
> >Steiner" stenciled on the fall board.
>
> You have had all these perversions of reality explained to you. Anyone can make
> a mistake, only a liar would continue to repeat it. You are a liar.
As I said, it is a FACT that there is no mention of Bernhard Steiner
in a) the Samick website, b) the Bernhard Steiner court filing, or c)
the Handbook of Texas Piano Manufacture.
It is a FACT that Bernhard Steiner began production in Germany in
1886.
It is a FACT that the various components of the Bernhard Steiner (such
as the Abel Hammers, Renner actions, German strings) are German.
It is a FACT that the pianos are German. There is no "lying" to it.
> >It is absolutely possible that, at one time, Kahn might have allowed
> >Samick to issue some Samick line pianos with the Bernhard Steiner name
> >stencilled on.
>
> The only Bernhard Steiner grands ever made anywhere in the world at any time in
> history were made by Samick in Korea.
There was no Samick in 1886, when Bernhard Steiner was founded in
Germany. The court decision about Bernhard Steiner even lists the
date of founding. The decision is at:
http://www.txnb.uscourts.gov/opinions/hdh/02-32294_20030115.pdf
Get the facts, before you issue wild and extreme pronouncements. I
keep reminding you of the facts, and repeating them, but you just
won't listen.
You are only going to end up embarrasing yourself, by obstinately and
perversely maintaining these things about Bernhard Steiner pianos
which are not true.
As I said, I think your modus operandi is argument for argument's
sake. That having been said, you should lose all evidential and
refutational credibility.
> >The fact is that
> >Bernhard Steiner pianos have been in production since 1886. They are
> >German pianos.
>
> This is not a fact. It is a lie.
Read the court decision. Learn about how the Kahn family was involved
in the history of German piano manufacture. Then make your decisions
- and not before you do these preliminaries.
> >One can tell that they are German pianos, by how they sound. Even if
> >they were made in Texas, they would still be German pianos - just as,
> >Bostons are American pianos, even though Kawai makes them for
> >Steinway.
>
> You're pathetic and ill, Sayer. You wouldn't know a German piano from a banjo.
> Look behind the right front leg of your piano and find the Samick sticker.
It's not there. Those stickers only go on Samick manufactured pianos.
As I said, one can tell that they are German pianos, by how they
sound. Even if they were made in Texas, they would still be German
pianos - just as, Bostons are American pianos, even though Kawai makes
them for Steinway.
If, for the sake of argument, you really are going to insist that
Bostons are Kawai pianos, then that will only further reinforce my
assessment of your modus operandi in this - that your are arguing just
to argue.
There is an amoral element to your behaviour too. Please read on.
> >Leave the piano evaluations to the pianists.
>
> First, you're not a pianist. You're a mentally ill hack who can play a couple
> of tunes poorly. Second, pianists can tell you if they like the way a
> particular piano plays and sounds, but they deal in the purely subjective areas
> of pianos. Being a pianist is not enough when talking about how, or where, they
> are built.
You have never heard me to perform, and are not able therefore to
evaluate the quality of even one of my public performances.
I don't doubt that you have a nuts and bolts comprehension of pianos -
describing a type of wood, or estimating market value, is very
different from knowing if a piano is worth practicing, playing, or
performing.
Of course, the two are related - but your expertise seems to solely
relate to the nuts and bolts end.
Your evaluations of piano tone are confined to naivity.
> >You don't know enough about pianos, to have a viable interpretation of
> >when a piano is or is not satisfactory.
> >
>
> Right, Sayer. You're a mentally ill half assed banger who eats cat food, and
> you know more about pianos than the industry that builds them. You really don't
> realize your stupid you present yourself to be.
The industry knows a great deal about what is or is not a good piano.
I am sure that the staff of Bosendorfer - which caters to Austrian
tastes - wish privately they could make pianos with the bass of a good
American Steinway D.
If they can't detect that their pianos have sound boards that are too
small, then MAYBE I DO KNOW MORE about what makes a good piano, than
do at least some persons in the piano industry.
If you liked the Bosendorfers which you sold at one time, and thought
that those overpriced "harps" were good pianos, then - as I have read
- then you probably are not able to have a viable interpretation of
when a piano is or is not satisfactory
> >Your use of logic is like that of a criminal. Don't ever criticize my
> >"logic, common sense, or thinking processes" again.
> >
>
> No, my statement stands, and this post is proof. As long as you hang around
> dropping your demented scribbling of lies and preverted logic, I will respond
> correcting you.
Alan Jones
[...]
> Bernhard Steiner C-8s are $46 000 from the factory.
I'm sure you've told us, but it escapes my memory where exactly the Bernhard
Steiner C-8 is made. Can one visit the factory? Does BS have a showroom
there?
Alan Jones
Larry
>Bernhard Steiner C-8s are $46 000 from the factory.
No, they're not. How could they be - you claim to own the prototype, and since
there are no other C-8 Bernhard Steiners in existence, they cannot be *any*
price from the Samick factory.
>These offices are in Dallas. In case you forgot, I am from Dallas. I
>have seen these offices, and these pianos.
>
They had distributors located there. A distributor is no more an extension of a
factory than a Ford dealer in Wyoming means Fords are built in Wyoming.
Everyone else here understands that, you are the only one too thick to get it.
>What do mean, by saying the Bernhard Steiner "is not, and never was, a
>German piano" ? The company was founded in Germany by Kahn's family
>in 1886.
>
Give me an address.
>As I said, it is a FACT that there is no mention of Bernhard Steiner in a) the
Samick website,
And as has been said repeatedly, that's because Bernhard Steiner is a STENCIL.
Samick only lists the trade names they own in their website, not the stuff they
built for stencil accounts.
>b) the Bernhard Steiner court filing,
That's because Samick wasn't owed any money - again, this was explained to you.
Piano manufacturers do not extend credit to distributors who purchase stencils.
In fact, they have to pay in advance.
>or c) the Handbook of Texas Piano Manufacture.
Again as has been clearly stated, is a second rate, poorly researched article,
and they have been contacted with the correct information.
>It is a FACT that Bernhard Steiner began production in Germany in 1886.
It is also a fact that Mr. Krakauer started building pianos even before that,
here in America. He died, the company was closed, the name bought and sold
numerous times, and is now owned by Artfield piano manufacturers in China.
Krakauer of the 1800s has nothing more to do with Krakauers today than an old
Bernhard Steiner company in Germany in the 1800s has anything to do with Kahn.
>It is a FACT that the various components of the Bernhard Steiner (such
>as the Abel Hammers, Renner actions, German strings) are German.
It is also a fact that these same German components are the same German
components found in a Samick.
>It is a FACT that the pianos are German. There is no "lying" to it.
>
>
That is *NOT* a fact. Your piano is a Samick. The serial number is a Samick
number. Call Samick and ask them.
>There was no Samick in 1886, when Bernhard Steiner was founded in
>Germany.
Which has absolutely nothing to do with your piano.
>The court decision about Bernhard Steiner even lists the date of founding.
Which has absolutely nothing to do with your piano, or Ivan Kahn in Dallas, for
that matter.
>Get the facts, before you issue wild and extreme pronouncements.
You need to take your own advice. *You* are the one issuing wild and extreme
pronouncements, not me.
>I keep reminding you of the facts, and repeating them, but you just
>won't listen.
Again, you need to listen to your own advice. What you have been repeating is
so obviously wrong that a 6 year old can see through it. Repeating lies out of
ignorance and stubbornness and just plain mental deficiency does not make them
true.
>You are only going to end up embarrasing yourself, by obstinately and
>perversely maintaining these things about Bernhard Steiner pianos
>which are not true.
No, the one who is embarrasing himself is you. Get out of your "Texas Handbook"
pamphlet and examine the piano industry. You're gonna come up empty.
>As I said, I think your modus operandi is argument for argument's
>sake. That having been said, you should lose all evidential and
>refutational credibility.
No, I am going to make sure that every time you try to spread your idiotic
drivel there is a huge trail of data behind it warning the unsuspecting person
that you are a crook, a liar, and probably mentally ill. They will have the
true facts about your piano, and all they have to do is call their nearest
piano technician to verify that you are lying.
>It's not there. Those stickers only go on Samick manufactured pianos.
Then Kahn's is a crook too, and pulled the sticker off.
>I don't doubt that you have a nuts and bolts comprehension of pianos
You are correct. And if I am speaking to someone with a pianistic knowledge and
comprehension of pianos, I have that ability as well. In speaking to you
however, it is not necessary or even of interest to me to delve into that area,
since my only concern with you is to uncover the crooked liar you are so no one
will lose their ass by falling for your garbage. Talking to you about music??
You know nothing about it, so for what purpose?
>Your evaluations of piano tone are confined to naivity.
>
Hey - *you're* the one that put an mp3 up that sounded like two 5 year olds
banging on a Wurlitzer spinet with metal pans.
>The industry knows a great deal about what is or is not a good piano.
The industry also knows that Bernhard Steiner grands were built by Samick in
Korea.
>I am sure that the staff of Bosendorfer - which caters to Austrian
>tastes - wish privately they could make pianos with the bass of a good
>American Steinway D.
I would imagine they really wouldn't want to sacrifice their tonal quality in
order to achieve it.
>If they can't detect that their pianos have sound boards that are too
>small, then MAYBE I DO KNOW MORE about what makes a good piano, than
>do at least some persons in the piano industry.
What an absolutely idiotic statement.
>In your other post, you stated specifically that the reason you were
>doing this is because you can't stop
No, I stated that it's like shelling peanuts. As long as there's another peanut
to shell, you shell it. I can stop at any time. I won't however, because it
would make you happy to find yourself left alone to take advantage of other
people's lack of information on things, such as falling for paying outrageous
sums of money for a Samick because you lied to them and told them it was built
in Germany.
>You can moralize all you want to about the reasons you are doing this
>- but the fact is, that you can't stop doing it, and that is the
>reason you keep on going.
You are a failure at psychology, Sayer. And not nearly as intelligent as you
think.
>Criminals are very good at making up
>excuses for their crimes.
As are pathological liars such as yourself.
>I have read your remarks about women, and am starting to wonder if the
>only reason you don't kidnap and rape them, is because you don't want
>to be in prison. Maybe you do kidnap and rape them, but just have not
>been apprehended.
I don't have to kidnap women or rape them either one, Sayer. The fact that you
brought this train of though up gives a little insight into *your* brain
though.
Michael Sayers
> >From: mjs1...@yahoo.com (Michael Sayers)
>
> >Bernhard Steiner C-8s are $46 000 from the factory.
>
> No, they're not. How could they be - you claim to own the prototype, and since
> there are no other C-8 Bernhard Steiners in existence, they cannot be *any*
> price from the Samick factory.
The prototype would be the initial working model of the line, through
which specifications for the C-8 production units were determined. It
toured pianos shows - for which it has plainly been outfitted (the
other Bernhard Steiners I've seen have a different rim, plus red
ribbons, red inset twine, a different iron frame coating, and so
forth).
Furthermore, if it were a "stencil" Samick, there would be no need for
design researching and testing. There would be no need to have a
prototype. There would be no need to wait a year to bring out the new
C-9 model (pianos aren't made the same year after year after year).
Finally, there is no, and never has there been to my knowledge, a 7'8"
Samick.
> >These offices are in Dallas. In case you forgot, I am from Dallas. I
> >have seen these offices, and these pianos.
> >
>
> They had distributors located there. A distributor is no more an extension of a
> factory than a Ford dealer in Wyoming means Fords are built in Wyoming.
> Everyone else here understands that, you are the only one too thick to get it.
The document reads "offices", not "distributors". So, evidently they
do have offices in Dallas - offices which you have not visited, but
which I have visited.
Like I said, just because Kahn has a piano restoration and rebuilding
staff in Dallas, doesn't mean he builds the things there. A handful
of skilled artisans, can only turn out pianos at up to a certain rate
(as, for instance, with the Fazioli company). But, I would not be
surpised at all if the prototype Bernhard Steiner C-8 were made by his
staff. As you might know, normally a rebuilt piano has some problems
and imbalances.....but Kahn's rebuilt pianos are amazingly perfect and
flawless. Just as is the prototype Bernhard Steiner C-8.
I really don't think a piano as good as this one, could have been made
except by hand from start to finish. It is as free of imbalances as a
Bosendorfer.
The production unit Bernhard Steiners, seem to have been produced with
greater rapidity. But this particular one is perfect - which is why I
bought it.
> >What do mean, by saying the Bernhard Steiner "is not, and never was, a
> >German piano" ? The company was founded in Germany by Kahn's family
> >in 1886.
> >
>
> Give me an address.
I don't need to have an address, to know that this is a German piano.
I don't need to have an address, to know that American Steinways are
American pianos.
By the way, you still haven't said if the Boston Steinways, which are
made by Kawai, are American pianos or not? You don't like that
question, do you?
I am not going to learn German, simply to research this address for
you at my time and expense. For a high hourly researcher's fee,
though, I might be willing.
> >As I said, it is a FACT that there is no mention of Bernhard Steiner in a) the
> Samick website,
>
> And as has been said repeatedly, that's because Bernhard Steiner is a STENCIL.
> Samick only lists the trade names they own in their website, not the stuff they
> built for stencil accounts.
Thank you for confirming that Bernhard Steiner is not mentioned at the
Samick website.
> >b) the Bernhard Steiner court filing,
>
> That's because Samick wasn't owed any money - again, this was explained to you.
> Piano manufacturers do not extend credit to distributors who purchase stencils.
> In fact, they have to pay in advance.
It would also be the case that, were there no connection whatsoever
between Samick and Bernhard Steiner, then Samick would not be
mentioned. For some reason, you can't seem to perceive the whole
picture.
> >or c) the Handbook of Texas Piano Manufacture.
>
> Again as has been clearly stated, is a second rate, poorly researched article,
> and they have been contacted with the correct information.
It is "poorly researched", because it doesn't agree with your
"research" (mainly, internet surfing and Googling keywords).
> >It is a FACT that Bernhard Steiner began production in Germany in 1886.
>
> It is also a fact that Mr. Krakauer started building pianos even before that,
> here in America. He died, the company was closed, the name bought and sold
> numerous times, and is now owned by Artfield piano manufacturers in China.
> Krakauer of the 1800s has nothing more to do with Krakauers today than an old
> Bernhard Steiner company in Germany in the 1800s has anything to do with Kahn.
The court decision states the Bernhard Steiner was founded BY THE KAHN
FAMILY in 1886 in Europe. It was not founded by someone other than
the Kahns, following which the Kahns purchased the name.
The name "Bernhard Steiner" has never been owned by anyone who was not
a Kahn, or who was not a master piano builder, rebuilder and
craftsman.
> >It is a FACT that the various components of the Bernhard Steiner (such
> >as the Abel Hammers, Renner actions, German strings) are German.
>
> It is also a fact that these same German components are the same German
> components found in a Samick.
According to the Samick website, only the concert grand Samick uses
Abel hammers. The website doesn't specify if a) the Renner actions
are made by Renner, and then shipped to Samick, or b) the Renner
actions parts are shipped to Samick, where they are assembled.
However, I pretty much suspect it is the latter. I know someone with
a baby grand Samick, who has problems with the flange pins slipping
out - evidently, at least the Renner action in that one was not
assembled in Germany.
After four years in my possession, not one flange pin has ever slipped
out of place in the prototype Bernhard Steiner C-8.
I really don't understand what the big deal is about Samick. Even
though I don't own a Samick, I understand from piano technicians that
they aren't as bad as they used to be. The ones I've, could be very
good were I to go over them. I think I could a Samick concert grand
in a recital, once I've worked on it, and no one would care.
Samicks are definitely start out having a lot more to work with, then
do certain Chinese pianos, for instance. I think Samick implemented
some quality control, got their act together, and now they are making
good pianos.
FYI, the stencil Samicks seem better than the non-stencilled Samicks,
and might get better regulation and voicing at the factory.
> >It is a FACT that the pianos are German. There is no "lying" to it.
> >
> >
>
> That is *NOT* a fact. Your piano is a Samick.
That the Bernhard Steiner piano is German, IS a fact - but only for
someone who knows what is really being assessed by the statement, and
for someone who has a FACTUAL knowledge of when a piano either a) is
or b) is not, German.
Do you not think Renner and Abel are not German companies? What
components, specifically, do you think are in my piano, which were not
manufactured in Germany? And, what components in a piano, if they are
not German, cause the piano to not be German?
Fazioli operates out of Italy. The actions and hammers are from
Germany. Do you think that there is, nonetheleless, a distinctly
Italian pattern of piano manufacture, and that these pianos are
Italian?
Our conversation about if a piano a) is or b) is not, German, will
make more sense once you explain what criteria we are using to decide
the question. As I say, there are Bernhard Steiner offices in Texas.
But that doesn't, to my way of thinking, make Bernhard Steiners into
American pianos. Even if my prototype Bernhard Steiner C-8 were built
in Dallas, Tx., it would still be a German piano.
And, of course, my big question to you, which you ignore because you
are afraid to answser it, is: are the Boston Steinways, made by Kawai,
American pianos?
>The serial number is a Samick
> number. Call Samick and ask them.
It can't be a Samick serial number, because the piano is not a Samick.
And, to my knowledge, Samick's serial number scheme is not patented.
So, another company can use the same scheme if they want to, without
an infringement.
I do not need to call them, to know that my Bernhard Steiner is a
Bernhard Steiner.
I wouldn't mistake a Samick for a Bernhard Steiner, any more than I
would mistake a 60's British Mini for a Ferrari.
> >There was no Samick in 1886, when Bernhard Steiner was founded in
> >Germany.
>
> Which has absolutely nothing to do with your piano.
My piano is a Bernhard Steiner. Bernhard Steiner was founded by the
Kahns in Germany in 1886, and has been owned by the Kahns every day
since then until now.
There is no Samick involvement. When Samick came on the scene,
Bernhard Steiner was owned by the Kahns. Bernhard Steiner still is
owned by the Kahns.
> >The court decision about Bernhard Steiner even lists the date of founding.
>
> Which has absolutely nothing to do with your piano, or Ivan Kahn in Dallas, for
> that matter.
The decision explains that Bernhard Steiner WAS FOUNDED BY THE KAHN
FAMILY in Europe in 1886, and has BEEN OWNED BY THE KAHN FAMILY ever
since. It explains that Ivan kahn is a fourth generation master piano
craftsman and rebuilder.
Bernhard Steiner has never been owned by Samick.
For their work on the Bernhard Steiner, Kahn's family should be listed
in Dover's book - but they aren't. Dover Publications does a lot of
reprints.....as in, facsimile reprints of books which have entered the
public domain. I don't have the book handy, but it is in their
catalogue. It makes for (at least to me) interesting reading.
Perhaps you have read it?
> >Get the facts, before you issue wild and extreme pronouncements.
>
> You need to take your own advice. *You* are the one issuing wild and extreme
> pronouncements, not me.
I am just going by the facts.
> >I keep reminding you of the facts, and repeating them, but you just
> >won't listen.
>
> Again, you need to listen to your own advice. What you have been repeating is
> so obviously wrong that a 6 year old can see through it. Repeating lies out of
> ignorance and stubbornness and just plain mental deficiency does not make them
> true.
I will believe that a 6 yr. old can prove that my piano is not a
Bernhard Steiner, if you can find a 6 yr. old who can prove that the
Earth is flat.
> >You are only going to end up embarrasing yourself, by obstinately and
> >perversely maintaining these things about Bernhard Steiner pianos
> >which are not true.
>
> No, the one who is embarrasing himself is you. Get out of your "Texas Handbook"
> pamphlet and examine the piano industry. You're gonna come up empty.
>
> >As I said, I think your modus operandi is argument for argument's
> >sake. That having been said, you should lose all evidential and
> >refutational credibility.
>
> No, I am going to make sure that every time you try to spread your idiotic
> drivel there is a huge trail of data behind it warning the unsuspecting person
> that you are a crook, a liar, and probably mentally ill. They will have the
> true facts about your piano, and all they have to do is call their nearest
> piano technician to verify that you are lying.
Your data = "Sayers is a liar and an idiot"
my data = a court filing, the Handbook of Texas Piano Manufucture, and
first hand experience and study of Bernhard Steiners
It is easy to see which way the scale will tip.
YOU might want to come up with some data to support your claim. YOU
might want to come up with some data to refute the court decision,
which reads that Bernhard Steiner was founded by the Kahn family in
1886, and has been owned by them ever since.
I have supplied evidence for my claim (or claims). You have supplied
ZERO evidence for your claim (or claims).
It would be just like not showing up to court. You might be in the
right, but if you don't make an appearance, and the only evidence
presented is in support of the other party, they will win.
Judges go by the balance of the evidence. Judges don't go by what
evidence a party who might have showed up, might have presented.
> >It's not there. Those stickers only go on Samick manufactured pianos.
>
> Then Kahn's is a crook too, and pulled the sticker off.
Next, you will say that he paid the judge $1 000 000 dollars to say
things in the decision like, "Ivan Kahn is a fourth generation master
craftsman," and "Bernhard Steiner was founded by Kahn's family in
Europe in 1886".
I have supplied enough evidence to support the fact that Bernhard
Steiners are German pianos.
If you think Kahn pulled a sticker off a piano, YOU must present your
evidence.
If you think Kahn bribed a judge, YOU must present your evidence.
You hold a different conclusion about Bernhard Steiner pianos than I
do, but refuse to make available any evidence to support your
concusion.
I will be very glad to examine any evidence you have, which supports
your position. But, I really think you are just being obstinate, and
are arguing for arguments sake - since you are 100% argumentation, and
0% evidence.
> >I don't doubt that you have a nuts and bolts comprehension of pianos
>
> You are correct. And if I am speaking to someone with a pianistic knowledge and
> comprehension of pianos, I have that ability as well. In speaking to you
> however, it is not necessary or even of interest to me to delve into that area,
> since my only concern with you is to uncover the crooked liar you are so no one
> will lose their ass by falling for your garbage. Talking to you about music??
> You know nothing about it, so for what purpose?
My piano is not for sell, and will never be for sell again - so, you
can rest easy if you are worried that someone poor bloke will succumb
to the seduction of the Bernhard Steiner C-8 prototype sirens.
YOU are the one who is bashing Kahn and Bernhard Steiner, with zero
evidence.
YOU are the one who is being crooked.
Until you discuss music with me, you have no basis in questioning my
musical knowledge. We haven't discussed music or not - so, you don't
know how able I am to discuss it or not.
> >Your evaluations of piano tone are confined to naivity.
> >
>
> Hey - *you're* the one that put an mp3 up that sounded like two 5 year olds
> banging on a Wurlitzer spinet with metal pans.
This only confirms, as I have suggested, that your evaluations of
piano tone are confined to naivity.
An informed pianist and listener doesn't simply form a decision based
on one recording.
He has to be able to hear everything that is good or bad - whether the
pianist is Gilels, Richter, Argerich, Paderewski, Friedman, Barere,
Busoni, Cortot, Risler, Sauer, Pollini, Nyiregyhazi, Rosenthal,
Rubinstein, or Artur Schnabel.
I hate and loathe Michelangeli's tone. It is as cold as ice. He
brutalizes Mozart and Chopin. But his recording of the Bach-Busoni
Chaconne, for instance, has my respect. In that piece, he is like a
hand in a glove.
So, one can't evaluate a pianist from just hearing a few pieces. To
get a full grasp of a pianist's art, takes a significant amount of
listening.
It might interest you, that as much as I admire Nyiregyhazi, I don't
think he was as great as some people feel that he was. But he was
definitely a 19th century type pianist, and the greatest of recorded
pianists.
FYI, the pianist in the mp3 you heard was not myself, but a friend
named Michael Allen. I have emailed him for the file, and I should be
able to make it available shortly.
He is an extremely good classical pianist, and an extremely compelling
(at times) improviser. What you hard was the cataclysmic final 30
seconds of one of his improvisations. You heard 30 seconds of Michael
Allen playing, and you didn't like it.
If you heard him play a Chopin nocturne, you would feel differently.
When he wants it to be, his tone is better than Arthur Rubinstein's.
Michael Allen has gone on to study advanced mathematics, since the
music school where he studied music was obsessed with all sorts of
arbitrary impositions and restrictions on performance. He had a bad
experience there. It is unfortunate. There aren't many pianists, who
can go months at a time without practice, studying vector analysis
instead, and then just rattle off the Chopin etudes like they are
nothing.
> >The industry knows a great deal about what is or is not a good piano.
>
> The industry also knows that Bernhard Steiner grands were built by Samick in
> Korea.
Where's your evidence that "the industry" knows this?
> >I am sure that the staff of Bosendorfer - which caters to Austrian
> >tastes - wish privately they could make pianos with the bass of a good
> >American Steinway D.
>
> I would imagine they really wouldn't want to sacrifice their tonal quality in
> order to achieve it.
A good American Steinway D, has much better tone qualities than these
Bosendorfers. It is not about "tone quality" so much as, the number
and range of different tone qualities and colours a piano can produce.
A piano should be able to imitate every instrument in the orchestra,
not just the harp. They are coming up vastly short - they need to not
come up so far short tonally, before they worry about miniscule
finesses.
I have played Imperial Bosendorfers. They are horrendous pianos.
They have basically only one tone quality, and 2 or 3 colours which
can be produced. The Bosendorfer Saal should be renamed: "Monument to
Mediocrity".
> >If they can't detect that their pianos have sound boards that are too
> >small, then MAYBE I DO KNOW MORE about what makes a good piano, than
> >do at least some persons in the piano industry.
>
> What an absolutely idiotic statement.
What is idiotic, is to make with great cost and craftsmanship, a 9'6"
piano with added keys in the bass, but a baby soundboard. THAT is
idiotic.
It would be like a Ferrari.....with a Volkswagen Beetle engine under
the hood.
> >In your other post, you stated specifically that the reason you were
> >doing this is because you can't stop
>
> No, I stated that it's like shelling peanuts. As long as there's another peanut
> to shell, you shell it. I can stop at any time. I won't however, because it
> would make you happy to find yourself left alone to take advantage of other
> people's lack of information on things, such as falling for paying outrageous
> sums of money for a Samick because you lied to them and told them it was built
> in Germany.
Like I said, the piano is not for sell, and will never be for sell.
You said earlier that the reason you are doing this, is that you can't
stop. So far, it's been true.
Unlike yourself, I CAN STOP shelling peanuts, even when there is
another peanut to shell.
Larry
>The prototype would be the initial working model of the line, t
Well, as we now know from another post, your entire "prototype" argument has
been shot to hell with the publication of Samick's liquidation of all leftover
Bernhard Steiner stencils, meaning there were *no* "prototypes" necessary.
You're full of sh*t, Sayer. You're a liar, and you know it. That, or you need
medical help.
>The document reads "offices", not "distributors". So, evidently they
>do have offices in Dallas - offices which you have not visited, but
>which I have visited.
Distributors have offices. Your argument here is stupid.
>Like I said, just because Kahn has a piano restoration and rebuilding
>staff in Dallas,
Kahn has little to nothing in Dallas anymore. It makes no difference, because
he is *not* some "world reknowned" piano designer as you claim. He was just
another piano dealer.
>I really don't think a piano as good as this one, could have been made
>except by hand from start to finish. It is as free of imbalances as a
>Bosendorfer.
And it is this very lack of ability to tell the difference that shows you to be
one of the most ignorant people in the country regarding pianos.
>I don't need to have an address, to know that this is a German piano.
>I don't need to have an address, to know that American Steinways are
>American pianos.
>
Again, your argument is juvenile, and stupid.
>By the way, you still haven't said if the Boston Steinways, which are
>made by Kawai, are American pianos or not? You don't like that
>question, do you?
Why would I not like that question? I haven't answered it because it is so
obviously the blatherings of a mental midget. Any fool knows the answer to it,
but I'll humor you. There is no such thing as a "Boston Steinway". There *is* a
Boston piano, sold by Steinway. The piano is built by Kawai, in Japan. This
makes it a Japanese built piano, sold in America by an American piano company.
Are they "American pianos"? Are Bosendorfers built in Austria and sold in
America "American pianos" while the ones sold in Switzerland "Swiss pianos"?
Of course not. You see Sayer, you set up idiotic questions based on moronic
logic, and then expect people to buy into it. It is a sympton of *your* mental
illness, not a reflection on those who choose not to address your twisted
logic.
>I am not going to learn German, simply to research this address for
>you at my time and expense. For a high hourly researcher's fee,
>though, I might be willing.
>
In other words, you know already you can't come up with the address. You know
you're a liar.
>Thank you for confirming that Bernhard Steiner is not mentioned at the
>Samick website.
I'll be even more simple in how I explain this this time, since you obviously
aren't smart enough to follow it: Bernhard Steiner isn't mentioned on Samick's
website. It isn't listed because it isn't a brand Samick owns, and wants to
promote. They also don't list Hyundai, Chickering, and several other stencil
names they build. Mitsubishi Motors doesn't list Dodge on their website either,
but everyone knows that Mitsubishi built several Dodge vehicles, and sold them
to Dodge with the name Dodge on them. The same vehicle could be bought with the
name Mitsubishi on it as well. If you go to Dodge's website, you don't see
Mitsubishi mentioned either.
Now - what *else* do you not understand about modern commerce?
>It would also be the case that, were there no connection whatsoever
>between Samick and Bernhard Steiner, then Samick would not be
>mentioned. For some reason, you can't seem to perceive the whole
>picture.
Only someone as stupid as you would fail to understand that it is *you* that
can't see the whole picture. Sure, if there was no connection, there would be
no mention. But all evidence shows there *was* a connection, so the fact that
they aren't mentioned must mean there is another option open to us to explain
it ----- My God!!! Maybe they weren't owed any money!!!! Maybe they required
all products be paid for in advance before they shipped them!!! Now that would
be a logical assumption, since that's how it's done industrywide.
>It is "poorly researched", because it doesn't agree with your
>"research" (mainly, internet surfing and Googling keywords).
It is poorly researched because it arrives at a conclusion that is opposite the
entire body of evidence on the issue, and is the *only* source to arrive at
this conclusion. Simple logic, Sayer - if the entire piano industry says one
thing and your source says another, either the entire piano industry, including
the principles involved in the matter are wrong, or your single source is
wrong. Calculate the odds of your single source, who isn't even involved in the
piano industry - is correct on a matter that the entire piano industry agrees
on another answer.
>FYI, the stencil Samicks seem better than the non-stencilled Samicks,
>and might get better regulation and voicing at the factory.
Yet another statement exposing the dementia that you call thinking.
>That the Bernhard Steiner piano is German, IS a fact
No, it is *not* a fact, Sayer. There is no factory in Germany. The pianos are
built in Korea by Samick. THIS is fact.
>Do you not think Renner and Abel are not German companies?
What does this have to do with anything? Are Michelin tires built in Germany?
Does that make a Chevy with Michelins on it a German car?
>And, what components in a piano, if they are
>not German, cause the piano to not be German?
>
If it is built in Korea, it is a Korean built piano. Just because a few
components are made in Germany doesn't mean anything. Some of the wood used in
the piano comes from Alaska - that doesn't mean it's an Alaskan piano.
Do you suffer from this same inability to process simple logic in other areas
of your life, Sayer, or only when you're trying to cheat people?
>Even if my prototype Bernhard Steiner C-8 were built
>in Dallas, Tx., it would still be a German piano.
You continue to help me at every opportunity in my effort to show you a
complete and utter fool.
>It can't be a Samick serial number, because the piano is not a Samick.
It is a Samick, and it has a Samick serial number in it.
> And, to my knowledge, Samick's serial number scheme is not patented.
>So, another company can use the same scheme if they want to, without
>an infringement.
Sure - of course, since the numbers run consecutively, they'd have to convince
Samick to stop at the point where the Bernhard Steiner number begin, and skip
over to the last number used by a Bernhard Steiner company, and then pick up
again, leaving a gap in their serial numbers. Gee, what an intelligent and
logical explanation you gave, Sayer......
Nah..... you're an idiot. The numbers are consecutive, which are also in
sequence with all the other brand names used, whether stencil or Samick owned
brand names.
>I do not need to call them, to know that my Bernhard Steiner is a Bernhard
Steiner.
Of course not. Using the warped way you try to logic everything out, your piano
says Bernhard Steiner on it, therefore it is a BErnhard Steiner. Fine. I'll
accept that. But that does not in any way stop the fact that a Bernhard Steiner
is simply a Samick stencil, built in Korea, sold to a distributor in Texas,
using old, out of date Samick scale designs.
>I wouldn't mistake a Samick for a Bernhard Steiner, any more than I
>would mistake a 60's British Mini for a Ferrari.
>
You have proven beyond doubt that you couldn't discern the difference between
shit and chocolate cake.
>Bernhard Steiner has never been owned by Samick.
No one has said it was, Sayer. That's why it's called "stenciling". Someone who
owns a trade name, such as Baldwin owning the name Chickering, who buys product
from another manufacturer with their name placed on the product. A Chickering
used to be built for Baldwin by Samick, and was the same piano as yours, Sayer.
That doesn't mean that Samick owned Chickering. Baldwin did. Kahn owned the
rights to the name "Bernhard Steiner". But he bought pianos from Samick, and
had the name BS placed on them, just like Baldwin had them place the name
Chickering on them.
>For their work on the Bernhard Steiner, Kahn's family should be listed
>in Dover's book - but they aren't.
They aren't listed because there was no "work" done by them - their pianos were
simply Samick stencils, just like dozens of other trade names. Dover doesn't
waste his time talking about retailers who had nothing to do with
manufacturing, and who had no factory.
>I am just going by the facts.
You have ignored every single fact presented to you. That's because you are a
demented crook, with the logic skills of a 6 year old.
>Your data = "Sayers is a liar and an idiot"
No, that data is provided by *you*.
>It is easy to see which way the scale will tip.
Well, it tipped against you with the posting of Samick's liquidation of the
Bernhard Steiners that getreal posted, didn't it Sayer?
>I have supplied evidence for my claim (or claims).
To arrive at your conclusions from the data you have presented as your
"evidence" could only be achieved by being a stark raving lunatic.
>I have supplied enough evidence to support the fact that Bernhard
>Steiners are German pianos.
You have supplied nothing.
>You hold a different conclusion about Bernhard Steiner pianos than I
>do, but refuse to make available any evidence to support your
>concusion.
Every single source of information coming from the piano industry shows that
Bernhard Steiner is a stencil made by Samick. I've been to the Samick factory
and watched the damned things coming off the assembly line. You can't *get* any
more solid evidence than the entire industry, Sayer. You on the other hand, use
warped logic to make what amounts to stupid conspiracy theories, and requires
one to strain the very limits of sanity to rationalize your conclusions.
>I will be very glad to examine any evidence you have, which supports
>your position. But, I really think you are just being obstinate, and
>are arguing for arguments sake - since you are 100% argumentation, and
>0% evidence.
You have been presented by literally reams of evidence, from literally dozens
of different people over the course of your idiotic postings here. You have
dismissed every bit of it as worthless information, even when Samick itself
says they made your piano. Why should anyone think you would actually take a
serious look at proof, when you've been supplied this proof repeatedly, and
you've repeatedly sidestepped it? Getreal just posted a website created by
Samick itself where they were liquidating their remaining Bernhard Steiner
inventory - obviously product they had ended up stuck with when Kahn went
bankrupt. If Samick didn't build them, why did they have them, Sayer? If Samick
didn't build them, why are they saying they did?
>Until you discuss music with me, you have no basis in questioning my
>musical knowledge. We haven't discussed music or not - so, you don't
>know how able I am to discuss it or not.
I have no desire to discuss music with you. You're mentally ill, your musical
knowledge is deficient, and your pianistic skills are pathetic. Engaging in a
discourse with you about music would amount to nothing but mental torture.
Since you cannot cause anyone financial harm as a result of your worthless
ramblings regarding music or piano skills, I have absolutely no interest in
having even the slightest conversation with you regarding music. I don't engage
in serious discussions with mental midgets. On the other hand, I *do* engage in
discussions with people who try to screw the public out of money by lying. This
is the *only* reason I even acknowledge your existence.
>What is idiotic, is to make with great cost and craftsmanship, a 9'6"
>piano with added keys in the bass, but a baby soundboard. THAT is
>idiotic.
You obviously didn't look at the soundboard, did you? Your statement is
ridiculous.
>Unlike yourself, I CAN STOP shelling peanuts, even when there is
>another peanut to shell.
>
Then SHUT THE HELL UP, AND GET OFF RMMP, AND QUIT TALKING ABOUT YOUR DAMNED
46,000$ SAMICK!!!!
Michael Sayers
> >(Michael Sayers)
>
> >The prototype would be the initial working model of the line, t
>
> Well, as we now know from another post, your entire "prototype" argument has
> been shot to hell with the publication of Samick's liquidation of all leftover
> Bernhard Steiner stencils, meaning there were *no* "prototypes" necessary.
The word "stencil" does not appear in that Samick publication. But
the word Bechstein does. Maybe you also think Bechstein's are
"stencil" Samicks?
> You're full of sh*t, Sayer. You're a liar, and you know it. That, or you need
> medical help.
You might want to consider the possibility that Samick could be a
Korean market distributor or vendor of the Bernhard Steiner pianos.
Considering all possibilities, and making a decision based on the
procurable evidence, is not lying: it is rational empiricism.
> >The document reads "offices", not "distributors". So, evidently they
> >do have offices in Dallas - offices which you have not visited, but
> >which I have visited.
>
> Distributors have offices. Your argument here is stupid.
The Handbook of Texas Piano Manufacture document reads "offices", not
"distributors".
Every time there is an "office", does not mean that the office is
adjacent to or a component of a point of distribution. Distributors
do have offices - but the controlling offices aren't necessarily
located of the point of distribution.
The document does not specify either "distribution offices" or
"manufacturing offices of manufacture" or "corporate offices" - you
are reading things into it, that are not there. If you know address
of the coporate and/or manufacturing offices of Bernhard Steiner, then
please tell us the country name, city and street address.
For your information: some companies only offer services. They have
offices. But there is no distribution warehouse at all, and no
manufacturing installation.
> >Like I said, just because Kahn has a piano restoration and rebuilding
> >staff in Dallas,
>
> Kahn has little to nothing in Dallas anymore. It makes no difference, because
> he is *not* some "world reknowned" piano designer as you claim. He was just
> another piano dealer.
Kahn is a fourth generation master piano craftsman and rebuilder. I
have played his rebuilt pianos. They are amazingly free of even the
slightest imbalances or imperfections.
One of the members of his rebuilding staff, Jay, whom I have met and
conversed with, was formerly foreman of Steinway factory restoration
department. I guess Jay, too, is just a "piano dealer"?
I have walked in, and looked around the rebuilding facilities. There
most definitely is a rebuilding centre. Encore Piano Restoration is
the name of the rebuilding firm supervised by Ivan Kahn.
That fact that you are not acquainted with Ivan Kahn and his Encore
Piano Restoration company, says more about YOUR place in the piano
world, than it does about Mr. Kahn's.
> >I really don't think a piano as good as this one, could have been made
> >except by hand from start to finish. It is as free of imbalances as a
> >Bosendorfer.
>
> And it is this very lack of ability to tell the difference that shows you to be
> one of the most ignorant people in the country regarding pianos.
You have seen, heard, or played my piano, and are in position to
comment on its imabalances and imperfections, or the lack thereof.
> >I don't need to have an address, to know that this is a German piano.
> >I don't need to have an address, to know that American Steinways are
> >American pianos.
> >
>
> Again, your argument is juvenile, and stupid.
I don't need to have an address, to know that it is a German piano.
You DO NEED to have an address, to know if it is or is not a German
piano. Evidently, I know more about the piano, than you do.
> >By the way, you still haven't said if the Boston Steinways, which are
> >made by Kawai, are American pianos or not? You don't like that
> >question, do you?
>
> Why would I not like that question? I haven't answered it because it is so
> obviously the blatherings of a mental midget. Any fool knows the answer to it,
> but I'll humor you. There is no such thing as a "Boston Steinway". There *is* a
> Boston piano, sold by Steinway. The piano is built by Kawai, in Japan. This
> makes it a Japanese built piano, sold in America by an American piano company.
> Are they "American pianos"? Are Bosendorfers built in Austria and sold in
> America "American pianos" while the ones sold in Switzerland "Swiss pianos"?
>
> Of course not. You see Sayer, you set up idiotic questions based on moronic
> logic, and then expect people to buy into it. It is a sympton of *your* mental
> illness, not a reflection on those who choose not to address your twisted
> logic.
I appreciate the fact that you answered the question. Contrary to
what you state, Boston Steinways are, in fact, American pianos. I was
merely asking a rhetorical question. You seem to know less and less,
the more you type, as to what determines if a piano is essentially
German, American, or what not.
Boston Steinways are not therefore Kawais, simply because Kawai makes
them. They are Boston Steinways: they are "American" owned assets.
Kawais, are not American pianos, and can not be.
> >I am not going to learn German, simply to research this address for
> >you at my time and expense. For a high hourly researcher's fee,
> >though, I might be willing.
> >
>
> In other words, you know already you can't come up with the address. You know
> you're a liar.
I know that I don't know enough German to even figure out the Bonn
phonebook. I never said that I had the address, and am keeping it
"secret". Please don't accuse me of a childish lie.
> >Thank you for confirming that Bernhard Steiner is not mentioned at the
> >Samick website.
>
> I'll be even more simple in how I explain this this time, since you obviously
> aren't smart enough to follow it: Bernhard Steiner isn't mentioned on Samick's
> website. It isn't listed because it isn't a brand Samick owns, and wants to
> promote. They also don't list Hyundai, Chickering, and several other stencil
> names they build. Mitsubishi Motors doesn't list Dodge on their website either,
> but everyone knows that Mitsubishi built several Dodge vehicles, and sold them
> to Dodge with the name Dodge on them. The same vehicle could be bought with the
> name Mitsubishi on it as well. If you go to Dodge's website, you don't see
> Mitsubishi mentioned either.
>
> Now - what *else* do you not understand about modern commerce?
So far, you seem to have come up short on producing contracts copies
to support your view that Samick makes the Bernhard Steiner piano
line, or else stencils "Bernhard Steiner" onto a Samick piano line.
So far, your evidence for your conclusions is zero.
As far as my understanding of "modern" commerce goes, I think you
might want to read a few economics treatises, before discussing the
subject with me. I suggest that you start with the works of Rothbard,
Menger and Mises.
> >It would also be the case that, were there no connection whatsoever
> >between Samick and Bernhard Steiner, then Samick would not be
> >mentioned. For some reason, you can't seem to perceive the whole
> >picture.
>
> Only someone as stupid as you would fail to understand that it is *you* that
> can't see the whole picture. Sure, if there was no connection, there would be
> no mention. But all evidence shows there *was* a connection, so the fact that
> they aren't mentioned must mean there is another option open to us to explain
> it ----- My God!!! Maybe they weren't owed any money!!!! Maybe they required
> all products be paid for in advance before they shipped them!!! Now that would
> be a logical assumption, since that's how it's done industrywide.
No, Larry - YOU are the one who can not see the whole picture.
"Samick" and "Bernhard Steiner" appear on some of the same documents.
Anyone can prepare a document with those two words in. There is
nothing more to it than that.
Anyone can have a webpage indicate anything they want it to read. The
page authors are under no obligation to protect themselves from
liability by researching the information, unless they are selling
products, are offering services, or if the information is being made
available free of charge.
On the other hand, the decision of a court in the United States must
be accurately portrayed on a webpage - it must be accurate and
faithful to the facts in evidence at the time of filing, in the the
court proceedings. The Bernhard Steiner court case states that
Bernhard Steiner was founded in Europe by Kahn's family in 1886. It
also states that Ivan Kahn is a fourth generation master piano
craftsman and rebuilder.
> >It is "poorly researched", because it doesn't agree with your
> >"research" (mainly, internet surfing and Googling keywords).
>
> It is poorly researched because it arrives at a conclusion that is opposite the
> entire body of evidence on the issue, and is the *only* source to arrive at
> this conclusion. Simple logic, Sayer - if the entire piano industry says one
> thing and your source says another, either the entire piano industry, including
> the principles involved in the matter are wrong, or your single source is
> wrong.
For you, the "entire piano industry" consists of a few unresearched
web pages.
> Calculate the odds of your single source, who isn't even involved in the
> piano industry - is correct on a matter that the entire piano industry agrees
> on another answer.
The odds that the Bernhard Steiner court decision is faithful and
accurate in portraying all facts of evidence, is nearly 100%.
You have yet to show us evidence that Ivan Kahn either doesn't exist,
or that he exists but doesn't own Encore Piano Restoration, or that
Bernhard Steiner wasn't founded by Kahn's family in Europe in 1886, or
that there are contracts between Samick and Bernhard Steiner, or that
Bernhard Steiner is not a German piano.
I have ONE STORY and ONE POSTULATE, and I stick to it. You, on the
other, keep running around in circles....and never have any evidence
that any of your makeshift speculations has a factual and verifiable
manifestation in the real world.
Schizophrenics often have a similar inability - perhaps not dissimilar
from what your are expressing - to separate sense perception from
imagined perception. It is neurological in basis, and is an
essentially unremediable form of neuropathology, and is only moderated
by the administration of psychiatric drugs.
> >FYI, the stencil Samicks seem better than the non-stencilled Samicks,
> >and might get better regulation and voicing at the factory.
>
> Yet another statement exposing the dementia that you call thinking.
It sounds to me like you have never regulated any of the stencil
Samicks. You might have never even regulated a Samick proper.
> >That the Bernhard Steiner piano is German, IS a fact
>
> No, it is *not* a fact, Sayer. There is no factory in Germany. The pianos are
> built in Korea by Samick. THIS is fact.
Not only have you supplied no evidence that Bernhard Steiner wasn't
founded in Europe in 1886 by the Kahn family, but the argument about
where it is built as being connected with if it is or is not German is
not relevant to the question of determing where it is built. Your are
running in a circle ("It is built in Korea, therefore it is not
German, therefore it is built in Korea..."). A big circle, with
nothing holding it together but the gravity of your capacity for
self-repetition.
Bernhard Steiners are German pianos.
> >Do you not think Renner and Abel are not German companies?
>
> What does this have to do with anything? Are Michelin tires built in Germany?
> Does that make a Chevy with Michelins on it a German car?
Tires are not part of a car, Larry. No one thinks that putting
Pirellis on a Taurus, makes it into an Italian car. We have discussed
this before.
> >And, that components in a piano, if they are
> >not German, cause the piano to not be German?
> >
>
> If it is built in Korea, it is a Korean built piano. Just because a few
> components are made in Germany doesn't mean anything. Some of the wood used in
> the piano comes from Alaska - that doesn't mean it's an Alaskan piano.
"a few components" - you greater trivialize the importance of having
Renner actions, Abel hammers, and German strings, in those pianos
which do have them. The fact is, that these things are more of a
factor in determining how a piano sounds than are, say, what
specification of rollers have been affixed to the legs.
If you think there is such a thing as an Alaskan piano, then you are
definitely not using good sources for your information on piano
manufacture.
> Do you suffer from this same inability to process simple logic in other areas
> of your life, Sayer, or only when you're trying to cheat people?
The piano was advertised as being for sell, for LESS than what it is
worth.
FYI, if you know anything about "modern" commerce, you will know that
in a free market I can sell the piano for $1 or $1 000 000 - it is
just a question of what the market will bear.
If you are suggesting I have ever lied about this piano in any way,
shape or form, you are being preposterous.
It is every bit as good as I say it is - every pianist so far who has
played it agrees.
> >Even if my prototype Bernhard Steiner C-8 were built
> >in Dallas, Tx., it would still be a German piano.
>
> You continue to help me at every opportunity in my effort to show you a
> complete and utter fool.
>
> >It can't be a Samick serial number, because the piano is not a Samick.
>
> It is a Samick, and it has a Samick serial number in it.
>
> > And, to my knowledge, Samick's serial number scheme is not patented.
> >So, another company can use the same scheme if they want to, without
> >an infringement.
>
> Sure - of course, since the numbers run consecutively, they'd have to convince
> Samick to stop at the point where the Bernhard Steiner number begin, and skip
> over to the last number used by a Bernhard Steiner company, and then pick up
> again, leaving a gap in their serial numbers. Gee, what an intelligent and
> logical explanation you gave, Sayer......
>
> Nah..... you're an idiot. The numbers are consecutive, which are also in
> sequence with all the other brand names used, whether stencil or Samick owned
> brand names.
The correct word, for serial numbers that work in the latter fashion,
is "accessional", not "consecutive".
Two or more piano companies can each make a piano, legally, with the
same serial number. There have been THOUSANDS of piano manufacturers.
But you think it is IMPOSSIBLE for such a coincidence to occur - and
yet, you have no evidence to prove the impossibility of this
coincidence.
If you could come up with patent numbers for patented serial number
schemes of piano manufacturers, that might qualify as evidence, for
instance.
But you have none of this possible evidence.
> >I do not need to call them, to know that my Bernhard Steiner is a Bernhard
> Steiner.
>
> Of course not. Using the warped way you try to logic everything out, your piano
> says Bernhard Steiner on it, therefore it is a BErnhard Steiner. Fine. I'll
> accept that. But that does not in any way stop the fact that a Bernhard Steiner
> is simply a Samick stencil, built in Korea, sold to a distributor in Texas,
> using old, out of date Samick scale designs.
Bernhard Steiner Pianos was founded by Kahn's family in Europe in
1886. The piano presently in production were designed by Mr. Ivan
Kahn.
> >I wouldn't mistake a Samick for a Bernhard Steiner, any more than I
> >would mistake a 60's British Mini for a Ferrari.
> >
>
> You have proven beyond doubt that you couldn't discern the difference between
> shit and chocolate cake.
You are the one who said in another post, that men don't shave under
their arms - but, since I do shave under my arms, and since I know
other men who shave under their arms, evidently men DO shave under
their arms.
That you would issue such a pronouncement, contrary to the facts,
shows some lack of perceptive capacity on your part.
> >Bernhard Steiner has never been owned by Samick.
>
> No one has said it was, Sayer. That's why it's called "stenciling". Someone who
> owns a trade name, such as Baldwin owning the name Chickering, who buys product
> from another manufacturer with their name placed on the product. A Chickering
> used to be built for Baldwin by Samick, and was the same piano as yours, Sayer.
> That doesn't mean that Samick owned Chickering. Baldwin did. Kahn owned the
> rights to the name "Bernhard Steiner". But he bought pianos from Samick, and
> had the name BS placed on them, just like Baldwin had them place the name
> Chickering on them.
I know what stencilling is. My comment didn't mention "stencilling",
so I don't know why you are going into it again. All that comments
says is that Bernhard Steiner has never been owned by Samick.
Since you agree, perhaps you can tell us who the present owner of
Bernhard Steiner is? And then, you can give us the successive
owners....going right back to the point where it diverges from the
model put forward in the Bernhard Steiner court case. The model in
the court case, is that Bernhard Steiner has been owned by a series of
Kahns from 1886 (when it was founded) to the present.
Since you KNOW SO MUCH about Bernhard Steiner, constructing this
time-line of the owners, so that I and others can benefit by knowing
THE TRUTH about Bernhard Steiner's history from start to finish,
should be a no-brainer for you.
My piano is no Chickering....nor is it a Samick....you are starting to
make me laugh.
> >For their work on the Bernhard Steiner, Kahn's family should be listed
> >in Dover's book - but they aren't.
>
> They aren't listed because there was no "work" done by them - their pianos were
> simply Samick stencils, just like dozens of other trade names. Dover doesn't
> waste his time talking about retailers who had nothing to do with
> manufacturing, and who had no factory.
Larry, I hate to be hard on you.....but the last name of the book's
author, for the book I am referring to, is not "Dover". The book is,
however, published by Dover Publications, Inc. In addition, Dover
can't "waste his time" doing anything, beause Dover is not a "he".
The press was founded by a man named Dover - from whence it derives
its name. That man is now deceased. But that is neither here nor
there, and has nothing to do with the contents of the book.
If you know of a book on the history of piano manufacture in Europe
and the United States, which you have read and know about, and to
which you are now referring as "Dover's" book, I would like to have
the name. Otherwise, it will be obvious (if it isn't already) that
you are attempting to be deceptive and misleading, in talking about
what Dover the author does with "his" time.
Dover Publications, Inc., to a large extent specializes in historical
reprints and facsimiles - and in making these available at a very low
price for the buyer. The reasons for which Dover does not alter its
reprints, are the reasons for which the change was not made. To cast
new plates, for one addition to a book, is cost prohibitive for a
marginal press - especially these days (as it would be to adopt a
totally different process of book manufacture). That is all there is
to it.
In case you are interested, this is the book. It makes for a
fascinating read:
Pianos and Their Makers
ISBN: 0486228568
Page Count: 581
Dimensions: 5 3/8 x 8 1/2
"Leading inventor offers full history of piano technology, earliest
models to 1910. Types, makers, components, mechanisms, musical
aspects. 300 illustrations."
http://store.yahoo.com/doverpublications/0486228568.html
> >What is idiotic, is to make with great cost and craftsmanship, a 9'6"
> >piano with added keys in the bass, but a baby soundboard. THAT is
> >idiotic.
>
> You obviously didn't look at the soundboard, did you? Your statement is
> ridiculous.
I have played them, and looked at their soundboards. The soundboards
are too small. One can take the soundboard measurements of an
American Steinway D, and an Imperial Bosendorfer, scale adjusted for
the bass string length, and compare them. One can also do it for an
Imperial Bosendorfer vs. a Baldwin SD-10 - or vs. a Bechstein EN, or
even versus the Samick concert grand. Bosendorfer will always come up
at the bottom of the pile. Always.
> >Unlike yourself, I CAN STOP shelling peanuts, even when there is
> >another peanut to shell.
> >
>
> Then SHUT THE HELL UP, AND GET OFF RMMP, AND QUIT TALKING ABOUT YOUR DAMNED
> 46,000$ SAMICK!!!!
What this demonstrates, perhaps, is that you are sincere in thinking
that Samick manufactures the German Bernhard Steiner pianos. It means
that perhaps you are not doing this 100% for the intent of having some
fun at my expense, and at the expense of the r.m.m.p. readers who keep
finding the board clogged with these posts. It means that perhaps you
are not as morally irresponsible as I had previously concluded.
However, the sincerity with which a belief is held, does not thereby
make it true.
And, all those caps and the !!!!s could just be part of a calculated
rhetorical ploy, in continuance of your desire to argue with me, and
to keep clogging up these boards.
Have you never heard of Repetition Fatigue? Give it a rest!
Michael Sayers
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.piano
Subject: Re: Kimball Bosendorfer pianos
References: <219226cd.04100...@posting.google.com>
<20041007112344...@mb-m04.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.167.46.27
Message-ID: <219226cd.04100...@posting.google.com>
larryin...@aol.composer (Larry) wrote in message
news:<20041007112344...@mb-m04.aol.com>...
> >(Michael Sayers)
>
> >The prototype would be the initial working model of the line, t
>
> Well, as we now know from another post, your entire "prototype"
argument has
> been shot to hell with the publication of Samick's liquidation of all
leftover
> Bernhard Steiner stencils, meaning there were *no* "prototypes"
necessary.
The word "stencil" does not appear in that Samick publication. But
the word Bechstein does. Maybe you also think Bechstein's are
"stencil" Samicks?
> You're full of sh*t, Sayer. You're a liar, and you know it. That, or
you need
> medical help.
You might want to consider the possibility that Samick could be a
Korean market distributor or vendor of the Bernhard Steiner pianos.
Considering all possibilities, and making a decision based on the
procurable evidence, is not lying: it is rational empiricism.
> >The document reads "offices", not "distributors". So, evidently
they
> >do have offices in Dallas - offices which you have not visited, but
> >which I have visited.
>
> Distributors have offices. Your argument here is stupid.
The Handbook of Texas Piano Manufacture document reads "offices", not
"distributors".
Every time there is an "office", does not mean that the office is
adjacent to or a component of a point of distribution. Distributors
do have offices - but the controlling offices aren't necessarily
located of the point of distribution.
The document does not specify either "distribution offices" or
"manufacturing offices of manufacture" or "corporate offices" - you
are reading things into it, that are not there. If you know address
of the coporate and/or manufacturing offices of Bernhard Steiner, then
please tell us the country name, city and street address.
For your information: some companies only offer services. They have
offices. But there is no distribution warehouse at all, and no
manufacturing installation.
> >Like I said, just because Kahn has a piano restoration and
rebuilding
> >staff in Dallas,
>
> Kahn has little to nothing in Dallas anymore. It makes no difference,
because
> he is *not* some "world reknowned" piano designer as you claim. He
was just
> another piano dealer.
Kahn is a fourth generation master piano craftsman and rebuilder. I
have played his rebuilt pianos. They are amazingly free of even the
slightest imbalances or imperfections.
One of the members of his rebuilding staff, Jay, whom I have met and
conversed with, was formerly foreman of Steinway factory restoration
department. I guess Jay, too, is just a "piano dealer"?
I have walked in, and looked around the rebuilding facilities. There
most definitely is a rebuilding centre. Encore Piano Restoration is
the name of the rebuilding firm supervised by Ivan Kahn.
That fact that you are not acquainted with Ivan Kahn and his Encore
Piano Restoration company, says more about YOUR place in the piano
world, than it does about Mr. Kahn's.
> >I really don't think a piano as good as this one, could have been
made
> >except by hand from start to finish. It is as free of imbalances as
a
> >Bosendorfer.
>
> And it is this very lack of ability to tell the difference that shows
you to be
> one of the most ignorant people in the country regarding pianos.
You have not seen, heard, or played my piano, and are therefore not in
position to comment on its performance.
> >I don't need to have an address, to know that this is a German
piano.
> >I don't need to have an address, to know that American Steinways are
> >American pianos.
> >
>
> Again, your argument is juvenile, and stupid.
I don't need to have an address, to know that it is a German piano.
You DO NEED to have an address, to know if it is or is not a German
piano. Evidently, I know more about the piano, than you do.
I appreciate the fact that you answered the question. Contrary to
what you state, Boston Steinways are, in fact, American pianos. I was
merely asking a rhetorical question. You seem to know less and less,
the more you type, as to what determines if a piano is essentially
German, American, or what not.
Boston Steinways are not therefore Kawais, simply because Kawai makes
them. They are Boston Steinways: they are "American" owned assets.
Kawais, are not American pianos, and can not be.
> >I am not going to learn German, simply to research this address for
> >you at my time and expense. For a high hourly researcher's fee,
> >though, I might be willing.
> >
>
> In other words, you know already you can't come up with the address.
You know
> you're a liar.
I know that I don't know enough German to even figure out the Bonn
phonebook. I never said that I had the address, and am keeping it
"secret". Please don't accuse me of a childish lie.
> >Thank you for confirming that Bernhard Steiner is not mentioned at
the
> >Samick website.
>
> I'll be even more simple in how I explain this this time, since you
obviously
> aren't smart enough to follow it: Bernhard Steiner isn't mentioned on
Samick's
> website. It isn't listed because it isn't a brand Samick owns, and
wants to
> promote. They also don't list Hyundai, Chickering, and several other
stencil
> names they build. Mitsubishi Motors doesn't list Dodge on their
website either,
> but everyone knows that Mitsubishi built several Dodge vehicles, and
sold them
> to Dodge with the name Dodge on them. The same vehicle could be
bought with the
> name Mitsubishi on it as well. If you go to Dodge's website, you
don't see
> Mitsubishi mentioned either.
>
> Now - what *else* do you not understand about modern commerce?
So far, you seem to have come up short on producing contracts copies
to support your view that Samick makes the Bernhard Steiner piano
line, or else stencils "Bernhard Steiner" onto a Samick piano line.
So far, your evidence for your conclusions is zero.
As far as my understanding of "modern" commerce goes, I think you
might want to read a few economics treatises, before discussing the
subject with me. I suggest that you start with the works of Rothbard,
Menger and Mises.
> >It would also be the case that, were there no connection whatsoever
> >between Samick and Bernhard Steiner, then Samick would not be
> >mentioned. For some reason, you can't seem to perceive the whole
> >picture.
>
> Only someone as stupid as you would fail to understand that it is
*you* that
> can't see the whole picture. Sure, if there was no connection, there
would be
> no mention. But all evidence shows there *was* a connection, so the
fact that
> they aren't mentioned must mean there is another option open to us to
explain
> it ----- My God!!! Maybe they weren't owed any money!!!! Maybe they
required
> all products be paid for in advance before they shipped them!!! Now
that would
> be a logical assumption, since that's how it's done industrywide.
No, Larry - YOU are the one who can not see the whole picture.
"Samick" and "Bernhard Steiner" appear on some of the same documents.
Anyone can prepare a document with those two words in. There is
nothing more to it than that.
Anyone can have a webpage indicate anything they want it to read. The
page authors are under no obligation to protect themselves from
liability by researching the information, unless they are selling
products, are offering services, or if the information is being made
available free of charge.
On the other hand, the decision of a court in the United States must
be accurately portrayed on a webpage - it must be accurate and
faithful to the facts in evidence at the time of filing, in the the
court proceedings. The Bernhard Steiner court case states that
Bernhard Steiner was founded in Europe by Kahn's family in 1886. It
also states that Ivan Kahn is a fourth generation master piano
craftsman and rebuilder.
> >It is "poorly researched", because it doesn't agree with your
> >"research" (mainly, internet surfing and Googling keywords).
>
> It is poorly researched because it arrives at a conclusion that is
opposite the
> entire body of evidence on the issue, and is the *only* source to
arrive at
> this conclusion. Simple logic, Sayer - if the entire piano industry
says one
> thing and your source says another, either the entire piano industry,
including
> the principles involved in the matter are wrong, or your single
source is
> wrong.
For you, the "entire piano industry" consists of a few unresearched
web pages.
> Calculate the odds of your single source, who isn't even involved in
the
> piano industry - is correct on a matter that the entire piano
industry agrees
> on another answer.
The odds that the Bernhard Steiner court decision is faithful and
accurate in portraying all facts of evidence, is nearly 100%.
You have yet to show us evidence that Ivan Kahn either doesn't exist,
or that he exists but doesn't own Encore Piano Restoration, or that
Bernhard Steiner wasn't founded by Kahn's family in Europe in 1886, or
that there are contracts between Samick and Bernhard Steiner, or that
Bernhard Steiner is not a German piano.
I have ONE STORY and ONE POSTULATE, and I stick to it. You, on the
other, keep running around in circles....and never have any evidence
that any of your makeshift speculations has a factual and verifiable
manifestation in the real world.
Schizophrenics often have a similar inability - perhaps not dissimilar
from what your are expressing - to separate sense perception from
imagined perception. It is neurological in basis, and is an
essentially unremediable form of neuropathology, and is only moderated
by the administration of psychiatric drugs.
> >FYI, the stencil Samicks seem better than the non-stencilled
Samicks,
> >and might get better regulation and voicing at the factory.
>
> Yet another statement exposing the dementia that you call thinking.
It sounds to me like you have never regulated any of the stencil
Samicks. You might have never even regulated a Samick proper.
> >That the Bernhard Steiner piano is German, IS a fact
>
> No, it is *not* a fact, Sayer. There is no factory in Germany. The
pianos are
> built in Korea by Samick. THIS is fact.
Not only have you supplied no evidence that Bernhard Steiner wasn't
founded in Europe in 1886 by the Kahn family, but the argument about
where it is built as being connected with if it is or is not German is
not relevant to the question of determing where it is built. Your are
running in a circle ("It is built in Korea, therefore it is not
German, therefore it is built in Korea..."). A big circle, with
nothing holding it together but the gravity of your capacity for
self-repetition.
Bernhard Steiners are German pianos.
> >Do you not think Renner and Abel are not German companies?
>
> What does this have to do with anything? Are Michelin tires built in
Germany?
> Does that make a Chevy with Michelins on it a German car?
Tires are not part of a car, Larry. No one thinks that putting
Pirellis on a Taurus, makes it into an Italian car. We have discussed
this before.
> >And, that components in a piano, if they are
> >not German, cause the piano to not be German?
> >
>
> If it is built in Korea, it is a Korean built piano. Just because a
few
> components are made in Germany doesn't mean anything. Some of the
wood used in
> the piano comes from Alaska - that doesn't mean it's an Alaskan
piano.
"a few components" - you greater trivialize the importance of having
Renner actions, Abel hammers, and German strings, in those pianos
which do have them. The fact is, that these things are more of a
factor in determining how a piano sounds than are, say, what
specification of rollers have been affixed to the legs.
If you think there is such a thing as an Alaskan piano, then you are
definitely not using good sources for your information on piano
manufacture.
> Do you suffer from this same inability to process simple logic in
other areas
> of your life, Sayer, or only when you're trying to cheat people?
The piano was advertised as being for sell, for LESS than what it is
worth.
FYI, if you know anything about "modern" commerce, you will know that
in a free market I can sell the piano for $1 or $1 000 000 - it is
just a question of what the market will bear.
If you are suggesting I have ever lied about this piano in any way,
shape or form, you are being preposterous.
It is every bit as good as I say it is - every pianist so far who has
played it agrees.
The correct word, for serial numbers that work in the latter fashion,
is "accessional", not "consecutive".
Two or more piano companies can each make a piano, legally, with the
same serial number. There have been THOUSANDS of piano manufacturers.
But you think it is IMPOSSIBLE for such a coincidence to occur - and
yet, you have no evidence to prove the impossibility of this
coincidence.
If you could come up with patent numbers for patented serial number
schemes of piano manufacturers, that might qualify as evidence, for
instance.
But you have none of this possible evidence.
> >I do not need to call them, to know that my Bernhard Steiner is a
Bernhard
> Steiner.
>
> Of course not. Using the warped way you try to logic everything out,
your piano
> says Bernhard Steiner on it, therefore it is a BErnhard Steiner.
Fine. I'll
> accept that. But that does not in any way stop the fact that a
Bernhard Steiner
> is simply a Samick stencil, built in Korea, sold to a distributor in
Texas,
> using old, out of date Samick scale designs.
Bernhard Steiner Pianos was founded by Kahn's family in Europe in
1886. The piano presently in production were designed by Mr. Ivan
Kahn.
> >I wouldn't mistake a Samick for a Bernhard Steiner, any more than I
> >would mistake a 60's British Mini for a Ferrari.
> >
>
> You have proven beyond doubt that you couldn't discern the difference
between
> shit and chocolate cake.
You are the one who said in another post, that men don't shave under
their arms - but, since I do shave under my arms, and since I know
other men who shave under their arms, evidently men DO shave under
their arms.
That you would issue such a pronouncement, contrary to the facts,
shows some lack of perceptive capacity on your part.
> >Bernhard Steiner has never been owned by Samick.
>
> No one has said it was, Sayer. That's why it's called "stenciling".
Someone who
> owns a trade name, such as Baldwin owning the name Chickering, who
buys product
> from another manufacturer with their name placed on the product. A
Chickering
> used to be built for Baldwin by Samick, and was the same piano as
yours, Sayer.
> That doesn't mean that Samick owned Chickering. Baldwin did. Kahn
owned the
> rights to the name "Bernhard Steiner". But he bought pianos from
Samick, and
> had the name BS placed on them, just like Baldwin had them place the
name
> Chickering on them.
I know what stencilling is. My comment didn't mention "stencilling",
so I don't know why you are going into it again. All that comments
says is that Bernhard Steiner has never been owned by Samick.
Since you agree, perhaps you can tell us who the present owner of
Bernhard Steiner is? And then, you can give us the successive
owners....going right back to the point where it diverges from the
model put forward in the Bernhard Steiner court case. The model in
the court case, is that Bernhard Steiner has been owned by a series of
Kahns from 1886 (when it was founded) to the present.
Since you KNOW SO MUCH about Bernhard Steiner, constructing this
time-line of the owners, so that I and others can benefit by knowing
THE TRUTH about Bernhard Steiner's history from start to finish,
should be a no-brainer for you.
My piano is no Chickering....nor is it a Samick....you are starting to
make me laugh.
> >For their work on the Bernhard Steiner, Kahn's family should be
listed
> >in Dover's book - but they aren't.
>
> They aren't listed because there was no "work" done by them - their
pianos were
> simply Samick stencils, just like dozens of other trade names. Dover
doesn't
> waste his time talking about retailers who had nothing to do with
> manufacturing, and who had no factory.
http://store.yahoo.com/doverpublications/0486228568.html
> >What is idiotic, is to make with great cost and craftsmanship, a
9'6"
> >piano with added keys in the bass, but a baby soundboard. THAT is
> >idiotic.
>
> You obviously didn't look at the soundboard, did you? Your statement
is
> ridiculous.
I have played them, and looked at their soundboards. The soundboards
are too small. One can take the soundboard measurements of an
American Steinway D, and an Imperial Bosendorfer, scale adjusted for
the bass string length, and compare them. One can also do it for an
Imperial Bosendorfer vs. a Baldwin SD-10 - or vs. a Bechstein EN, or
even versus the Samick concert grand. Bosendorfer will always come up
at the bottom of the pile. Always.
> >Unlike yourself, I CAN STOP shelling peanuts, even when there is
> >another peanut to shell.
> >
>
> Then SHUT THE HELL UP, AND GET OFF RMMP, AND QUIT TALKING ABOUT YOUR
DAMNED
> 46,000$ SAMICK!!!!
Michael Sayers
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.piano
Subject: Re: Kimball Bosendorfer pianos
References: <219226cd.04100...@posting.google.com>
<20041007112344...@mb-m04.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.167.46.27
Message-ID: <219226cd.04100...@posting.google.com>
larryin...@aol.composer (Larry) wrote in message
news:<20041007112344...@mb-m04.aol.com>...
> >(Michael Sayers)
>
> >The prototype would be the initial working model of the line, t
>
> Well, as we now know from another post, your entire "prototype"
argument has
> been shot to hell with the publication of Samick's liquidation of all
leftover
> Bernhard Steiner stencils, meaning there were *no* "prototypes"
necessary.
The word "stencil" does not appear in that Samick publication. But
the word Bechstein does. Maybe you also think Bechstein's are
"stencil" Samicks?
> You're full of sh*t, Sayer. You're a liar, and you know it. That, or
you need
> medical help.
You might want to consider the possibility that Samick could be a
Korean market distributor or vendor of the Bernhard Steiner pianos.
Considering all possibilities, and making a decision based on the
procurable evidence, is not lying: it is rational empiricism.
> >The document reads "offices", not "distributors". So, evidently
they
> >do have offices in Dallas - offices which you have not visited, but
> >which I have visited.
>
> Distributors have offices. Your argument here is stupid.
The Handbook of Texas Piano Manufacture document reads "offices", not
"distributors".
Every time there is an "office", does not mean that the office is
adjacent to or a component of a point of distribution. Distributors
do have offices - but the controlling offices aren't necessarily
located of the point of distribution.
The document does not specify either "distribution offices" or
"manufacturing offices of manufacture" or "corporate offices" - you
are reading things into it, that are not there. If you know address
of the coporate and/or manufacturing offices of Bernhard Steiner, then
please tell us the country name, city and street address.
For your information: some companies only offer services. They have
offices. But there is no distribution warehouse at all, and no
manufacturing installation.
> >Like I said, just because Kahn has a piano restoration and
rebuilding
> >staff in Dallas,
>
> Kahn has little to nothing in Dallas anymore. It makes no difference,
because
> he is *not* some "world reknowned" piano designer as you claim. He
was just
> another piano dealer.
Kahn is a fourth generation master piano craftsman and rebuilder. I
have played his rebuilt pianos. They are amazingly free of even the
slightest imbalances or imperfections.
One of the members of his rebuilding staff, Jay, whom I have met and
conversed with, was formerly foreman of Steinway factory restoration
department. I guess Jay, too, is just a "piano dealer"?
I have walked in, and looked around the rebuilding facilities. There
most definitely is a rebuilding centre. Encore Piano Restoration is
the name of the rebuilding firm supervised by Ivan Kahn.
That fact that you are not acquainted with Ivan Kahn and his Encore
Piano Restoration company, says more about YOUR place in the piano
world, than it does about Mr. Kahn's.
> >I really don't think a piano as good as this one, could have been
made
> >except by hand from start to finish. It is as free of imbalances as
a
> >Bosendorfer.
>
> And it is this very lack of ability to tell the difference that shows
you to be
> one of the most ignorant people in the country regarding pianos.
You have not seen, heard, or played my piano, and are therefore not in
position to comment on its performance.
> >I don't need to have an address, to know that this is a German
piano.
> >I don't need to have an address, to know that American Steinways are
> >American pianos.
> >
>
> Again, your argument is juvenile, and stupid.
I don't need to have an address, to know that it is a German piano.
You DO NEED to have an address, to know if it is or is not a German
piano. Evidently, I know more about the piano, than you do.
I appreciate the fact that you answered the question. Contrary to
what you state, Boston Steinways are, in fact, American pianos. I was
merely asking a rhetorical question. You seem to know less and less,
the more you type, as to what determines if a piano is essentially
German, American, or what not.
Boston Steinways are not therefore Kawais, simply because Kawai makes
them. They are Boston Steinways: they are "American" owned assets.
Kawais, are not American pianos, and can not be.
> >I am not going to learn German, simply to research this address for
> >you at my time and expense. For a high hourly researcher's fee,
> >though, I might be willing.
> >
>
> In other words, you know already you can't come up with the address.
You know
> you're a liar.
I know that I don't know enough German to even figure out the Bonn
phonebook. I never said that I had the address, and am keeping it
"secret". Please don't accuse me of a childish lie.
> >Thank you for confirming that Bernhard Steiner is not mentioned at
the
> >Samick website.
>
> I'll be even more simple in how I explain this this time, since you
obviously
> aren't smart enough to follow it: Bernhard Steiner isn't mentioned on
Samick's
> website. It isn't listed because it isn't a brand Samick owns, and
wants to
> promote. They also don't list Hyundai, Chickering, and several other
stencil
> names they build. Mitsubishi Motors doesn't list Dodge on their
website either,
> but everyone knows that Mitsubishi built several Dodge vehicles, and
sold them
> to Dodge with the name Dodge on them. The same vehicle could be
bought with the
> name Mitsubishi on it as well. If you go to Dodge's website, you
don't see
> Mitsubishi mentioned either.
>
> Now - what *else* do you not understand about modern commerce?
So far, you seem to have come up short on producing contracts copies
to support your view that Samick makes the Bernhard Steiner piano
line, or else stencils "Bernhard Steiner" onto a Samick piano line.
So far, your evidence for your conclusions is zero.
As far as my understanding of "modern" commerce goes, I think you
might want to read a few economics treatises, before discussing the
subject with me. I suggest that you start with the works of Rothbard,
Menger and Mises.
> >It would also be the case that, were there no connection whatsoever
> >between Samick and Bernhard Steiner, then Samick would not be
> >mentioned. For some reason, you can't seem to perceive the whole
> >picture.
>
> Only someone as stupid as you would fail to understand that it is
*you* that
> can't see the whole picture. Sure, if there was no connection, there
would be
> no mention. But all evidence shows there *was* a connection, so the
fact that
> they aren't mentioned must mean there is another option open to us to
explain
> it ----- My God!!! Maybe they weren't owed any money!!!! Maybe they
required
> all products be paid for in advance before they shipped them!!! Now
that would
> be a logical assumption, since that's how it's done industrywide.
No, Larry - YOU are the one who can not see the whole picture.
"Samick" and "Bernhard Steiner" appear on some of the same documents.
Anyone can prepare a document with those two words in. There is
nothing more to it than that.
Anyone can have a webpage indicate anything they want it to read. The
page authors are under no obligation to protect themselves from
liability by researching the information, unless they are selling
products, are offering services, or if the information is being made
available free of charge.
On the other hand, the decision of a court in the United States must
be accurately portrayed on a webpage - it must be accurate and
faithful to the facts in evidence at the time of filing, in the the
court proceedings. The Bernhard Steiner court case states that
Bernhard Steiner was founded in Europe by Kahn's family in 1886. It
also states that Ivan Kahn is a fourth generation master piano
craftsman and rebuilder.
> >It is "poorly researched", because it doesn't agree with your
> >"research" (mainly, internet surfing and Googling keywords).
>
> It is poorly researched because it arrives at a conclusion that is
opposite the
> entire body of evidence on the issue, and is the *only* source to
arrive at
> this conclusion. Simple logic, Sayer - if the entire piano industry
says one
> thing and your source says another, either the entire piano industry,
including
> the principles involved in the matter are wrong, or your single
source is
> wrong.
For you, the "entire piano industry" consists of a few unresearched
web pages.
> Calculate the odds of your single source, who isn't even involved in
the
> piano industry - is correct on a matter that the entire piano
industry agrees
> on another answer.
The odds that the Bernhard Steiner court decision is faithful and
accurate in portraying all facts of evidence, is nearly 100%.
You have yet to show us evidence that Ivan Kahn either doesn't exist,
or that he exists but doesn't own Encore Piano Restoration, or that
Bernhard Steiner wasn't founded by Kahn's family in Europe in 1886, or
that there are contracts between Samick and Bernhard Steiner, or that
Bernhard Steiner is not a German piano.
I have ONE STORY and ONE POSTULATE, and I stick to it. You, on the
other, keep running around in circles....and never have any evidence
that any of your makeshift speculations has a factual and verifiable
manifestation in the real world.
Schizophrenics often have a similar inability - perhaps not dissimilar
from what your are expressing - to separate sense perception from
imagined perception. It is neurological in basis, and is an
essentially unremediable form of neuropathology, and is only moderated
by the administration of psychiatric drugs.
> >FYI, the stencil Samicks seem better than the non-stencilled
Samicks,
> >and might get better regulation and voicing at the factory.
>
> Yet another statement exposing the dementia that you call thinking.
It sounds to me like you have never regulated any of the stencil
Samicks. You might have never even regulated a Samick proper.
> >That the Bernhard Steiner piano is German, IS a fact
>
> No, it is *not* a fact, Sayer. There is no factory in Germany. The
pianos are
> built in Korea by Samick. THIS is fact.
Not only have you supplied no evidence that Bernhard Steiner wasn't
founded in Europe in 1886 by the Kahn family, but the argument about
where it is built as being connected with if it is or is not German is
not relevant to the question of determing where it is built. Your are
running in a circle ("It is built in Korea, therefore it is not
German, therefore it is built in Korea..."). A big circle, with
nothing holding it together but the gravity of your capacity for
self-repetition.
Bernhard Steiners are German pianos.
> >Do you not think Renner and Abel are not German companies?
>
> What does this have to do with anything? Are Michelin tires built in
Germany?
> Does that make a Chevy with Michelins on it a German car?
Tires are not part of a car, Larry. No one thinks that putting
Pirellis on a Taurus, makes it into an Italian car. We have discussed
this before.
> >And, that components in a piano, if they are
> >not German, cause the piano to not be German?
> >
>
> If it is built in Korea, it is a Korean built piano. Just because a
few
> components are made in Germany doesn't mean anything. Some of the
wood used in
> the piano comes from Alaska - that doesn't mean it's an Alaskan
piano.
"a few components" - you greater trivialize the importance of having
Renner actions, Abel hammers, and German strings, in those pianos
which do have them. The fact is, that these things are more of a
factor in determining how a piano sounds than are, say, what
specification of rollers have been affixed to the legs.
If you think there is such a thing as an Alaskan piano, then you are
definitely not using good sources for your information on piano
manufacture.
> Do you suffer from this same inability to process simple logic in
other areas
> of your life, Sayer, or only when you're trying to cheat people?
The piano was advertised as being for sell, for LESS than what it is
worth.
FYI, if you know anything about "modern" commerce, you will know that
in a free market I can sell the piano for $1 or $1 000 000 - it is
just a question of what the market will bear.
If you are suggesting I have ever lied about this piano in any way,
shape or form, you are being preposterous.
It is every bit as good as I say it is - every pianist so far who has
played it agrees.
The correct word, for serial numbers that work in the latter fashion,
is "accessional", not "consecutive".
Two or more piano companies can each make a piano, legally, with the
same serial number. There have been THOUSANDS of piano manufacturers.
But you think it is IMPOSSIBLE for such a coincidence to occur - and
yet, you have no evidence to prove the impossibility of this
coincidence.
If you could come up with patent numbers for patented serial number
schemes of piano manufacturers, that might qualify as evidence, for
instance.
But you have none of this possible evidence.
> >I do not need to call them, to know that my Bernhard Steiner is a
Bernhard
> Steiner.
>
> Of course not. Using the warped way you try to logic everything out,
your piano
> says Bernhard Steiner on it, therefore it is a BErnhard Steiner.
Fine. I'll
> accept that. But that does not in any way stop the fact that a
Bernhard Steiner
> is simply a Samick stencil, built in Korea, sold to a distributor in
Texas,
> using old, out of date Samick scale designs.
Bernhard Steiner Pianos was founded by Kahn's family in Europe in
1886. The piano presently in production were designed by Mr. Ivan
Kahn.
> >I wouldn't mistake a Samick for a Bernhard Steiner, any more than I
> >would mistake a 60's British Mini for a Ferrari.
> >
>
> You have proven beyond doubt that you couldn't discern the difference
between
> shit and chocolate cake.
You are the one who said in another post, that men don't shave under
their arms - but, since I do shave under my arms, and since I know
other men who shave under their arms, evidently men DO shave under
their arms.
That you would issue such a pronouncement, contrary to the facts,
shows some lack of perceptive capacity on your part.
> >Bernhard Steiner has never been owned by Samick.
>
> No one has said it was, Sayer. That's why it's called "stenciling".
Someone who
> owns a trade name, such as Baldwin owning the name Chickering, who
buys product
> from another manufacturer with their name placed on the product. A
Chickering
> used to be built for Baldwin by Samick, and was the same piano as
yours, Sayer.
> That doesn't mean that Samick owned Chickering. Baldwin did. Kahn
owned the
> rights to the name "Bernhard Steiner". But he bought pianos from
Samick, and
> had the name BS placed on them, just like Baldwin had them place the
name
> Chickering on them.
I know what stencilling is. My comment didn't mention "stencilling",
so I don't know why you are going into it again. All that comments
says is that Bernhard Steiner has never been owned by Samick.
Since you agree, perhaps you can tell us who the present owner of
Bernhard Steiner is? And then, you can give us the successive
owners....going right back to the point where it diverges from the
model put forward in the Bernhard Steiner court case. The model in
the court case, is that Bernhard Steiner has been owned by a series of
Kahns from 1886 (when it was founded) to the present.
Since you KNOW SO MUCH about Bernhard Steiner, constructing this
time-line of the owners, so that I and others can benefit by knowing
THE TRUTH about Bernhard Steiner's history from start to finish,
should be a no-brainer for you.
My piano is no Chickering....nor is it a Samick....you are starting to
make me laugh.
> >For their work on the Bernhard Steiner, Kahn's family should be
listed
> >in Dover's book - but they aren't.
>
> They aren't listed because there was no "work" done by them - their
pianos were
> simply Samick stencils, just like dozens of other trade names. Dover
doesn't
> waste his time talking about retailers who had nothing to do with
> manufacturing, and who had no factory.
http://store.yahoo.com/doverpublications/0486228568.html
> >What is idiotic, is to make with great cost and craftsmanship, a
9'6"
> >piano with added keys in the bass, but a baby soundboard. THAT is
> >idiotic.
>
> You obviously didn't look at the soundboard, did you? Your statement
is
> ridiculous.
I have played them, and looked at their soundboards. The soundboards
are too small. One can take the soundboard measurements of an
American Steinway D, and an Imperial Bosendorfer, scale adjusted for
the bass string length, and compare them. One can also do it for an
Imperial Bosendorfer vs. a Baldwin SD-10 - or vs. a Bechstein EN, or
even versus the Samick concert grand. Bosendorfer will always come up
at the bottom of the pile. Always.
> >Unlike yourself, I CAN STOP shelling peanuts, even when there is
> >another peanut to shell.
> >
>
> Then SHUT THE HELL UP, AND GET OFF RMMP, AND QUIT TALKING ABOUT YOUR
DAMNED
> 46,000$ SAMICK!!!!
get real
wrote:
>larryin...@aol.composer (Larry) wrote in message news:<20041007112344...@mb-m04.aol.com>...
>> >(Michael Sayers)
>>
>> >The prototype would be the initial working model of the line, t
>>
>> Well, as we now know from another post, your entire "prototype" argument has
>> been shot to hell with the publication of Samick's liquidation of all leftover
>> Bernhard Steiner stencils, meaning there were *no* "prototypes" necessary.
>
>
>The word "stencil" does not appear in that Samick publication. But
>the word Bechstein does. Maybe you also think Bechstein's are
>"stencil" Samicks?
>
>
>> You're full of sh*t, Sayer. You're a liar, and you know it. That, or you need
>> medical help.
>
>
>You might want to consider the possibility that Samick could be a
>Korean market distributor or vendor of the Bernhard Steiner pianos.
What an ass you are! The newsletter I posted was for samick USA. Do
you think samick USA distributed BS in Korea? Moron.
Julius Dedekind
concerning any subject matter. The facts should speak for themselves
for those who are willing to listen. However, when one side is
determined to "grab the peanuts" at all costs, respect for truth and
honesty diminishes in proportion, and thus ignorant people start
speaking for the facts.
The point is that I have toothless, uneducated, beer grappling tards
try to explain to me the fact that a $3,000 TV isn't worth 1/10th of
the retail just because it has the sticker "made in China" on the
bottom. Now, if I remember correctly (since I went to a few antique,
pawn, consignment, etc. in Dallas), the last time I heard someone
sneering at merchandise "made it China," it was followed by "I know
you are but what am I"--or some other infantile 3rd grade response.
The point is that, in this example, we have a great deal of our
merchandise which is of very high quality originating in China.
Consequently, if you are to tell me that a C-8 Bernhard Steiner is
really a Samick (or whatever) and that a Samick is really a piano made
in Korea (if I remember correctly), then I can then ask why a Samick
would lose 80-90% of its original value?
Concerning Samick, you find ample information concerning their
affiliations:
"SAMICK MUSIC CORPORATION today is a giant of a Music Industry that is
a major owner of a prestigious German BECHSTEIN Piano Company. SAMICK
Family of Pianos includes Kohler & Campbell, Sohmer & Co, Wm. Knabe &
Co. and more. Fantastic New line of digital pianos by SAMICK, KOHLER
DIGITALS, is a result of partnership between SAMICK and renowned
electronic instrument leader KORG."
As far as the claims made by Larry and others, I have yet to see any
solid evidence concerning their affiliation with Bernhard Steiner, in
fact, I looked far and wide for one single 7ft Samick grand piano--and
found none.
http://www.hrovatmusic.com/samick_grand_pianos.htm
Type the keywords "7 ft samick grand piano," and you will find nothing
but a hodgepodge of irrelevant links.
This is indeed a problem. I think it would be a huge stretch to say
that Samick developed a complete line of 7ft grand pianos just for the
purpose of sending them to the market as C-8 Bernhard Steiners--when
the necessary infrastructure was not already in place, as evidenced by
the fact that I have yet to see any advertised over 6ft. I may be
wrong, but even so, no amount of filth-mongering and muckracking will
convince me that a Samick is a piano 1/10th retail price when
used--the impression one gets when they read posts in this thread.
Michael Sayers
If you genuinely want to discuss Bernhard Steiner pianos, or want
information about my pianistic history, you might want to at least
have not created the aura that your modus operandi in these
interactions is to do me some sort of harm, psychological if not also
physical. You might want to get a lawyer's advice concerning stalking
- especially wherein the internet is a tool of stalking - before you
go any further down your present path.
You also might want to read up on the behaviour characteristics of
trolls. These two apply distinctly to you:
1. people who are psychologically disturbed,
and seek to feel good by making other list
members feel bad.
Getreal, anyone who reads your posts unbiasedly, can see that you do
this. I don't even need to elaborate...."the worst banger in
Texas"....."your drek"...."your piece of drek"....."you little
twirp"....."a moron"....."wannabe thief"...."insane"....."poor
mikey"...."your poor, diseased brain"....."what an ass you are".....
2. people who pretend to be someone that
they are not - they create personae that you
think are real, but they know is fictitious.
Getreal, don't you remember when you claimed to be some sort of an
internationally famous concert pianist, with students calling you from
overseas for live phone consultations? You might deny this now, but
if the archives go back far enough, I should be able to dig up your
posts from a year or two ago.
If I claimed to be a world famous pianist, I would have to hide my
identity, because I would be telling a lie. But I just claim to be a
pianist who performs here or there - once or twice a year - and I
don't suggest that I have ever performed in places such as, say,
Carnegie Hall or Wigmore Hall. So, I don't have to lie.
You, on the other, do have to lie. The purpose of your lying is a
form of self-inflatement, so that you can make other people feel
diminished. The fact is, that your piano abilities are probably far
removed from being exeptional.
My abilities are exceptional, so I don't care if I am famous or not, I
don't mind from time-to-time making audio files of my recitals
available on the net, and I don't need fame as a butress to my
confidence or self-esteem....but your's are probably mediocre, and you
do need fame to butress your self-esteem, and you lie to create a
false effect on the internet. But when you sign off the net, the
truth is still there waiting for you.
It is okay to not be an exceptional pianist.......people go to bed
every night, not being an exceptional pianist, and they have their
piece of mind nonetheless. I think you are torturing yourself about
something unnecessarily - and, somehow, my peculiar traits of
obstinancy and persistence have brought this to the surface. I think
the notion that I might be a concert pianist (even if only a highly
semi-professional one), threatens your particular constructs in some
way.
Unless you learn to only worry about what is in your power to control,
you aren't going to be able to stop the self-torturing.
I am sure this post is going to fall on deaf ears....so, be sure in
your response to wail away, abuse, abuse, abuse.....after all, you
have an pseudo-ally in Larry Fletcher. Before abusing me in the past,
as in recent days, your procedure has been to wait for him to make the
first stab, and clear a path. Maybe you would listen to him if he
said to stop....I don't know.
I am not sure what is wrong with you, but I have the patience and
curiosity to see where it leads. Please don't stalk me illegally - as
in, making telephone calls to my relatives, or sending unnecessary
items in the regular mails. If you do that, I will feel compelled to
undertake lawful recourse. If you ever want to communicate privately,
we can - but it will have to be by email at the start, at the
confortable distance of one email at a time - no deluges, demands or
ultimatums. It also has to be sincere, honest and non-abusive. And,
of course, I would keep the emails 100% private.
Larry
>Consequently, if you are to tell me that a C-8 Bernhard Steiner is
>really a Samick (or whatever) and that a Samick is really a piano made
>in Korea (if I remember correctly), then I can then ask why a Samick
>would lose 80-90% of its original value?
You're getting confused. No one said that. Sayer has claimed a price that is
outrageous for the piano, and your point actually proves him wrong. His piano
is not worth 46K. He never paid that for it. His piano sold brand new for
around 15K.
>"SAMICK MUSIC CORPORATION today is a giant of a Music Industry that is
>a major owner of a prestigious German BECHSTEIN Piano Company.
Samick owns stock in Bechstein. There is no relationship between the two brands
in terms of quality, any more than an Aston Martin (owned by Ford) and a Ford
Fiesta are the same cars.
>As far as the claims made by Larry and others, I have yet to see any
>solid evidence concerning their affiliation with Bernhard Steiner, in
>fact, I looked far and wide for one single 7ft Samick grand piano--and
>found none.
First, Sayer claims his is a 7'8", which is incorrect. Second, if you can't
understand the evidence that's been presented to you, you need to go back and
reexamine it. It couldn't be more obvious.
>Type the keywords "7 ft samick grand piano," and you will find nothing
>but a hodgepodge of irrelevant links.
That's because Samick doesn't build a 7' grand, they build a 7'4" grand. That's
what Sayer has, if he has one at all, and his claims of a 7'8" piano are
ridiculous.
>This is indeed a problem. I think it would be a huge stretch to say
>that Samick developed a complete line of 7ft grand pianos just for the
>purpose of sending them to the market as C-8 Bernhard Steiners--when
>the necessary infrastructure was not already in place, as evidenced by the
fact that I have yet to see any advertised over 6ft.
Simply go to Samick's website. You'll find they make a couple of sizes over 6'.
>I may be
>wrong, but even so, no amount of filth-mongering and muckracking will
>convince me that a Samick is a piano 1/10th retail price when
>used--the impression one gets when they read posts in this thread.
That's precisely why me and others make sure Sayer doesn't get away with it -
there's just too many people like yourself who can't seem to figure things out
on their own, and who are easily fooled.
Julius Dedekind
Bernhard Steiner. If you can supply any source that support such
assertions, then I will at least concede that the C-8 is a stenciled
Samick.
Larry
There must have been 3 dozen different sources cited already, but since you
missed them, here are a few:
http://www.ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech/1998-November/039837.html
http://www.ptg.org/mfgrs.htm
Scroll down to Bernhard Steiner
http://www.pianotuning.com/manufacturers.htm
Scroll down to Samick
http://www.pianofinders.com/educational/shortguide2.htm#Korean%20Pianos
I could go on, but these should be sufficient. You will also find it documented
in The Piano Book, the Pierce Piano Atlas, and the Ancott Directory, these 3
publications being the undisupted "bibles" of the piano industry.
Julius Dedekind
That is all fine and good, but it neglects to show without a shadow of
a doubt that the C-8 Bernhard Steiner is--in fact--a stenciled Samick.
I found other piano manufacturers who stenciled Bernhard Steiners,
but there is no mention as to which models are stenciled correlating
to each piano maker listed.
Dietman was another company that stenciled Bernhard Steiners.
But even if it is a Samick--I don't understand who you think gives you
the moral authority to force others to set prices according to your
own opinions and designs. If you think that $48,000 is too much, then
simply don't buy it.
It always fascinates me when I hear about people like you who (most
likely) have no qualms with the idea of a company overcharging the
U.S. militia $6.3 million for fuel to bases in Iraq and Kuwait and $27
million for food (they announced they would pay the 27 million
back)--but yet continue to set price ceilings for others in this
forum. No doubt, people within this nation continue to exhibit the
crudest forms of hypocrisy and therefore have no problem picking
specks out of others eyes while suffering severe blindness from their
own two-by-four.
In general, most in here would have no moral problem with Mr. Sayers
should he put his piano on the market for $1,500 (i.e. firesale
prices), nor would you stop yourself or others from making a
transaction with MJS for such a bargain. In the language of the
American Democracy of Hypocrisy, they would simply light up another
cigar and talk about that "poor bastard" who had to sell his beautiful
piano at less than firesale or government auction prices. That is
precisely what makes this crusade against the $48,000 C-8 Bernhard
Steiner (or Samick) so ridiculous and pathetic.
In general, there are people in here are more sympathetic to ownership
of money than of ownership of fine merchandise. People like Larry
will more likely help a "poor bastard" sell his $48,000 piano for
$12,000 than to help a seller obtain any modest appreciation on their
own investment--which is probably not what MJS is trying to do.
In addition, I cannot fathom the extreme snobbery of these individuals
who sound as if Korean products are bad because they are Korean; or
Chinese products are bad because they are Chinese. In that "not so
short..." manual, there are a few references of Korean pianos "needing
more work" coming out of the factory than their other
counterparts--but such statements are never qualified to any extent.
I.e. we may be told that certain brands and countries of origin are
highly respected and others are not, and then find that the product
that needs no refinement is--in fact--in the worst possible state of
un-refinement. That happens to be the case with Bosendorfer Pianos,
which I believe have a stark, hollow tone that can only be remedied by
a very large team of Korean experts--with a sledgehammer, perhaps
built by Samick.
get real
Dedekind) wrote:
>Larry,
>
>That is all fine and good, but it neglects to show without a shadow of
>a doubt that the C-8 Bernhard Steiner is--in fact--a stenciled Samick.
The reason you still have doubt is because you are apparently not
astute enough to eliminate it based on the ample evidence, not because
of the evidence itself. In the words of Dirty Harry, a man's got to
know his limitations.
Larry
>Larry,
>
>That is all fine and good, but it neglects to show without a shadow of
>a doubt that the C-8 Bernhard Steiner is--in fact--a stenciled Samick.
>I found other piano manufacturers who stenciled Bernhard Steiners,
>but there is no mention as to which models are stenciled correlating
>to each piano maker listed.
>Dietman was another company that stenciled Bernhard Steiners.
You apparently are arguing just for the sake of arguing, or you are just dense.
The first time Sayer tried to sell his Samick stencil here, he posted the
serial number of the piano. A quick check of the Piano Atlas showed the number
to be a Samick number. Samick has a method of serializing their products that
is totally unique in the piano business, so there's no possibility that another
manufacturer could have given their product that specific serial number. Next,
I spent most of my adult life in the piano business. Sayer posted pictures of
his piano, and it is a Samick. Now whether you are convinced or not at this
point is of no importance. I get the impression that it wouldn't matter if I
managed to have the president of Samick itself take out ads on all the national
TV networks saying they built it, you wouldn't believe it. That's fine - be
ignorant.
>But even if it is a Samick--I don't understand who you think gives you
>the moral authority to force others to set prices according to your
>own opinions and designs. If you think that $48,000 is too much, then
>simply don't buy it.
What gives me the moral authority is the same thing that gives *every single
industry professional that knows the truth* the moral authority. The piano in
question sold new for 15K. Sayer tried to con the public by claiming it sold
new for 46,000, and offering it for 27,000. Now - if you didn't know anything
about pianos (which you obviously don't) but was in the market for one, and you
were about to fall for Sayer's claims and buy it, wouldn't you want someone who
knew the true value of the piano to speak up before you wrote the check? Are
you of the opinion that those who know when someone is getting scammed should
just sit idly by and allow it to happen? If so, you're no better than Sayer.
>It always fascinates me when I hear about people like you who (most
>likely) have no qualms with the idea of a company overcharging the
>U.S. militia $6.3 million for fuel to bases in Iraq and Kuwait and $27
>million for food (they announced they would pay the 27 million
>back)--but yet continue to set price ceilings for others in this
>forum. No doubt, people within this nation continue to exhibit the
>crudest forms of hypocrisy and therefore have no problem picking
>specks out of others eyes while suffering severe blindness from their
>own two-by-four.
What in the hell does this have to do with me outing Sayer for the con he is?
Geez.... I could write a rambling, incoherent speech to compare people like
yourself who aren't smart enough to use simple logic yet who try to express
their opinions about military expense too. But for what purpose?
>In general, there are people in here are more sympathetic to ownership
>of money than of ownership of fine merchandise. People like Larry
>will more likely help a "poor bastard" sell his $48,000 piano for
>$12,000 than to help a seller obtain any modest appreciation on their
>own investment--which is probably not what MJS is trying to do.
>
>In addition, I cannot fathom the extreme snobbery of these individuals
>who sound as if Korean products are bad because they are Korean; or
>Chinese products are bad because they are Chinese. In that "not so
>short..." manual, there are a few references of Korean pianos "needing
>more work" coming out of the factory than their other
>counterparts--but such statements are never qualified to any extent.
>I.e. we may be told that certain brands and countries of origin are
>highly respected and others are not, and then find that the product
>that needs no refinement is--in fact--in the worst possible state of
>un-refinement. That happens to be the case with Bosendorfer Pianos,
>which I believe have a stark, hollow tone that can only be remedied by
>a very large team of Korean experts--with a sledgehammer, perhaps
>built by Samick.
>
Ah, now you expose yourself. You're Sayer. Nice try, Sayer. That was the most
idiotic pile of stupidity I've read since you stopped posting under your own
name. But your comments about Bosendorfer gave you away.
It won't work, Sayer. Your piano didn't sell for 46K, it's a Samick stencil, no
one said there was anything wrong with a Samick because it was built in Korea,
what has been said is that 27K for a Samick is a ripoff. Sell your piano for
what it's worth, present it for what it is, and you won't hear a peep out of
me.
Have the guts to face me as yourself Sayer, instead of trying to hide behind
another name pretending to be someone else coming to your defense.
Larry
>Anyway, why do you always respond to this psycho?
Oh, I don't know.... Marcia mentioned he was here again in some thread, so I
thought I'd have a little fun.
Glenn Grafton
> Rick Clark wrote a reply to michael wu...back in 2001...
> mich...@mindspring.com (Mike Wu) wrote:
>
>> When I was early into my piano search last year, I played a large
>> Kimball grand at Grafton's in Pennsylvania. According to Glenn
>> Grafton, this was actually a Bosendorfer labeled as a Kimball for
>> promotional use. Perhaps Glenn (who is an occasional poster to RMMP)
>> can fill in some more about this piano.
>
> I remember those when they first came out. I think they even called it
> a Kimball Imperial or something. I can't swear it was identical in
> every way to what you get when you buy a Bosie, though it was in the
> gross features, and it was certainly far and away better than any
> regular Kimball by a long shot. I would have been more than happy to
> own one.
>
> Regards,
>
> Rick Clark
From the occasional poster: lol
Yes that piano WAS a Bosendorfer 225 made in Vienna at the Bosendorfer
factory. We bought it from Kimball when Kimball decided to descontinue
the promotion and they pulled the pianos from Radio City Music Hall.
The pianos were in there for promotional exposure for Kimball.
There were some interesting discussions with some customers who had
gotten bad information from another Philadelphia area dealer. I recall
one customer who visited another store and was told by the salesman
that in no uncertain terms this was not a Bosendorfer. I called our
sales rep at the time to quiz him on it. He confirmed everything
including a fax we got back from the Bosendorfer factory when that
serial number piano shipped. Our sales rep. even recalled seeing the
quite substantial air freight bill that went with the piano.
It illicited some interesting reactions during the time we had it. I
spoke with a tuner who tuned the piano when we rented it to a major
church conference. This was some months afterwards but he remembered
the piano and asked me "what was with that Kimball piano he tuned?" He
said he knew right away that something was up with it that it was not a
Kimball. I told him the background of the piano, which confirmed what
he heard.
This piano is different than the stock Vienese Classic grands that were
made by Kimball in Indiana. The spruce rim and cross braces underneath
were obvious indications that it was not from the Kimball factory.
I just spoke to one of the men on the committee that purhcased the
piano last week. He commented that when they asked the musician they
had try out the piano what he thought. his answer was; Buy it.
They did and are very pleased with it.
--
Glenn Grafton
Grafton Piano & Organ Co.
1-877-GRAFTON (877-472-3866)
1081 County Line Rd. Souderton PA 18964
gl...@nospamgraftonpiano.com (remove "nospam" to reply)
http://www.graftonpiano.com/
get real
wrote:
If I may, Sayers claimed it sold *from the factory* for 46K, making
the suggested retail somewhere around 92K. So Julius, if you're
reading this, Sayers's Steiner is obviously an incredible bargain and
I think you should hurry and snap it up before someone beats you to
it!
Mizz Marcia Ryder
"Larry" <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote in message
news:20041011162633...@mb-m16.aol.com...
> >From: Thomas F. Unke
>
>>Anyway, why do you always respond to this psycho?
>
> Oh, I don't know.... Marcia mentioned he was here again in some thread, so
> I
> thought I'd have a little fun.
>
I just needed time to FIND the time to dispute his absurd
statement that no woman can produce the fantastic tone
that a male pianist can. But I grew tired.
Carry on,
Marsha
Larry
>It was the woman that started it, your honor.
Honest officer.... I've never seen that woman before in my life - and the
midget was on fire when I got here!.........
Julius Dedekind
Sayers just because I happen to find your argument less convincing--is
this your own blog-troll tactic to disrupt rational discussion?
Perhaps I should be flattered--or perhaps not. The bottom line is that
I have no idea who this Sayers is nor do I understand precisely why
you think I am him just because I decided to drag you down from your
own piled-up moral high ground.
But there is a minor point that needs to be addressed here. In spite
of protests above, I showed implicitly your hypocrisy within the
earlier posts. But, since my explanations cannot multiply
proportionally to the density of your own intellect, I will try to be
brief:
You are a hypocrite. You scratch at stickers and dusty tomes in order
to prove that a piano depreciates from $50,000 retail to $15,000--and
you do this through the artifice of false representation and
guesswork. On the other hand, you will not discuss freely your own
views on buying ethics. In spite of your hand waving, you haven't
proven anything that I can see and have simply resorted to malicious
insults to mask the impending failure of blatantly false statements
and capricious exaggerations. In short, you barked like a rabid dog
to a simple question--e.g.
"What is your point, Sayer[s]? What does this have to do with your
claim that Kawai sold Bosendorfers with the name Kawai on them?"
Whatever the argument was, you certainly sounded a bit defensive and
perhaps even violated by your own paranoiac inferences (projected upon
Sayers).
. . .
Keep me posted if you find any hard evidence that Sayers piano is a
ripoff at the advertised price.
Bernhard Steiner
Listen Larry,
I have refrained from posting here since I announced the refutation.
All of your internet research is not acceptable, and every page is
invalid for at least one of the reasons described below:
I. Whoever compiled the data on what piano stores sell what piano
brands in Dallas, doesn't seem to have actually walked inside any of
those stores. The sources for the information are unstated, and
whatever they are, those documents are not accurate in the information
they contain. That such a document might say Bernhard Steiner pianos
are made by Samick, or that they are stencilled Samicks, is
irrelevant, since the document as a whole is not researched or
accurate.
II. The charts of piano comparison, read like spec comparisons for car
engines or speakers - and yet the multi-dimensional quality of piano
tone IS NOT a specification one can just order and install. Just look
at how they rank the Bosendorfer piano - this really shows how flawed
the documents are. A bigger sound than a Steinway D? A better
sustain than a Steinway D? With that undersized soundboard? Give me
a break. Go talk to some concert pianists, and see how many of them
think a Bosendorfer has a better sustain or a bigger tone than a good
Steinway. Your own evaluation of the tone quality of a Bosendorfer is
irrelevant - you probably can't even produce a 'f' level sound,
without forcing the tone.....much less a 'ff', a 'fff', a 'ffff', or a
'fffff' level sound. This takes a special timing and type of muscular
relaxation, and a certain angling of the arms and transfer of body/arm
weight. Until you can properly make a 'fffff' tone on a full-sized
piano without having to bang, and without having to use any muscular
exertion, then don't comment on the relative capabilities of the
pianos. I don't dispute that a Bosendorfer can get loud - but it must
be banged and forced, in order to do so. If you hit it the bass keys
hard enough with a 25 lbs. sledge hammer, to borrow from one of Julius
Dedekind's posts, then it might reach 'fffff' - but banging won't
produce the type of tone that can envelope a 2 000 seat hall....and,
as I have said, Bosendorfers have an impediment, in part due to the
undersized soundboards, when it comes to a big, projected sound that
peels out through a hall like massive church bells. The last 9'6"
Bosendorfer I played on, was narrower in the middle than is my 7'8"
Bernhard Steiner.
I think your lack of playing ability might have distorted your
judgment, for this reason: when forcing the piano tone, the quality of
tone on (say) a Steinway declines much more quickly than it will with
a Bosendorfer. So, sure, for a kid to bang on, a Bosendorfer is
better. But a mature pianist, with a good enough technique to not
have to force the tone, the Steinway, with its fabulous range of
colours, is to be preferred. It is fashionable to like Bosendorfers -
but only because the relative inability of most people who own a piano
to make even a 'f' level sound, without having to contract muscles and
start trying to force the tone out of the piano, causes them to admire
it compared to other pianos when pianos are being forced. The ability
to produce piano tone in this way, is a special technique, and it is a
much a part of technique as are finger speed, octaves and pedalling.
It is not unlike oriental Tai Chi techniques, which produce
tremendous, tremendous results by high ranking practicioners, with
almost no effort. Similarly, one must work to place one's energy in
harmony with the piano - and not use inefficient means to force a
piano to do something.
Bosendorfers are functional in a small space.....for a kind of
miniaturized approximation of the relative sound outputs....but the
projection seems to stop not far from the concert stage in a large
hall. Haven't you ever noticed how there is almost no hall sound in
recordings of Bosendorfers in large halls, except when it has been
electronically added in after recording.....but with, say, Steinways
are Bechsteins, the hall sound is there naturally?
Can you think of one spectacular sounding recording, comparing with
the live recitals of Nyiregyhazi, Horowitz of Hofmann, that was done
with an Imperial Bosendorfer? No pianist wil ever get an Imperial
Bosendorfer to sound the way Nyiregyhazi got that Baldwin to sound in
that live performance of the 2nd Liszt Legend.
I don't deny that Bosendorfers are well crafted, and are extremely
free of any imbalances in tone and touch. I just deny they are
suitable for a large space (a space that seats more than, say, 200
people), or that they can produce an adequate range of colours and
effects.
III. The various references to Bernhard Steiner being connected with
Samick, are simply incorrect - and, they give no sources for their
information. The Bernhard Steiner court case plainly states that
Bernhard Steiner was founded by Ivan Kahn's family, in Europe, in
1886.....in bankruptcy filings, companies supply the court with
information on when the company was founded, who the owners were, what
its activities have been, and so forth. If you won't believe a judge,
who finds that Bernhard Steiner (or Enron, or whatever company) was
founded on a certain date by a certain family, and who notates this
finding in his decision, then that is your own personal disbelief in
judicial authority and evidence at work here. If I hammer away at it
enough, maybe you will agree that if a bankruptcy judge says that that
1886 is the date which the evidence indicates a company was
formed.....then just maybe, the judge is not a liar.
I had gathered that the topic of Bernhard Steiner pianos had grown
wearisome, and I had quit posting about the subject. But, if you want
to do so, I am certainly capable of discussing the subject until the
cows come home - I don't care what arguments you have with "Julius
Dedekind" (whoever he is), but if you start using your arguments with
him as a platform for addressing me personally, and for being abusive
and insulting, then I have to assume that in fact you are trying to
communicate with me, and that you wish to continue our various
discussions.
Be advised that if you are the person harassing my relatives by
telephone, being abusive here won't add anything to your defence later
on. I suggest that you stop immediately, before my relatives get the
police detectives and the courts involved.
Regards,
Michael Sayers
http://profiles.yahoo.com/mjs112358
P.S. - The "firt time" the prototype Bernhard Steiner C-8 was
advertised as being for sell, was the only time. That was about two
years ago. It has not been advertised for sell since then, and it is
not for sell now.
I never indicated a willingness to accept less that $30 000 for it -
your "$27 000" is off by 3K.
For a 7'8" prototype piano only a few years old, for which the
production units are 46K from the factory, I believe that 30K was more
than reasonable - it all depends on how quickly one wants to sell the
piano.
The piano has a high grade Renner action - made at Renner, for 15K,
with Abel hammers to boot. So, your whole argument about the entire
piano being worth some ludicrously low amount, as if it were some
cheapo Chinese piano with a cheapo action, parts and quality of
manufacter, is absolutely absurd.
Especially considering that it is the prototype - not a production
unit - and that, indeed, only a very good American Steinway D, or a
very good Bechstein EN, can surpass it.
Richard Hofheimer
you expose yourself. You're Sayer. Nice try, Sayer...."
Your post puzzles me. It is combative for no reason, and if I read it right
it looks like you're saying I'm Sayer (using yet another alias), which makes
absolutely no sense because it was who I pointed out the thing with the
server, and I agree with Larry. What's going on?
"get real" <suedo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cn90n0t4svssl4f96...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 16:46:52 GMT, "Richard Hofheimer"
> <rick_ho...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>>Mikey, you had better reread the thread. It was not Larry who recognized
>>>your fraud.
>>
>>Hmm. I thought it was Larry.
>
> Hmm, "you" thought it was Larry?
>
> I don't recall having addressed "you".
>
> Why would "you" have thought it was Larry when it was Mr. Unke who
> posted it? Are "you" suffering from the same perceptual defect as
> mikey, aka Julius? Now THAT'S a coincidence!
>
> Mikey, the truth is, you are losing grip of your aliases (amongst
> other things).
>>
>>You might be amused that both Michael Sayers and Julius Dedekind use the
>>same news server (postnews1.google.com), which is not used by anyone else
>>in
>>this thread. It doesn't prove anything, but it is worth a good laugh.
>>
>>Sayers is confused on many levels (to put it nicely), but it might be time
>>to let him off the hook. Too much heat! (But still, watch out for
>>overpriced
>>Steiners, or Samicks, or whatever they are....).
>>
>
Julius Dedekind
statements that I did not make--I am not Sayers. It is highly
dishonest to pigeon-hole your opposition just to save yourself the
sport of debate.
Richard Hofheimer
and a sort of cheating with aliases. I pointed out the thing with the
newsgroup server and suddenly *I* was accused of being Sayer. Despite your
clear and just exposure of Sayers, you might be next, Kit. (Are you from
Dallas, by any chance?)
"Kit Walker" <kitw...@phantomemail.com> wrote in message
news:1097869726.P5k0IhN86l6C0Aj4KUH0/g@teranews...
> In article <5e4804d8.04101...@posting.google.com>,
> My, such pompous indignation from a sock puppet!
>
> My dear Mr. Dedekind, the facts are:
> 1) a simple parsing of the phrases, words, and opinions posted by both
> of you reveal similarities approaching unity;
> 2) you and Mr. Sayers both use Google Groups as your posting host, a
> rarity within this group;
> 3) Mr. Sayers is known to post from the Dallas Texas area;
> 4) you are posting from within 100 miles of Plano, Texas;
> 5) you have zero posting history within any newsgroup prior to the
> creation of your yahoo address just a few days ago.
>
> Therefore, if you are not a sock puppet of Mr. Sayers, then you are
> certainly within commuting distance to visually inspect the BS yourself
> and perhaps make him an offer he could not refuse.
>
> It would be easy to make the payment, too. Just take the money out of
> your right pocket and put it in your left.
>
> Enjoy the rest of your weekend.
> --
> Kit Walker
> The Ghost Who Walks
> http://www.deepwoods.org/
Larry
Michael Sayer, the cat food eating no talent homeless stooge in Dallas)
>Your contribution(s) to this thread is nilpotent. I cannot respond to
>statements that I did not make--I am not Sayers.
Sayer, you have to be the stupidest fool living in Dallas. We all know you're
the same person, your IP signature proves it.
Give it up, idiot.
Larry
Michael Sayer, mental patient on a Kibbles and Bits diet)......
>Listen Larry,
>
>I have refrained from posting here since I announced the refutation.
>All of your internet research is not acceptable, and every page is
>invalid for at least one of the reasons described below:
Sayer, give it up, dude. I don't get my information from internet searches. I
show you internet sites to back up what I say, but the facts are that everyone
in the piano industry is aware of who made your piano. It's a Samick. Nothing
more, nothing less.
>and,
>as I have said, Bosendorfers have an impediment, in part due to the
>undersized soundboards
You're a moron, Sayer. Bosendorfer does *not* have "undersized soundboards".
You show your ignorance with that statement to everyone on rmmp.
>I think your lack of playing ability might have distorted your
>judgment,
I've heard you play, Sayer. You're the one lacking in ability, not me.
>III. The various references to Bernhard Steiner being connected with
>Samick, are simply incorrect - and, they give no sources for their
>information.
Hell, Sayer, even old Ivan Kahn himself says so. You couldn't have been given
more accurate and solid information. Your piano is a Samick.
>The Bernhard Steiner court case plainly states that
>Bernhard Steiner was founded by Ivan Kahn's family, in Europe, in
>1886...
Your point? Knabe was founded up in Boston or somewhere earlier than that - but
today it is built by.........
Samick.
>I had gathered that the topic of Bernhard Steiner pianos had grown
>wearisome, and I had quit posting about the subject. But, if you want
>to do so, I am certainly capable of discussing the subject until the
>cows come home -
And I don't mind sitting here correcting your lies til the cows go back out
again, Sayer.
> I don't care what arguments you have with "Julius
>Dedekind" (whoever he is), but if you start using your arguments with
>him as a platform for addressing me personally, and for being abusive
>and insulting, then I have to assume that in fact you are trying to
>communicate with me,
Of course I'm addressing him to communicate with you, Sayer. You're the only
one here stupid enough to think you can pull that little stunt and get away
with it. We all know it's you.
>Be advised that if you are the person harassing my relatives by
>telephone, being abusive here won't add anything to your defence later
>on.
Oh, shove it, Sayer. No one is calling your relatives. You're just blowing
smoke trying to leave some sort of veiled threat. Again, your the only one
stupid enough to think that little game will fly. Or you're off your medicine
again.
> I suggest that you stop immediately, before my relatives get the
>police detectives and the courts involved.
You make me laugh, Sayer. You need to be committed to a mental institution, you
know that, don't you?
Bernhard Steiner
> >From: Bernhard...@hotmail.com (Bernhard Steiner) (otherwise known as
> Michael Sayer, mental patient on a Kibbles and Bits diet)......
>
>
>
> >Listen Larry,
> >
> >I have refrained from posting here since I announced the refutation.
> >All of your internet research is not acceptable, and every page is
> >invalid for at least one of the reasons described below:
>
> Sayer, give it up, dude. I don't get my information from internet searches. I
> show you internet sites to back up what I say, but the facts are that everyone
> in the piano industry is aware of who made your piano. It's a Samick. Nothing
> more, nothing less.
For starters, don't talk about "everyone in the piano industry" as if
you are included. If you were really in the industry, and if what you
are saying about Bernhard Steiners were true, then you could have the
president of Samick, who would be one of your colleagues, send you a
signed letter stating the truth about Samick's involvement in Bernhard
Steiner pianos, which you could then scan and post on the internet.
Of course, we both know Samick has nothing to do with Bernhard
Steiner, and that you aren't in the "piano industry" - otherwise, you
would have been able to procure such a letter by now.
The links you posted list no sources for what they state - and those
links are woefully inaccurate. Anyone in Dallas can walk into the
piano stores they list, and see the inaccuracy of the list of piano
brands which those links say are purveyed and not purveyed at each
store.
Their comparison charts of the tone and touch quality of pianos was
absurd. It is the pianist who has to have a good touch and a good
tone, not the piano. Then, once this initial requirement is met, he
will be able to find that some pianos do things better than do others.
These comparison charts, seem to be geared to moving the more
expensive pianos off the showroom floors by selling them, then by any
desire to reach the truth of the matter.
Don't tell me to "give it up", when I quit posting about it - when was
that, two weeks ago? - and then you decided to start abusing me and
addressing me over the issue in your posts to someone else. I proved
I can let go. You are the one who can't (or won't) let this matter
rest. You want to abuse me verbally for your amusement, and you know
that as long as you insult me or my piano, or distribute lies about me
or my piano that are meant to be harmful, I will respond.
As I said, I can do this until the cows come home.
> >and,
> >as I have said, Bosendorfers have an impediment, in part due to the
> >undersized soundboards
>
> You're a moron, Sayer. Bosendorfer does *not* have "undersized soundboards".
> You show your ignorance with that statement to everyone on rmmp.
They most certainly do have undersized soundboards - as I indicated,
the 9'6" Imperial I played on was narrower in the middle than is my
7'8" Bernhard Steiner. The sound board is not the only issue......I
have read that the rims on a Bosendorfer (unlike those of a Steinway,
for instance) aren't designed to reflect a lot of the sound back onto
the soundboard for additional amplification. This also contributes to
the minute sound of the Bosendorfer.
The use of German hammers contributes to the sound quality, too. But
most pianos with German hammers (such as Bechsteins, Steinways,
Samicks, Faziolis and Bernhard Steiners) keep the soundboard surface
area and depth in proportion to the size of the piano, and don't
design the rims to allow sound to escape without first being reflected
back onto the soundboard.
The Renner action is not normally going to be as fast, as the action
is in (say) one of the Steinways concert grands at SMU.
All of these things are factors. And there are more.....a piano has a
lot of parts and dimensions, which effect the quality of the end
result. A piano has to be well-voiced, tuned and regulated. Just
having a Renner action - which a Bosendorfer does, for instance -
doesn't by itself make the instrument into a good piano. And
Bosendorfer pianos are proof that high quality parts, don't
necessarily make for a great instrument.
When I performed on an Imperial Bosendorfer in 2002, I was able to get
a big sound out of it - and the director even said that in all the
years other pianists had played that Bosendorfer, he had never heard
that type of sound come out of it, and he hadn't known previously that
it was capable of that type of a sound. The fact was, that the piano
was in a space that could only have realistically seated about 200
people. To create an equivalent effect in a 2 000 seat hall, would
have required a very good American Steinway D, Bechstein EN, Baldwin
SD-10, my own Bernhard Steiner C-8.....or even a Samick FS275.
A Yamaha or Kawai concert grand, would most likely also have been
insufficient.
> >I think your lack of playing ability might have distorted your
> >judgment,
>
> I've heard you play, Sayer. You're the one lacking in ability, not me.
If I don't have the ability, then by what means is it, other than use
of an ability, through which you postulate that I succeed at playing
the piano? Telekinesis?
> >The Bernhard Steiner court case plainly states that
> >Bernhard Steiner was founded by Ivan Kahn's family, in Europe, in
> >1886...
>
> Your point? Knabe was founded up in Boston or somewhere earlier than that - but
> today it is built by.........
>
> Samick.
Knabe is a completely different brand from Bernhard Steiner: this has
nothing to do with Knabe.
The point, since you asked, is that the history of Bernhard Steiner
pianos was entered into the bankruptcy filing as evidence. The only
two places that the court findings determined Bernhard Steiner pianos
have ever been made are: Europe, and South Africa. Samick doesn't
enter into it. Korea doesn't enter into it. But a lot of German
things enter into it.
This is, of course, because it is a German piano.
> >I had gathered that the topic of Bernhard Steiner pianos had grown
> >wearisome, and I had quit posting about the subject. But, if you want
> >to do so, I am certainly capable of discussing the subject until the
> >cows come home -
>
> And I don't mind sitting here correcting your lies til the cows go back out
> again, Sayer.
Spoken like a true Texan. Congratulations.
But the fact is that I quit posting at r.m.m.p. - and yet, you started
abusing me again, and addressing me publicly in your posts. You are
the one who is keeping this going. Don't lie, and please start being
nice.
> >Be advised that if you are the person harassing my relatives by
> >telephone, being abusive here won't add anything to your defence later
> >on.
>
> Oh, shove it, Sayer. No one is calling your relatives. You're just blowing
> smoke trying to leave some sort of veiled threat. Again, your the only one
> stupid enough to think that little game will fly. Or you're off your medicine
> again.
Someone has been calling my parents at odd hours, saying that he is
"Michael Sayers" to get through their privacy manager. If it isn't
you, then you shouldn't worry about what the outcome might be once its
all said and done. You should only be worried, if it is you. And if
it is you, I am advising that you stop.
Michael Sayers
http://profiles.yahoo.com/mjs112358
Larry
catfood junkie with the Samick piano:
>For starters, don't talk about "everyone in the piano industry" as if
>you are included. If you were really in the industry, and if what you
>are saying about Bernhard Steiners were true, then you could have the
>president of Samick who would be one of your colleagues, send you a
>signed letter stating the truth about Samick's involvement in Bernhard
>Steiner pianos, which you could then scan and post on the internet.
You aren't that stupid, Sayer. Neither is anyone else reading this. You don't
have to get a letter from the president of a company to find out who builds
what.
>Of course, we both know Samick has nothing to do with Bernhard Steiner,
No, what we both know is that your piano was built by Samick.
>As I said, I can do this until the cows come home.
Have at it, Sayer. I've seen your picture. It's a given you have nothing else
to do.....
>They most certainly do have undersized soundboards - as I indicated,
>the 9'6" Imperial I played on was narrower in the middle than is my
>7'8" Bernhard Steiner.
You're a hoot, Sayer. Blind, stupid, but a hoot. Is this kind of arguing what
you learned from your "rhetoric" studies? I guess the fact that it was 2 feet
longer than your piano fooled your eyes. Quit eating catfood and your vision
might improve.
>If I don't have the ability (to play), then by what means is it, other than
use
>of an ability, through which you postulate that I succeed at playing
>the piano? Telekinesis?
I've never said you succeed. You're one of the worst pianists I've heard.
>Knabe is a completely different brand from Bernhard Steiner: this has
>nothing to do with Knabe.
>
It has everything to do with it Sayer, and you know it. Nearly every brand of
piano on the market claims a history back to its origins, but has nothing to do
with the pianos being built today. Trying to claim your piano is German on the
grounds that the name originated in German in the late 1800s is ridiculous.
>Samick doesn't
>enter into it. Korea doesn't enter into it. But a lot of German
>things enter into it.
>
>This is, of course, because it is a German piano.
You're blowing smoke, Sayer. Your piano is a Samick. It has a Samick serial
number. Samick acknowledges they built it. Kahn acknowledges they built it. The
Pierce Atlas acknowledges Samick built it. The Piano Book acknowledges Samick
built it. Hell, the whole world acknowledges Samick built it. The only person
who doesn't is you, and you're a mentally deranged cat food eating homeless
person with no musical talent and even less common sense.
>Don't lie, and please start being
>nice.
I don't lie, and I have no intention of being nice to you.
>Someone has been calling my parents at odd hours, saying that he is
>"Michael Sayers" to get through their privacy manager.
It's probably *you*, and you're having to lie to your parents to get them to
accept your call. Begging for money again, Sayer?
>You should only be worried, if it is you.
I have no interest in harassing your parents. I feel sorry for them. It's not
easy dealing with the fact that your son is mentally ill.
Bernhard Steiner
> >From: Bernhard...@hotmail.com (Bernhard Steiner) Otherwise known as the
> catfood junkie with the Samick piano:
>
>
>
> >For starters, don't talk about "everyone in the piano industry" as if
> >you are included. If you were really in the industry, and if what you
> >are saying about Bernhard Steiners were true, then you could have the
> >president of Samick who would be one of your colleagues, send you a
> >signed letter stating the truth about Samick's involvement in Bernhard
> >Steiner pianos, which you could then scan and post on the internet.
>
> You aren't that stupid, Sayer. Neither is anyone else reading this. You don't
> have to get a letter from the president of a company to find out who builds
> what.
My point is that you aren't in the piano industry. Steinway didn't
call you this week for assistance with his piano manufacturing, for
instance. You act like these people are your buddies, and that you
know everything that is happening - this is really just an air you put
on, nothing more.
You might feel good talking about "everyone in the piano industry",
but ultimately, if a bankruptcy court finds that Bernhard Steiners
were only made in Europe and South Africa, it takes some pretty
siginificant evidence to discredit that court.....and that letter from
the president of Samick, would be the sort of thing that would
indicate someone again needs to look into the question of Bernhard
Steiners and where they have been made, in case the judge in that case
misinterpreted the evidence.
But those courts are highly methodical and procedural, and it is
unlikely that anything was minterpreted.
Next, you will be saying that Enron was really owned by some company
out in Korea....and that the judges so far have been just too stupid
to figure it out. Yeah, whatever.
> >Of course, we both know Samick has nothing to do with Bernhard Steiner,
>
> No, what we both know is that your piano was built by Samick.
That judge for the Bernhard Steiner case, who reviewed the evidence,
disagrees with you. You might want to read his memorandum decision.
Judges are extremely good at sorting through evidence. Do you need me
to post a link to his memorandum decision again?
> >As I said, I can do this until the cows come home.
>
> Have at it, Sayer. I've seen your picture. It's a given you have nothing else
> to do.....
I can't help it if the fact that I am 30 years old, 6'4", built better
than an Olympic diver, and have the face of an exotic looking model,
arouses your malice. I guarantee that you can't get that #2, 195 lbs.
gripper even to the halfway closed point, or do pullups only suspended
by the tips of the inner two fingers in each hand.
> >They most certainly do have undersized soundboards - as I indicated,
> >the 9'6" Imperial I played on was narrower in the middle than is my
> >7'8" Bernhard Steiner.
>
> You're a hoot, Sayer. Blind, stupid, but a hoot. Is this kind of arguing what
> you learned from your "rhetoric" studies? I guess the fact that it was 2 feet
> longer than your piano fooled your eyes. Quit eating catfood and your vision
> might improve.
The question is in the relationship of the soundboard surface area, to
the string length. This just one thing that negatively impacts the
quality of Bosendorfer pianos. Rhetoric has nothing to do with it.
Since we have been discussing the mediocrity of the Bosendorfer
pianos, not one pianist has chimed in with you to claim that
Bosendorfers have a bigger bass than a Steinway, more colours, or a
better sustain. The preference of Horowitz, Nyiregyhazi, Hofmann,
Glenn Gould, Artur Rubinstein, and hosts of other great pianists, to
avoid the modern-day Bosendorfer, speaks for itself.
FYI, there is more degree and area string overlap in a Bernhard
Steiner grand, than in any other grand piano - to the point of them
quite nearly forming an 'X'. This is responsible for my piano's
unusually rich tone. The bass strings in my 7'8" are almost as long
as those on an ordinary Steinway concert grand.
My piano is nothing like a Samick, and has nothing to do with Samick.
Just because a Samick also uses a Renner action, or a matching serial
number scheme, doesn't mean that there are any other similarities, and
it doesn't mean that Samick in some way owns or controls the Bernhard
Steiner company. I don't even think the 7'4" Samick has Abel hammers,
which my 7'8" Bernhard Steiner certainly does. The Renner actions
inside Samick pianos are probably shipped in parts, and assembled
later on in Korea - which is why the flange pins in them are always
sliding out. My piano has none of the maintenance problems, that one
would associate with a piano made either totally or partially in
Korea.
My piano is a completely, 100% different design, from the ground up.
Some parts have the same manufacturer as the equivlent parts in a
Samick, yes, but they are made and prepared to different
specifications.
Just as....a Bechstein and a Bosendorfer, also have Renner actions,
but are made to very different specifications than a Samick.
My piano is essentially identical to a Bechstein, but with
improvements in design, such as the noted degree and area of string
overlap.
As far as German piano manufacture goes, only a very good Bechstein EN
could surpass my 7'8" prototype Bernhard Steiner C-8.
> >If I don't have the ability (to play), then by what means is it, other than
> use
> >of an ability, through which you postulate that I succeed at playing
> >the piano? Telekinesis?
>
> I've never said you succeed. You're one of the worst pianists I've heard.
Now we are getting somewhere, since you admit that I do, in fact, play
the piano, and that I do, in fact, perform.
It is almost certainly a lie, that you have ever heard me perform.
But if it is really true, then please tell us when and where -
otherwise, stop lying.
> >Knabe is a completely different brand from Bernhard Steiner: this has
> >nothing to do with Knabe.
> >
>
> It has everything to do with it Sayer, and you know it. Nearly every brand of
> piano on the market claims a history back to its origins, but has nothing to do
> with the pianos being built today. Trying to claim your piano is German on the
> grounds that the name originated in German in the late 1800s is ridiculous.
Please don't misrepresent me. The court memorandum for the Bernhard
Steiner filing only lists TWO places were Bernhard Steiner pianos have
ever been manufactured: a) Europe, and b) South Africa.
It states that Ivan Kahn is a fourth generation master piano craftsman
and builder, and that Bernhard Steiner pianos were designed by his
family.
That is the finding of the court. If you don't like what the evidence
indicated, then that is your problem. You aren't some potentate who
dictates how the world turns, and when the sun shall rise.
Knabe is a different company from Bernhard Steiner, by the way - and,
Bernhard Steiner is not owned or controlled by Samick, as you seem to
believe. It is controlled by the Kahns, and has been since 1886. I
see no reason to think that judge is a liar. You are just spinning
all your criticism off the top of your head.
> >Samick doesn't
> >enter into it. Korea doesn't enter into it. But a lot of German
> >things enter into it.
> >
> >This is, of course, because it is a German piano.
>
> You're blowing smoke, Sayer. Your piano is a Samick. It has a Samick serial
> number.
There is no such thing as a "Samick serial number". Samick hasn't
patented any serial number scheme. Out of the thousands of companies
that have pianos at one time or another, it is very possible that two
companies might have pianos with identicaly running numbers.
> Samick acknowledges they built it. Kahn acknowledges they built it. The
> Pierce Atlas acknowledges Samick built it. The Piano Book acknowledges Samick
> built it. Hell, the whole world acknowledges Samick built it. The only person
> who doesn't is you, and you're a mentally deranged cat food eating homeless
> person with no musical talent and even less common sense.
Then please scan the letters or other documents you have received from
these various parties, and post them to the internet. You talk a
whole lot about what evidence you've got......but your hands seem to
really be empty.
I think it is time for you either to put up, or to shut up.
Michael Sayers
http://profiles.yahoo.com/mjs112358
P.S. - I only mention the fact that my relatives are being harassed,
so that if you are doing it, you will know to stop. They need to have
the ringer on, even at night, because of a relative who is in the
hospital, and if anyone who needs to leave the ringer on for that
reason is harassed the way they are being harassed, normally there
will be a consequence for the harasser sooner or later. I haven't
accused you of anything....and you, and my parents, are adults. If
you are involved, it is strictly between you all, and has nothing
legally to do with me. If you aren't involved, then there is nothing
for you to worry about.
Larry
>My point is that you aren't in the piano industry.
I might be the president of a major piano manufacturer for all you know, Sayer.
It doesn't really matter though, since all one has to be capable of is to know
how to read.
>You act like these people are your buddies, and that you
>know everything that is happening
Many of them are. And I do.
>You might feel good talking about "everyone in the piano industry",
>but ultimately, if a bankruptcy court finds that Bernhard Steiners
>were only made in Europe and South Africa, it takes some pretty
>siginificant evidence to discredit that court.
This explanation isn't for you, Sayer. You're too stupid to understand it. It's
for anyone else who reads your garbage. You have been told from the beginning
that Bernhard Steiner has been a stencil piano for a number of years now, built
by Samick on contract to Ivan Kahn, the man who owned the rights to the name
Bernhard Steiner. The name Samick wouldn't come up in Kahn's bankruptcy
paperwork, because Kahn didn't own Samick, he just bought things from them. The
bankruptcy court has no interest in listing the companies Mr. Kahn purchased
stencil product from, nor does it play any part in the history of the company's
manufacturing. Therefore, there was no reason to list Samick, any more than
there would be a reason to list Renner, Able, or any other supplier.
Your piano is a Samick.You have provided no logical evidence to the contrary,
just a lot of smoke.
>I can't help it if the fact that I am 30 years old, 6'4", built better
>than an Olympic diver, and have the face of an exotic looking model,
>arouses your malice.
I saw your picture, Sayer. You're probably only 30, You're probably 6'4", but
as for being better built than an olympic diver, you'd do well to weigh 120
pounds soaking wet. As for your face, the only thing you could model would be
plastic surgeon's advertizements. You could be the "before" picture where they
show how they can fix deformities of birth.
>I guarantee that you can't get that #2, 195 lbs. gripper even to the halfway
closed point, or do pullups only suspended
>by the tips of the inner two fingers in each hand.
Not that it matters, but I could take that gripper, straighten it out, then
wrap it around your neck and pull your head out through your ass with it.
>FYI, there is more degree and area string overlap in a Bernhard
>Steiner grand, than in any other grand piano - to the point of them
>quite nearly forming an 'X'.
They all form an "X", Sayer. Short stubby ones have the best "X"s though.
>My piano is nothing like a Samick, and has nothing to do with Samick.
>
Your piano is a box stock Samick with the name Bernhard Steiner stenciled on
it. You can also find them with the name Hyundai stenciled on them, or Maeri,
or a long list of other names.
>Just because a Samick also uses a Renner action, or a matching serial
>number scheme, doesn't mean that there are any other similarities, and
>it doesn't mean that Samick in some way owns or controls the Bernhard
>Steiner company.
I didn't say they did, Sayer. Pay attention. I said the exact opposite. I said
they simply sold pianos to Ivan Kahn. Did you know that if you pay for 500
pianos in advance, they'll put the name Michael Sayer on them?
>My piano is a completely, 100% different design, from the ground up.
>Some parts have the same manufacturer as the equivlent parts in a
>Samick, yes, but they are made and prepared to different
>specifications.
Your piano is a box stock Samick, with the name Bernhard Steiner stenciled on
it.
>My piano is essentially identical to a Bechstein,
Your piano is essentially identical to a Samick.
>As far as German piano manufacture goes, only a very good Bechstein EN
>could surpass my 7'8" prototype Bernhard Steiner C-8.
Your piano can be surpassed by most anything on the market.
>Now we are getting somewhere, since you admit that I do, in fact, play
>the piano, and that I do, in fact, perform.
I said you were one of the worst pianists I've ever heard. I would not call the
cat strangling you do a "performance", but I can see where you would sit in
front of one, drool on yourself, and imagine yourself "performing" in front of
people as you bang away like someone slamming a couple of ham hocks on the
keyboard.
>It is almost certainly a lie, that you have ever heard me perform.
>But if it is really true, then please tell us when and where -
>otherwise, stop lying.
You posted an mp3. Stay on the proper medication schedule and these memory
lapses won't be such a problem for you.
>It states that Ivan Kahn is a fourth generation master piano craftsman
>and builder, and that Bernhard Steiner pianos were designed by his
>family.
Yes - two models of verticals, which aren't built any more. The grands were
built by Samick under an OEM contract.
>You aren't some potentate who
>dictates how the world turns, and when the sun shall rise.
Yes I am, so kneel.
>There is no such thing as a "Samick serial number".
Yes, in fact there is. Samick uses a serial numbering system that is unique to
the piano industry. No one else has *ever* used their numbering system. It is a
coded system of letters and numbers. Those who know how to read it can look at
the serial number and tell you the month and year it was built, and from there,
literally the day it was built. Your piano has a Samick serial number in it.
Anyone with a Pierce Atlas can check this for accuracy, and I assure you there
are quite a few people on this forum with a Pierce Atlas handy.
>You talk a
>whole lot about what evidence you've got......but your hands seem to
>really be empty.
My hands have dumped enough evidence in your lap to bury you. I no longer
*need* to provide you with evidence. It's been done, and the case is closed to
all but your own deranged mind.
>I think it is time for you either to put up, or to shut up.
>
No, I think that honor belongs to you. Please contact Larry Fine at
http://www.brooksidepress.com and ask him to correct his information in the
Piano Book. See what happens.
Bernhard Steiner
> >From: Bernhard...@hotmail.com (Bernhard Steiner) Otherwise known as
> Michael Sayer, the catfood junkie
>
>
> >My point is that you aren't in the piano industry.
>
> I might be the president of a major piano manufacturer for all you know, Sayer.
> It doesn't really matter though, since all one has to be capable of is to know
> how to read.
There is a UFO industry. They can read. They claim that an alien
base is located underwater off the coast of South America.
Since they can read, and you think that is all that counts, you are
now compelled to accept the UFO industry's claims.
> >FYI, there is more degree and area string overlap in a Bernhard
> >Steiner grand, than in any other grand piano - to the point of them
> >quite nearly forming an 'X'.
>
> They all form an "X", Sayer. Short stubby ones have the best "X"s though.
The overlapping of strings appeared during the 1800s, before which all
pianos had parallel strings. If you think all pianos have overlapping
strings, then you probably don't know very much about pianos.
> >My piano is nothing like a Samick, and has nothing to do with Samick.
> >
>
> Your piano is a box stock Samick with the name Bernhard Steiner stenciled on
> it. You can also find them with the name Hyundai stenciled on them, or Maeri,
> or a long list of other names
If that's true, then my Forcas Hosten '97, is really just a California
wine with a French label stuck on the side.
> >Just because a Samick also uses a Renner action, or a matching serial
> >number scheme, doesn't mean that there are any other similarities, and
> >it doesn't mean that Samick in some way owns or controls the Bernhard
> >Steiner company.
>
> I didn't say they did, Sayer. Pay attention. I said the exact opposite. I said
> they simply sold pianos to Ivan Kahn. Did you know that if you pay for 500
> pianos in advance, they'll put the name Michael Sayer on them?
UFO people say that there is an alien base off the coast of South
America. I suggest that you go out there, and round up 'em there
critters.
> >My piano is a completely, 100% different design, from the ground up.
> >Some parts have the same manufacturer as the equivlent parts in a
> >Samick, yes, but they are made and prepared to different
> >specifications.
>
> Your piano is a box stock Samick, with the name Bernhard Steiner stenciled on
> it.
>
> >My piano is essentially identical to a Bechstein,
>
> Your piano is essentially identical to a Samick.
>
> >As far as German piano manufacture goes, only a very good Bechstein EN
> >could surpass my 7'8" prototype Bernhard Steiner C-8.
>
> Your piano can be surpassed by most anything on the market.
>
> >Now we are getting somewhere, since you admit that I do, in fact, play
> >the piano, and that I do, in fact, perform.
>
> I said you were one of the worst pianists I've ever heard. I would not call the
> cat strangling you do a "performance", but I can see where you would sit in
> front of one, drool on yourself, and imagine yourself "performing" in front of
> people as you bang away like someone slamming a couple of ham hocks on the
> keyboard.
A person's potential kinetic energy has to be brought in harmony with
a piano, to make the piano work efficiently, and to do the most with
the least. Banging and forcing doesn't enter into it.
But modern pianists do bang and force.....but they don't get very
loud, because of the inefficiency of their methods.....180lbs
accelerating the keys down with the help of amplification through
graduated leverage application at the right angles, in the right way,
far exceeds any key accleration that can be produced by simply
contracting the muscles of the chest, shoulders and triceps, with a
little help of arm weight. So, I can understand why you might think
I, with a much bigger sound than these normally constituted pianists,
bang.
But the simple fact is, that being able to bench press 500 pounds,
won't give one the sound of the 74 year old, hunched over Nyiregyhazi
who walked only with the help of a cane, who probably never did one
pushup in his entire life, and who simply walked in off the street to
play and record those Liszt legends.
It won't make someone sound like Hofmann in those live Casimir Hall
recitals.
It won't make someone be able to play that Scriabin D sharp Minor
Etude, as Horowitz did in his 1986 Moscow recital (when he was 83
years old, too).
Banging and forcing aren't a part of my playing, and have never been a
part of it. Why would someone want to bang, when a higher quality and
far larger tone can be obtained with no effort by simply using a
different selection of means?
Banging on a piano, is like trying to cut a steak with a sledge
hammer....the harder you bang, the more the piano will fight back.
> >It is almost certainly a lie, that you have ever heard me perform.
> >But if it is really true, then please tell us when and where -
> >otherwise, stop lying.
>
> You posted an mp3. Stay on the proper medication schedule and these memory
> lapses won't be such a problem for you.
I posted several audio files. But, as I said, that you have ever
heard me perform, is almost certainly a lie, because if it were true,
you could specify the place and date of performance.
One of the audio files can presently be heard at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MichaelSayersRadicalMiniaturist/
Be advised, that the selection is a Chopin piece which is not fitted
for maximal sound output....the whole thing is between f-ff. That
piece is not suited for orchestral volumes of tone.
I don't claim anything extraordinary for that file....except for a
novel tempo change introduced by my at a little past halfway to the
end of the printed score.
> >It states that Ivan Kahn is a fourth generation master piano craftsman
> >and builder, and that Bernhard Steiner pianos were designed by his
> >family.
>
> Yes - two models of verticals, which aren't built any more. The grands were
> built by Samick under an OEM contract.
If that's true, then Mig-25s are OEM F-16s, and General Dynamics only
manufactures turbine casings.
> >There is no such thing as a "Samick serial number".
>
> Yes, in fact there is. Samick uses a serial numbering system that is unique to
> the piano industry. No one else has *ever* used their numbering system. It is a
> coded system of letters and numbers. Those who know how to read it can look at
> the serial number and tell you the month and year it was built, and from there,
> literally the day it was built. Your piano has a Samick serial number in it.
> Anyone with a Pierce Atlas can check this for accuracy, and I assure you there
> are quite a few people on this forum with a Pierce Atlas handy.
I don't know why you are talking about a Samick serial numbers, when
the piano I own is a Bernhard Steiner, and has a Bernhard Steiner
serial number.
> >You talk a
> >whole lot about what evidence you've got......but your hands seem to
> >really be empty.
>
> My hands have dumped enough evidence in your lap to bury you. I no longer
> *need* to provide you with evidence. It's been done, and the case is closed to
> all but your own deranged mind.
The UFO people say there is no reason at all why any rational person
would disbelieve that an alien base is operating underwater off the
coast of South America. They claim irrefutable evidence for their
conclusions - case closed. They might consider you to be deranged, if
express disagreement with them.
> >I think it is time for you either to put up, or to shut up.
> >
>
> No, I think that honor belongs to you. Please contact Larry Fine at
> http://www.brooksidepress.com and ask him to correct his information in the
> Piano Book. See what happens.
I will do that, if you can contact the UFO people, and get them to
correct their files to read that there is no alien base underwater off
the coast of South America.....and if you can tell us why you are
talking about a Samick serial number, when my piano is a Bernhard
Steiner.
Michael Sayers
http://profiles.yahoo.com/mjs112358
Larry
(Otherwise known as the homeless catfood eating alien)
>The overlapping of strings appeared during the 1800s, before which all
>pianos had parallel strings. If you think all pianos have overlapping
>strings, then you probably don't know very much about pianos.
Now did I say that, Meow Mix? I was discussing today's pianos. All of today's
piano are overstrung. That was my point. They all make an "X" today, Sayer. It
was *you* that tried to claim you had the only piano that was overstrung.
>If that's true, then my Forcas Hosten '97, is really just a California
>wine with a French label stuck on the side.
The stenciling of Samick pianos has nothing to do with the wine industry, Meow
Mix. If you want to draw a more accurate comparison, try using Mogan David.
>UFO people say that there is an alien base off the coast of South
>America. I suggest that you go out there, and round up 'em there
>critters.
I've been told there is intelligent life in Dallas too, but as yet I have seen
no proof of that from my discussions with you.
>A person's potential kinetic energy has to be brought in harmony with
>a piano, to make the piano work
Stop with the pompous claims, Meow Mix. You don't play well enough to pass a
3rd grade recital. The 8 year olds would put you to shame.
>I posted several audio files. But, as I said, that you have ever
>heard me perform,
You're correct. What you did on those audio files was definitely *not*
performing. But I didn't say I'd heard you perform, in fact, I clearly stated
you *can't* perform. I said I'd heard you play.
>I don't know why you are talking about a Samick serial numbers, when
>the piano I own is a Bernhard Steiner, and has a Bernhard Steiner
>serial number.
>
I know you don't. That's because you are a supreme moron. Your piano has a
Samick serial number in it because it is a Samick piano. The name Bernhard
Steiner is on the piano because Kahn bought a bunch of Samick pianos OEM and
had the name put on them. Everyone knows that now, except you.
Radu Focshaner
"Bernhard Steiner" <Bernhard...@hotmail.com> wrote
> A person's potential kinetic energy
Energy is either "potential" (relative to some system) or kinetic . Superman
(R.I.P.) had both while flying : potential relative to the earth and
kinetic. Anyway, I think that you cannot say "potential kinetic energy".
Walter Ramsey
> > 2) you and Mr. Sayers both use Google Groups as your posting host, a
> > rarity within this group;
> > 3) Mr. Sayers is known to post from the Dallas Texas area;
> > 4) you are posting from within 100 miles of Plano, Texas;
How can you find out this information? And how can a poster make it confidential.
Julius Dedekind
> the same person, your IP signature proves it.
This has happened before when I visited certain hostile groups, if you
take a particular viewpoint and argue against a well established
individual within a thread you endanger yourself to their own feeble
assumptions. This is not the first time I have been accused of being
a clone.
But conspiracies are easier to create than they are to defend
against--and anyone who tries to defend themselves from a liar often
appears as the biggest fool. Larry can either accept the fact that he
is a fool arguing with a liar or the liar arguing against the fool--if
I am the liar then he is the fool for spending so much time trying to
"win"; else he is jumping to conclusions based on my IP signature.
Dallas is a big city--if this Sayers lives somewhere nearby, so what?
That has nothing to do with the fact that unquestionable evidence is
lacking to support any connection of the Bernhard Steiner piano to
that of a stenciled Samick.
Larry
Sayer, catfood junkie and all round moron
>This is not the first time I have been accused of being
>a clone.
The question would be what they cloned....
Having seen your picture Sayer, my guess is a jack ass?
>That has nothing to do with the fact that unquestionable evidence is
>lacking to support any connection of the Bernhard Steiner piano to
>that of a stenciled Samick.
>
It just kills you that your piano is nothing more than a mass produced Samick
stencil, doesn't it Sayer? The sad part is, if you weren't such a freaking
idiot about it, you *could* be talking about the merits of your Samick. That
size Samick is actually a decent piano if it's properly prepped and in good
condition. But we can't talk about that, because you want to insist it is
something it's not. Just like you are now pretending to be someone you're not.
Just like you like to pretend to be the musician you're not.
You enjoy living in a fantasy world, don't you Sayer?
Julius Dedekind
agrees with Sayers will immediately be called a Sayers clone; I am not
surprised to see Richard being branded the same.
I can see where this is going--a bunch of chattering monkeys are now
going to continue to address me by a name that I do not answer to.
Larry
>I can see where this is going--a bunch of chattering monkeys are now
>going to continue to address me by a name that I do not answer to.
Cut it out Sayer. We all know who you are.
Bernhard Steiner
> > > 2) you and Mr. Sayers both use Google Groups as your posting host, a
> > > rarity within this group;
> > > 3) Mr. Sayers is known to post from the Dallas Texas area;
> > > 4) you are posting from within 100 miles of Plano, Texas;
If I want to post through the google groups interface, I will. I
don't have to provide a justification for this choice. If you have a
problem with this choice, then you need to deal with it - don't shove
the problem on to me, and expect me to comprehend why it bothers you,
or expect me to stop posting through google groups.
Why does it matter to you personally what state or city a poster
chooses to post from? It is legal to post to google from anywhere in
North America, and I will keep posting while I am here in Iowa if I
feel like it. When I am back in Dallas later this year, I will post
from Dallas if I feel like it.
I understand that when a person posts like this, the information about
where he posts from is publicly viewable. I also know that where a
poster dispatches his messages from, is not a matter of concern -
except to a stalker.
It is none of your concern where I post from, and if you don't like me
posting from a certain location, then you need to come try and stop me
in person, and see whether you end up in a) a county jail, or b) the
hospital. There aren't many pianos in either of those two places -
and if you can't eat solid food for six months, you probably won't
feel like playing the piano - so you might want to go ahead now to
consider getting back on track.
Respect for a man's privacy used to be considered noble. I am
normally a nice man - but I am not nice at all towards rapists,
stalkers and privacy invaders. If I ever feel like my safety or my
life is in danger by another man, I will become brutally, if not
lethally violent - I would rather be in jail for going too far, than
six feet under for not going far enough. So, can we please stick to
discussing pianos, and not try to figure out ways to invade the
privacy and the legal rights of posters?
Michael Sayers
Mariana
> It is legal to post to google from anywhere in
> North America,
Warmest greetings from Tirana, ALBANIA !
> When I am back in Dallas later this year, I will post
> from Dallas if I feel like it.
Dallas like in Dallas, Texas ? Isn't it dangerous to visit Dallas?
With all the Oswalds and other pinko commies shooting American
Presidents just for the fun of it ? I heard that Van Cliburn sought
refuge in a Fort , somewhere in Texas, to avoid being shot for playing
over 17138 times the 1st Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto.
> and see whether you end up in a) a county jail, or b) the
> hospital. There aren't many pianos in either of those two places
Yeah, yeah with all the pinko commies living on wellfare, out and in
and out and in the jail or hospital. Free hot meals, that's what they
are after those damn liberals !
Richard Hofheimer
Of course you can post with whatever news server you want. There is nothing
wrong with using Google. It is simply amusing that you and your other alias
claim to be different but happen to use the same server. And there are no
privacy issues. As you say, the news server that someone uses to post is
public. No private information has been gathered or publicized, as far as I
know. My name, which is also not private, is mentioned in here from time to
time, especially when I post something stupid. When that happens, I don't
talk about privacy issues or lethal violence. Come on, man, back to defcon
5!
Also, regarding your other post, Larry didn't brand me a Sayers clone (that
was "get real") and I never agreed with Sayers. I don't think anyone does
(except other google posters!?)
"Bernhard Steiner" <Bernhard...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:23002af8.04101...@posting.google.com...
Larry
>Respect for a man's privacy used to be considered noble. I am
>normally a nice man - but I am not nice at all towards rapists,
>stalkers and privacy invaders. If I ever feel like my safety or my
>life is in danger by another man, I will become brutally, if not
>lethally violent -
Who are you kidding, Sayer? Do you honestly think anyone is scared? And no one
is stalking you, either. You are posting to a public forum. When you post to a
public forum the public can respond to your posts. You're showing major signs
of paranoia, Catman. All anyone is doing is explaining to you that you can't
pretend to be other people and expect anyone to believe you. You leave
footprints.
All your talk about whipping people, going to jail as a result of your Superman
like ability to kick someone's ass - you're making a fool out of yourself,
Sayer. You're a wimp. A weenie. You couldn't fight a cat if it caught you
eating out of its bowl. We've seen your picture. You're the 98 pound weakling.
A woos. What some people call a "candy ass". You probably have been scared by
your shadow.
And you *suck* as a pianist.
Bernhard Steiner
Greetings Radu,
"Kinetic energy" is not the most apt phrase for what is being
described - but it is the phrase most likely to be comprehended with
the meaning which is intended by someone raised in the Occident.
Regards,
MJS
Bernhard Steiner
> >From: Bernhard...@hotmail.com
> (Otherwise known as the homeless catfood eating alien)
>
> >The overlapping of strings appeared during the 1800s, before which all
> >pianos had parallel strings. If you think all pianos have overlapping
> >strings, then you probably don't know very much about pianos.
>
> Now did I say that, Meow Mix? I was discussing today's pianos. All of today's
> piano are overstrung. That was my point. They all make an "X" today, Sayer. It
> was *you* that tried to claim you had the only piano that was overstrung.
What I said is that the area of overlap, and the degree of overlap,
are greater in Bernhard Steiners, than in other brands.
What I don't understand is why you not only said earlier that all
pianos make an "X", but now you are saying that "they all make an 'X'
today".
There are instruments in production today, which do not "make an 'X'".
For instance, here is one made in 1973:
http://www.ups.edu/news/releases/2002-03/fortepiano.shtml
Pianos that aren't overstrung, are in a production process as I type
these words.
> >I don't know why you are talking about a Samick serial numbers, when
> >the piano I own is a Bernhard Steiner, and has a Bernhard Steiner
> >serial number.
> >
>
> I know you don't. That's because you are a supreme moron. Your piano has a
> Samick serial number in it because it is a Samick piano. The name Bernhard
> Steiner is on the piano because Kahn bought a bunch of Samick pianos OEM and
> had the name put on them. Everyone knows that now, except you.
The piano I own is a Bernhard Steiner C-8. I checked the Samick
website very carefully: they don't make a C-8 model at all, for any
brand.
Once you've finished trying to find 'em there critters that have set
up that underwater UFO base off the coast of South America, and you
are through trying to prove the existence of unicorns and
toothfairies, why don't you come back to reality and explain how it is
possible for a piano of the C-8 model - a model which is not even made
by Samick for any of their piano lines - to have a Samick serial
number.
I'll be waiting for your explanation.....
Michael Sayers
Larry
catfood eating homeless space alien 98 pound weakling who wants to whip the
world:
>What I said is that the area of overlap, and the degree of overlap,
>are greater in Bernhard Steiners, than in other brands.
So let's start with that one. No it isn't. It has the same "overlap" as a
Samick, which has the same "overlap" as all the other stencil names used on
that piano, and which is pretty much the same as most of the other production
grade Asian made pianos of that size. In short, there is nothing unique or
special about your piano, Sayer. It's simply a Samick.
>What I don't understand is why you not only said earlier that all
>pianos make an "X", but now you are saying that "they all make an 'X'
>today".
I know you don't understand that, Sayer. I mistakenly assumed you had enough
intelligence to understand that we were involved in a discussion about the
modern piano. I should have known that you would go to the extreme ends of the
earth to drag things into the picture that weren't being discussed. We have not
been involved in a discussion about straight strung pianofortes, we have been
talking about modern pianos.
>There are instruments in production today, which do not "make an 'X'".
>
>For instance, here is one made in 1973:
>Pianos that aren't overstrung, are in a production process as I type
>these words.
Now let's address this foolish point you're trying to make:
No, there are no straight strung pianos in production today. Pointing to a one
off reproduction built in 1973 and declaring this establishes "production" of
pianofortes or otherwise straight strung instruments is stupid. The word
"production" is used to describe an ongoing output of product. Things such as
your Samick Sayer, where one after another are being produced. Someone
reproduced a copy of the Mayflower once as well, Sayer - that doesn't mean that
15th century ships are now in production. It was a "reproduction", not "in
production", just like your example is a reproduction, not a sign that
pianofortes are now in production.
>The piano I own is a Bernhard Steiner C-8. I checked the Samick
>website very carefully: they don't make a C-8 model at all, for any
>brand.
You won't find a Hyundai listed there either Sayer, but it's common knowledge
that your piano was sold to another distributor with the name Hyundai on it.
You won't find Dodge listed on the Mitsubishi website either Sayer, but
everyone knows that some of the Dodge product was built by Mitsubishi. Hyundai
products had their own model numbers different from Samick's also. That's how
they identified which distributor bought them. But the serial numbers run
consecutively, and every Hyundai, Kohler & Campbell, Maeri, and Bernhard
Steiner has serial numbers that fit into the consecutive run of Samick's serial
numbering.
>I'll be waiting for your explanation.....
>
Sure you will. How many times has this been explained to you already - a
thousand? It's not my fault you are too stupid to figure it out.
Dave Tempo
"Bernhard Steiner" <Bernhard...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:23002af8.04101...@posting.google.com...
> while I am here in Iowa if I
> feel like it.
Hi Michael - are you doing any performances in Iowa? I am originally from
Iowa and worked in piano store there and would like to come hear you if
possible.
DTempo
Bernhard Steiner
> "Larry" <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote in message
> news:20041011162633...@mb-m16.aol.com...
> > >From: Thomas F. Unke
>
> >>Anyway, why do you always respond to this psycho?
> >
> > Oh, I don't know.... Marcia mentioned he was here again in some thread, so
> > I
> > thought I'd have a little fun.
> >
> It was the woman that started it, your honor.
>
> I just needed time to FIND the time to dispute his absurd
> statement that no woman can produce the fantastic tone
> that a male pianist can. But I grew tired.
> Carry on,
> Marsha
It is true.....at least in regard to historical pianists, that the men
have a tone quality and size not matched by the women pianists of
their day (or of today).
I don't understand why this troubles you. After all, having a big
tone, is just as important as knowing what to do with it. Hofmann's
big tone, as in those frenetic Casimir Hall recitals of the 1930s, is
more gorgeous, dark and lovely, than is Nyiregyhazi's - but Hofmann
just uses it to toy with the audience, to prove that he can make that
sound, in order to work them up (as Horowitz would later on). But,
there is something more in at least those Casimir Hall recitals.......
When Hofmann gave the April 7, 1938 Casimir Hall recital, he was
feeling extremely frustrated, upset - if not also tramautized. He had
just returned from touring in Europe a day before - to discover that a
power struggle had occured at the Curtis Institute, of which he was
founder and president. They removed all traces from the school that
he had ever been there, and even renamed Casimir Hall (named after
Hofmann's father, Casimir Hofmann) into Curtis Hall. That particular
Casimir Hall recital reached a level of expression, that is far beyond
anything recorded anywhere else by Josef Hofmann. It is unsurpassed
by even the tension in the recitals of Horowitz's later years.
I have known people who heard some of Hofmann's studio recordings, or
the live recordings from the 1940s, who thought he was a just boring
pianist with a big technique. All I have to do is play the the Chopin
4th Ballade recording from April 7, 1938....and when they hear a power
of tone and technique surpassing anything Horowitz ever did, they
change their minds.
Cy Shuster
"Larry" <larryin...@aol.composer> wrote in message
> It just kills you that your piano is nothing more than a mass produced
> Samick
> stencil, doesn't it Sayer? The sad part is, if you weren't such a freaking
> idiot about it, you *could* be talking about the merits of your Samick.
> That
> size Samick is actually a decent piano if it's properly prepped and in
> good
> condition. But we can't talk about that, because you want to insist it is
> something it's not. Just like you are now pretending to be someone you're
> not.
> Just like you like to pretend to be the musician you're not.
Wait'll the plating flakes off the center pins... that'll be another
proof...
Bernhard Steiner
> >From: Bernhard...@hotmail.com (Bernhard Steiner) Otherwise known as the
> catfood eating homeless space alien 98 pound weakling who wants to whip the
> world:
>
>
> >What I said is that the area of overlap, and the degree of overlap,
> >are greater in Bernhard Steiners, than in other brands.
>
> So let's start with that one. No it isn't. It has the same "overlap" as a
> Samick, which has the same "overlap" as all the other stencil names used on
> that piano, and which is pretty much the same as most of the other production
> grade Asian made pianos of that size. In short, there is nothing unique or
> special about your piano, Sayer. It's simply a Samick.
My piano can't be a Samick, because it is a German piano, and because
there isn't even a C-8 model Samick.
Samicks are German pianos, too, by the way. Just as French food made
in NYC is still French food....a German piano made in Korea, as the
Samicks are, is a German piano. There is a different scale between
American and German pianos, and both Samicks and Bernhard Steiners
follow the German scale model. A famous German piano scale designer
provided the scale for the Samick pianos.
If you want to know what a Samick is really worth, recalculate the
costs of production for what they would be if the labour were done in
Germany.....then, you will see a better symbol of there true economic
value, adjusted for differences between the labour markets. The
margin of productivity for the Samick pianos, is probably not as high
as for Bosendorfer or Bechstein - but you will find that it is very
high.
And, a Samick, especially with Abel hammers, can have a bigger sound
and more colours than an equivalent length Bosendorfer......but, a
Bechstein will still tend to be better than either a Samick, or a
Bosendorfer.
> >What I don't understand is why you not only said earlier that all
> >pianos make an "X", but now you are saying that "they all make an 'X'
> >today".
>
> I know you don't understand that, Sayer. I mistakenly assumed you had enough
> intelligence to understand that we were involved in a discussion about the
> modern piano. I should have known that you would go to the extreme ends of the
> earth to drag things into the picture that weren't being discussed. We have not
> been involved in a discussion about straight strung pianofortes, we have been
> talking about modern pianos.
I didn't qualify my remarks in the way you described. If you assumed
that I was only referring to "modern" pianos, that was your mistake,
not mine.
> >There are instruments in production today, which do not "make an 'X'".
> >
> >For instance, here is one made in 1973:
>
> >Pianos that aren't overstrung, are in a production process as I type
> >these words.
>
> Now let's address this foolish point you're trying to make:
>
> No, there are no straight strung pianos in production today. Pointing to a one
> off reproduction built in 1973 and declaring this establishes "production" of
> pianofortes or otherwise straight strung instruments is stupid. The word
> "production" is used to describe an ongoing output of product. Things such as
> your Samick Sayer, where one after another are being produced. Someone
> reproduced a copy of the Mayflower once as well, Sayer - that doesn't mean that
> 15th century ships are now in production. It was a "reproduction", not "in
> production", just like your example is a reproduction, not a sign that
> pianofortes are now in production.
Any economic activity which produces a capital good, is a form of
production. The marginal utility of these historical piano models
produced today, might in fact be quite high.....which means that the
marginal productivity of the labour involved may also be quite high.
It would take significant research of the economic data, to determine
the specifics, of course.
All catallactic exchange is an economic activity which involves
production, supply and demand. "Reproduction" requires production.
> >The piano I own is a Bernhard Steiner C-8. I checked the Samick
> >website very carefully: they don't make a C-8 model at all, for any
> >brand.
>
> You won't find a Hyundai listed there either Sayer, but it's common knowledge
> that your piano was sold to another distributor with the name Hyundai on it.
> You won't find Dodge listed on the Mitsubishi website either Sayer, but
> everyone knows that some of the Dodge product was built by Mitsubishi. Hyundai
> products had their own model numbers different from Samick's also. That's how
> they identified which distributor bought them. But the serial numbers run
> consecutively, and every Hyundai, Kohler & Campbell, Maeri, and Bernhard
> Steiner has serial numbers that fit into the consecutive run of Samick's serial
> numbering.
My comment was not on what piano brand is listed or not, but on what
model grand is or is not actually made by Samick. There are nine
Bernhard Steiner grand models.....Samick doesn't make a C-8 model in
any brand, and the Samick grand piano line has only six models.
As I said, there is no such thing as a Samick serial number. A piano
company can serial number its pianos however is desired - this is not
something that is subject to government regulation or to patents.
You have written amply about the virtues of the Samick serial number
schemata. If it really is so informative and efficient as you claim,
I would not be surprised if other makers of German pianos, such as
Bernhard Steiner, were to adopt it.
>
> >I'll be waiting for your explanation.....
> >
>
> Sure you will. How many times has this been explained to you already - a
> thousand? It's not my fault you are too stupid to figure it out.
I am still waiting for your explanation of why a non-Samick piano such
as mine, in a model not made by Samick (there is no 7'8" Samick, and
no Samick C-8 piano), has a Samick serial number. It seems that you
know nothing, in fact, about Samick serial numbers at all.
Your stance reminds me of various members of the Bush adminstration
repeating over and over that certain weapons are possessed by the Iraq
government.....when, as it turns out, they weren't.
I think the CIA might be hiring. If you have a degree from an Ivy
League school, I suggest that you give them your application for
employment.
Regards,
Michael Sayers
Bernhard Steiner
> >From: Bernhard...@hotmail.com (Bernhard Steiner) Otherwise known as the
> catfood eating homeless space alien 98 pound weakling who wants to whip the
> world:
>
>
> >What I said is that the area of overlap, and the degree of overlap,
> >are greater in Bernhard Steiners, than in other brands.
>
> So let's start with that one. No it isn't. It has the same "overlap" as a
> Samick, which has the same "overlap" as all the other stencil names used on
> that piano, and which is pretty much the same as most of the other production
> grade Asian made pianos of that size. In short, there is nothing unique or
> special about your piano, Sayer. It's simply a Samick.
My piano can't be a Samick, because it is a German piano, and because
there isn't even a C-8 model Samick.
Samicks are German pianos, too, by the way. Just as French food made
in NYC is still French food....a German piano made in Korea, as the
Samicks are, is a German piano. There is a different scale between
American and German pianos, and both Samicks and Bernhard Steiners
follow the German scale model. A famous German piano scale designer
provided the scale for the Samick pianos.
If you want to know what a Samick is really worth, recalculate the
costs of production for what they would be if the labour were done in
Germany.....then, you will see a better symbol of there true economic
value, adjusted for differences between the labour markets. The
margin of productivity for the Samick pianos, is probably not as high
as for Bosendorfer or Bechstein - but you will find that it is very
high.
And, a Samick, especially with Abel hammers, can have a bigger sound
and more colours than an equivalent length Bosendorfer......but, a
Bechstein will still tend to be better than either a Samick, or a
Bosendorfer.
> >What I don't understand is why you not only said earlier that all
> >pianos make an "X", but now you are saying that "they all make an 'X'
> >today".
>
> I know you don't understand that, Sayer. I mistakenly assumed you had enough
> intelligence to understand that we were involved in a discussion about the
> modern piano. I should have known that you would go to the extreme ends of the
> earth to drag things into the picture that weren't being discussed. We have not
> been involved in a discussion about straight strung pianofortes, we have been
> talking about modern pianos.
I didn't qualify my remarks in the way you described. If you assumed
that I was only referring to "modern" pianos, that was your mistake,
not mine.
> >There are instruments in production today, which do not "make an 'X'".
> >
> >For instance, here is one made in 1973:
>
> >Pianos that aren't overstrung, are in a production process as I type
> >these words.
>
> Now let's address this foolish point you're trying to make:
>
> No, there are no straight strung pianos in production today. Pointing to a one
> off reproduction built in 1973 and declaring this establishes "production" of
> pianofortes or otherwise straight strung instruments is stupid. The word
> "production" is used to describe an ongoing output of product. Things such as
> your Samick Sayer, where one after another are being produced. Someone
> reproduced a copy of the Mayflower once as well, Sayer - that doesn't mean that
> 15th century ships are now in production. It was a "reproduction", not "in
> production", just like your example is a reproduction, not a sign that
> pianofortes are now in production.
Any economic activity which produces a capital good, is a form of
production. The marginal utility of these historical piano models
produced today, might in fact be quite high.....which means that the
marginal productivity of the labour involved may also be quite high.
It would take significant research of the economic data, to determine
the specifics, of course.
All catallactic exchange is an economic activity which involves
production, supply and demand. "Reproduction" requires production.
> >The piano I own is a Bernhard Steiner C-8. I checked the Samick
> >website very carefully: they don't make a C-8 model at all, for any
> >brand.
>
> You won't find a Hyundai listed there either Sayer, but it's common knowledge
> that your piano was sold to another distributor with the name Hyundai on it.
> You won't find Dodge listed on the Mitsubishi website either Sayer, but
> everyone knows that some of the Dodge product was built by Mitsubishi. Hyundai
> products had their own model numbers different from Samick's also. That's how
> they identified which distributor bought them. But the serial numbers run
> consecutively, and every Hyundai, Kohler & Campbell, Maeri, and Bernhard
> Steiner has serial numbers that fit into the consecutive run of Samick's serial
> numbering.
My comment was not on what piano brand is listed or not, but on what
model grand is or is not actually made by Samick. There are nine
Bernhard Steiner grand models.....Samick doesn't make a C-8 model in
any brand, and the Samick grand piano line has only six models.
As I said, there is no such thing as a Samick serial number. A piano
company can serial number its pianos however is desired - this is not
something that is subject to government regulation or to patents.
You have written amply about the virtues of the Samick serial number
schemata. If it really is so informative and efficient as you claim,
I would not be surprised if other makers of German pianos, such as
Bernhard Steiner, were to adopt it.
>
> >I'll be waiting for your explanation.....
> >
>
> Sure you will. How many times has this been explained to you already - a
> thousand? It's not my fault you are too stupid to figure it out.
Bernhard Steiner
The college here in Cedar Rapids has two Steinway concert grands, and
a variety of churches here have decent pianos.
There as been some talk of a recital while I am here, but nothing has
materialised. I probably won't perform, until I am back in Dallas.
If you want to visit, I can give you a phone number here through which
to reach me. I'll assume that "Tempo" will appear on the caller ID.
I should forewarn you that my piano playing might be quite shocking,
because I don't listen to much in the way of recordings, and I try to
arrive at original conceptions of the pieces.
I am practicing here on a Baldwin concert grand, which puts out a
decent sound. It would sound better in a hall, than it does in a
sitting room.
I don't know many people here, so it would be good to have some
company other than all the dead, great composers. Although this might
change quite soon, at the moment I don't practice every waking hour.
There is time for some r.m.m.p., chess, reading Shakespeare, and
having visitors.
A famous novelist lives in Cedar Rapids....his name is Dow Mossman.
But he is out of town.
Michael Sayers
http://profiles.yahoo.com/mjs112358
Bernhard Steiner
> Bernhard...@hotmail.com (SAMICK) wrote in message news:<23002af8.04101...@posting.google.com>...
> > It is legal to post to google from anywhere in
> > North America,
>
> Warmest greetings from Tirana, ALBANIA !
Greetings to you, Mariana!
> > When I am back in Dallas later this year, I will post
> > from Dallas if I feel like it.
>
> Dallas like in Dallas, Texas ?
Yes. I've visited Southfork Ranch, by the way.
> Isn't it dangerous to visit Dallas?
> With all the Oswalds and other pinko commies shooting American
> Presidents just for the fun of it ? I heard that Van Cliburn sought
> refuge in a Fort , somewhere in Texas, to avoid being shot for playing
> over 17138 times the 1st Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto.
Dallas is quite dangerous. It is not an advised location for
presidential visits - or for quasi-Lhevinesque and sub-Godowskian
renditions of the Tchaikovsky B Minor piano concerto (there are three
concertos by Tchaikovsky for piano and orchestra). The Grainger
arrangement, on the other hand, might fly with suitable Busonian
augmentations.
> > and see whether you end up in a) a county jail, or b) the
> > hospital. There aren't many pianos in either of those two places
>
> Yeah, yeah with all the pinko commies living on wellfare, out and in
> and out and in the jail or hospital. Free hot meals, that's what they
> are after those damn liberals !
Yeah, there is quite an enclave here of homeless anarcho-syndicalists,
Prussian Marxists, Dadaist Kleptomaniacs, and what not. You seem to
be one of the few persons who has caught on to their ruses. Not to
worry - Big Tex is always smiling and waving, unchanged by the passing
crowd. They will never be able to close the doors of Southfork Ranch.
They will never be able to make us stop putting ice in our tea. They
will never be able to make us stop tying a thread to little June Bugs
on cool, dry summer nights, to watch them fly around for a bit, and
then to let them go.
Michael Sayers
http://profiles.yahoo.com/mjs112358
Bernhard Steiner
My Southern lineage might be of interest to you. I am a direct
descendant of Captain Lee James, who was a camp d'aide, and a first
cousin, to General Robert E. Lee. Capt. James lost his right arm in
the War of Secession - we still have his civil war uniform, his sword,
and various letters and documents of historical significance. My
mother's maiden name was Nancy Lee James - her brother is named Robert
Lee James. My middle name is James.
The war is erroneously portrayed in the history books. Every state
that seceded, had the legal and constitutional right to secede -
except for Texas, which seceded because the Union was providing Texas
with insufficient protection against Indians. General Robert E. Lee
opposed slavery, as did most slave owners - you won't find this
discussed in the textbooks. A slaveowner was held liable for any
crime or offence committed by a released slave, which was the only
reason the South held on to slavery for so long. Legal reforms were
in process before the war started, which would have changed this. The
war was only about state's rights, and conquest and plunder (as, for
instance, the plundering which was done during the reconstruction).
Slavery had nothing to do with the war - there was slavery in a number
of Northern states: economics and state rights, on the other hand, had
everything to do with it.
Michael Sayers
http://profiles.yahoo.com/mjs112358
Bernhard Steiner
> Temper, Temper!
>
> It is simply amusing that you and your other alias
> claim to be different but happen to use the same server.
I don't know if we are using the same news server or not - I don't
know how to check these things.
I do know, however, that I am posting from Cedar Rapids, Iowa. If
Julius Dedekind is posting from the Dallas area, as you all allege, to
my mind that suggests that he is a different person, and not merely an
alias.
The driving time from my location to Dallas at the posted speed limit
is 17 hours. That being considered, I would say that an unbiased
spectator would conlcude it is more likely that Julius Dedekind is not
one of my aliases, than that I post in the morning, drive 195 mph in
an Aston Martin or Ferrari to Dallas to post there with that alias,
and that I then drive back here at 195 mph to post from Iowa in the
evening.
You won't find any airline records of me flying back and forth every
day - so that rules out flying 100%, unless I bought a special Lear
Jet just to create an illusory alias in Dallas through which to argue
about a piano on r.m.m.p. that isn't even for sale - and that I am
paying the massive cost of jet fuel and maintenance, in addition to
paying off the jet, just for that reason.
I would have to hire a pilot, too, since I am not a licensed pilot.
For the cost of all that.....one could by a 10'2" Fazioli, a Bechstein
EN, and an American Steinway D - and still have loads of money left
over.
Michael Sayers
http://profiles.yahoo.com/mjs112358
Richard Hofheimer
> I would have to hire a pilot, too, since I am not a licensed pilot.
Or simply make a long-distance call.
I didn't allege anything about locations. That was someone else.
"Bernhard Steiner" <Bernhard...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:23002af8.04101...@posting.google.com...
Tony Elka
<larryin...@aol.composer> wrote:
> Sure you will. How many times has this been explained to you already - a
> thousand? It's not my fault you are too stupid to figure it out.
Still on your high horse, eh sport?
Tony
Bernhard Steiner
> Goodness! You have a gift for tangents.
>
> > I would have to hire a pilot, too, since I am not a licensed pilot.
>
> Or simply make a long-distance call.
>
> I didn't allege anything about locations. That was someone else.
If you are suggesting that that other poster is an amanuensis to
Michael Sayers, then I suggest that you look at his posts carefully
and see if you really think I am their author.
I have too much to worry about and with which to contend, to deal with
setting up amanuenses to post about a piano to r.m.m.p.
I might not be doing any recitals, but I am practicing constantly -
and there is a lot to piano technique, and thorough preparation can be
exhausting, if not almost back-breaking. Then there is composing, and
transcribing special versions of the piano repertoire. There is also
sightreading, and examining scores of unfamiliar music and composers.
Free time might be spent in rereading Shakespeare, or playing through
some of Morphy's classic chess games. I have been sketching notes for
a few essays recently, on various things that I keep on cogitating
about - nothing to do with music, but a great deal to do with
Schopenhauer, and Hume's empirical method. Understanding and being
able to articulate the fatal defects in Hume's and Schopenhauer's main
works, is more important than setting up amanuenses to argue at
r.m.m.p.
The sound of my piano speaks for itself. There is nothing to be
gained by having an amanuensis post about it - although, at one time
when the piano was for sale, I suggested that a friend who is a
pianist, and a friend who is a recording engineer, post about the
qualities of the instrument. But they weren't amanuenses - they wrote
their own posts.
If some people don't like how my piano sounds, I don't care.
Extraordinary things are only for the few - and, I think it takes ears
that have spent thousands of hours in piano practice, straining to
listen to the quality of every tone that is produced by a piano, to
recognize a when a piano has a very good response to one's playing.
The world meandered out to the furthest edge of subjectivity and
irrationality in modern times.....and, as feared by Nietzsche, the
return to primal naivete has resulted not in a rebirth of creativity
and a reformulation of standards, but in an increasing abhorrence of
all pretences to creativity or objective standards - and there is
hardly a better place to find this horror of creativity and objective
standards expressed, than as it sometimes appears at r.m.m.p.
Standards allow for differentiation between people. In our day, with
the advent and spreading of democracy, and with an ultra-minimalistic
scientific method to back the conclusions up, differences between
people are held to be of arbitrary significance.
I am therefore arguing from a position of assumed weakness, in
discussing the piano. It is assumed that no one can have any special
knowledge or insight, into anything. It is accepted that there is
technical knowledge - but not special knowledge, and not priviliged
knowledge. I have read many times that Schliemann, who was one of the
most gifted archaeologists of all time, was an "amateur"
archaeologist, that he was merely "lucky" to have started digging at
the precise locations for Mycenae and Troy, and that his
archaeological methods weren't "good". In our century, people go to
the greatest possible pains to show that the 19th century
achaeologist, Schliemann, didn't have any special gifts for being able
to survey the terrain, and to determine if an ancient city is buried
far underneath in the earth. They try as hard as they can to deny
that there was in any way, anything special about him at all.
In the name of a minimalistic scientific empiricism, people retreat
into a cave lain deep in subjectivity's womb. Accustomed to the dim
light there, they lose the ability to see things as they really are.
Their views have an internal objectivity - just as a cave dwelling
salamander, through loss of its eyesight, will objectively ascertain
that it is dark outside the cave. But they mistake their myopic
vision, for encompassing the whole universe. Their objectivity, is
premissed on a deeper subjectivity and on buried assumptions.
An amanuensis can not change the assumptions on which most people
habitually act in our world.
Michael Sayers
Cy Shuster
much with which to contend"!
"Bernhard Steiner" <Bernhard...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
get real
wrote:
>Good Lord! Imagine the size of meandering posts if he *didn't* have "too
>much with which to contend"!
EXCELLENT! you gave me a chuckle