Schafen (sp?) Brothers baby grand
Sam Smith
year old "Shafen Brothers" (not sure I got that spelling right...) baby
grand from a neighbor for $1,500. I know nothing of pianos, brands and
their pricing.
Can anyone help?
TIA---
John Inzer
> A friend of mine is asking me for advice on buying
> an excellent condition 20 year old "Shafen Brothers"
> (not sure I got that spelling right...) baby grand from
> a neighbor for $1,500. I know nothing of pianos,
> brands and their pricing.
Get the correct name and if possible the serial number.
A picture would be useful also...if you do not have a
website to post it on you could use one of the free sites
at the following link:
Guide to online photo albums:
http://tinyurl.com/3x3a
--
John Inzer
return e-mail disabled
Brothermark
> A friend of mine is asking me for advice.
> I know nothing of pianos, brands and
> their pricing.
Why doesn't your friend ask someone better suited to advise?
Sam Smith
"Brothermark" <yonne...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bnv1p5$1661tj$1...@ID-132564.news.uni-berlin.de...
Brothermark
> Thanks a lot, f**k head...
> > Why doesn't your friend ask someone better suited to advise?
Woah, there was no need for that. Top-posting is totally uncalled for.......
and the language was a little strong too.
I was being serious. Why did your friend ask you for piano advice if you
have no idea about "piano, brands and their pricings" ?
Mark
Sam Smith
"Brothermark" <yonne...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bo0co9$16in8p$1...@ID-132564.news.uni-berlin.de...
Brothermark
> So, "top-posting" (get a life!) deserves your smart-ass reply?
Ah good, no swearing this time. That's progress
Sam Smith
standard?
"Brothermark" <yonne...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bo19tt$15edfe$1...@ID-132564.news.uni-berlin.de...
ptooner
Gerry
"Sam Smith" <SamS...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:mvWob.129655$gv5.10256@fed1read05...
Sam Smith
posting"?
"ptooner" <no...@yourlife.com> wrote in message
news:H0Xob.135788$k74.104067@lakeread05...
Brothermark
> Answer the [moron] question, Gerry. Where are these "rules" about "top
> posting"?
>
Whoops, you lost control of your tongue again there.
Top-posting is a little bit like having good manners. Its not the law, its
just considerate
Larry
I don't have a clue what top posting is myself, Sam - but what do you say you
show a little class and drop the filthy language. It speaks poorly of you.
Larry Fletcher
H. Emmerson Meyers
Schafen was a cousin of Steinweg--the predecessor of Steinway. His pianos
are every bit the equal of Steinway!! Apparently, the flair for piano
building runs in the family.
"Sam Smith" <SamS...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:0ZAob.128829$gv5.44452@fed1read05...
Radu Focshaner
"H. Emmerson Meyers" <vkr...@starpower.net> wrote in message
news:bo210b$7e9$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
> Schafen is a fine German piano. If my recollection serves me correctly,
> Schafen was a cousin of Steinweg--the predecessor of Steinway. His pianos
> are every bit the equal of Steinway!! Apparently, the flair for piano
> building runs in the family.
Actually Schafen is one of Vienna's most famous piano houses, as well as
its oldest, having been formally established in 1792. Its founders were the
twins Nicholaus and Johann Schafeneger, who lived from 1771 to 1809. The
company was responsible for many innovations in the early history of piano
manufacture.
Schafen is highly respected for its finely crafted and wonderful sounding
instruments. Throughout its long history, Schafen remained committed to the
highest standards. As a consequence, the company produced, on average,
fewer than one hundred pianos per year, accounting for their rarity today.
Too bad they closed their Hallstadt factory ten years ago. Schafen Bros
pianos are now considered collector items and their value increases each
day.
Michael
> Put him into your killfile, no need to listen to that sort of people
> anymore.
Maybe that's why his friend wants a piano, is the Schafen brothers loud
enough do you think, given the obvious problem his friend suffers?
--
Michael.
H. Emmerson Meyers
"mou" <bruce_fultonb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ab9jqvkp7oaojeova...@4ax.com...
> Top posting is always called for. Bottom posting should be discouraged
> and exterminated wherever it occurs.
>
> Agree about the language, however.
Brothermark
> and exterminated wherever it occurs.
>
> Agree about the language, however.
> >> Thanks a lot, f**k head...
If you read the conversation thus far (above), it makes no sense. It's all
out of order. With proper <snipping> and bottom-posting, it would make
perfect sense
Brothermark
Get a mouse with scroller wheel and bottom-posting becomes the best way.
top-posting is ignorant and short-sighted
John Miller
Now that we have threaded newsreaders, the argument for bottom posting
preserving the continuity of a thread becomes pretty much moot.
My newsreader window typically displays ~50 lines of message. If I can't
see a poster's comments within those first 50 lines, then I'd say that is
even more deserving of the description "ignorant and short-sighted."
The real advantage of top-posting is that it disrupts cascades. Some folks
consider that a Good Thing.
Given a choice between top posting and failing to trim prior posts, I'd say
that failure to trim is the more egregious behavior. If a person isn't
going to bother to edit his replies, I'd sure rather see a top post. I'd
even more prefer to see a bottom post where the priors were intelligently
snipped.
--
John Miller
Usenet news admin since 1987
My email address: domain, n4vu.com; username, jsm
Michael
> Given a choice between top posting and failing to trim prior posts, I'd say
> that failure to trim is the more egregious behavior.
Where does completely off-topic and discussed to death rank?
I'd say that the technical faults in various old internet protocols /
standards are well discussed, pretty well known and, putting legacy
concerns aside, not that difficult to solve.
That said, I suspect no application of technology will prevent folk from
finding something to argue about :o)
--
Michael.
Brothermark
Brothermark
>It won't do them any good, of course, but they certainly are a
> passionate bunch. Republicans and Meyers-Briggs ESTJ's I'm thinking.
> Fine folks in other respects, I'm sure.
Huh?
ptooner
that such a significant number of bottom posters have these control
issues. It won't do them any good, of course, but they certainly are a
passionate bunch. Republicans and Meyers-Briggs ESTJ's I'm thinking.
level of attainments. Can you think of anyone else you wanted to piss off?
Gerry
Brothermark
> Seems to fit that percentage of bottom posters who feel obliged to
> continue to try to enforce antiquated netiquette to the "T." I'm
> sorry, was it something I said?
Huh???
Brothermark
> I would hope that any ESTJs out there who self-afilliate with being
> conservative or republican aren't ashamed of who they are or what they
> believe. It takes all kinds. Jeez.
Uhm...
Brothermark
> My posting style is to top post and leave the entire thread below for
> people who need to backtrack.
But that's useless because the "entire thread" will all out of order and
will make no sense to anyone needing to trackback.
Brothermark
> The thread is only out of order if someone besides me chops it up,
> inline quotes, bottom posts, pieces it out, snips, reformats and does
> all those other things that many people actually recommend. That's the
> problem. Which I never do.
But there is already a long-established usenet protocol in place which
prevents threads getting all out of order. Why don't you just follow the
existing practise instead of trying to start off a whole new one which only
works if everyone follows you?
MArk
Brothermark
> Top posting started to
> become prevalent because the existing "protocol" which is hardly of
> the same level as an RFC, failed to meet many people's needs
That is simply not true.
Top-posting was borne out of ignorance.
But anyway, enough of about this
Gary L.
<yonne...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>mou wrote:
>> Top posting started to
>> become prevalent because the existing "protocol" which is hardly of
>> the same level as an RFC, failed to meet many people's needs
>
>That is simply not true.
>Top-posting was borne out of ignorance.
Top posting is the default of the Microsoft mail and news programs
that is present on >90% of the personal computers in use today. That
is the most important factor.
- -
Gary L.
Reply to the newsgroup only
Michael
> Top posting is the default of the Microsoft mail and news programs
> that is present on >90% of the personal computers in use today. That
> is the most important factor.
Interesting application of statistics.
You top post for the benefit of all the windows machines that aren't
connected to the internet or where the users don't use usenet?
Next year all the top posters will be posting in Mandarin.
--
Michael.
Brothermark
>> Times change and so do peoples' requirements and preferences.
>
> No, just there are more and more newbies who don't understand the
> concept of proper citing, who never care about manners and the way how
> to make a discussion in usenet readable and understandable.
Yup yup
Brothermark
> That it's not true for you doesn't mean that it is not true, and that
> you think it is born of ignorance simply means you haven't yet applied
> enough effort to understanding the alternative.
No it means I have an understanding of the growth of Usenet. When the
internet suddenly made it's way into everyone's homes, the numbers of
newbies exploded and none of them knew the unwritten rules of posting.
That's all.
Tom Shaw
TS
"Thomas F. Unke" <th...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:HoHss...@news.online.de...
> mou <bruce_fultonb...@yahoo.com> writes:
>
> >
> >Some people just
> refuse to learn anything - we probably have to live with that.
>
>
Tom Shaw
TSnews:bpad34$1mme7j$1...@ID-132564.news.uni-berlin.de...
El Kabong
Fer chrissakes post about Pianos of you want to rant about Netiquete go rant
in a different group...
Surely it doesn't matter if you top or bottom post who the hell cares..
What we in this group are interested in is P I A N O S
Brothermark
> Then you agree that the bottom poster who originally intruded into
> this thread by telling someone they shouldn't be top posting should
> have kept his mouth shut. I see we are in agreement.
Phew, you got out of that one very cleverly I thought :)