Couldn't you guys who aren't interested in this discussion make a filter on your mailing clients (be it on webmail like Gmail or your offline clients like Outlook and Thunderbird) so that discussions in these topics are automatically archived, deleted or something else?
It's a simple command line, it would only take you a couple of minutes. And after that, no message related to this would bother you again. There was already discussion about reviving the builders list, but most people decided they preferred to do it on this one. I myself have a good luthier-made instrument and do not have any interest in building myself one in any foreseeable time, but I do appreciate the discussion. A discussion group is based on COMPROMISE, many times there will be topics that will not interest all its members. That is only natural. We all have to learn to live with it and minimize whatever inconvenience it might bring about every once in a while. Filters are the way to go when that happens. Augusto On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 8:04 AM, JULIE BARKER <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello All > I agree with Ulrich about restricting the gurdy building topic to a > dedicated luthier / builder / DIY list. > As it happens I find some of the stuff interesting, even though I have no > intention of making a gurdy; however, it is a topic that makes for very, > very, VERY long posts. Quite frankly I do not have the time to read them > all, even the act of deleting them takes up a lot of time that could be > spent actually playing my instruments, which were incidently made by French > luthiers who dedicated their whole lives to perfecting their craft without > the aid of the internet. > Sorry to sound like a grumpy-old-gurdyman but good luck with your gurdy > building anyway. > > Philip G Martin aka Drohne > > --- On *Thu, 3/11/11, Ulrich Joosten <[email protected]>* wrote: > > > From: Ulrich Joosten <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [HG-new] Specifications for proposed 'builder gurdy' - part > 1, start with one important dimension > To: [email protected] > Date: Thursday, 3 November, 2011, 6:42 > > Dear list, > > didn't someone propose tho discuss this topic on a special luthier list ? > > For me this discussion is quite non-interesting. sorry, I do not want to > offend anybody. I have my opinion on hurry-gurdies built by amateurs. I did > built one some 30 years ago, starting from a building kit which was quite > expensive: about 800 German marks at that time. I survived the building > somehow. But this instrument sounded horrible, it was extremely hard to > handle, very unstable in tuning, too much string pressure, too much this > and too less that. In the past 35 years a lot of qualified instrument > makers worked hard to develop modern instruments that really SOUND like a > "real instrument" - in fact they worked hard to make this instrument no > longer suffering from it's bad image since the Praetorius days. I hate the > idea of some enthusiastic amateurs proudly presenting their newly tinkered > gurdy with a horrible sound… Audiences may get a total wrong impression of > what the instrument today is able to sound and play. Pardon my, but my > opinion! > > I agree to most of the arguments spread (if it is possible or not and how > it could be done) and I do not want to be the dog in the manger, but please > keep this topic off this list here. > > Best regards, > Ulrich > > Von: Kazimierz Verkmastare > <[email protected]<http://uk.mc864.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > > > Antworten an: > <[email protected]<http://uk.mc864.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > > > Datum: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 20:44:34 -0500 > An: > <[email protected]<http://uk.mc864.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > > > Betreff: [HG-new] Specifications for proposed 'builder gurdy' - part 1, > start with one important dimension > > I kind of like the idea of developing the plans for such a creature > around the best practices as agreed upon by those who know, specifically > keeping in mind the limitations of most beginner luthier's shop setup. > Designing for the beginning builder without being condescending, if that > is possible. If we are to truly gain the kind of understanding of the > instrument that makes it really worthwhile to build it, then understanding > the design issues is important, and there is no better way to gain this > than actually designing one. > > Besides, a functional plan set can allow those with more experience and > resources to do things like changing the body shape and style, changing the > head type, changing some aspects of the keybox, while staying faithful to > the important dimensions, sizes and angles. > > So if there are some interested in pursuing this flight of fancy, I > suggest that we first decide on a scale length. In my early research, > while I was looking to design my sinphone, I was trying to make things easy > on myself by settling on a good 'normal' string length so that I could > obtain strings relatively easily. After getting a dozen answers, the most > common I received was 345 mm. > > I am not suggesting we use that particular number, but I think we need to > set one important dimension in order to start designing the rest. Any > other suggestions or comments, from builders or players, on what luck they > have had finding strings for certain scale length instruments, and if > anyone has experience with multiple instruments with different scale > lengths, what seems to be the most conducive to playing different styles of > music? > > Just trying to keep up the momentum up. > > Chris > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "hurdygurdy" group. > To post to this group, send email to > [email protected]<http://uk.mc864.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<http://uk.mc864.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/hurdygurdy > > The rules of posting, courtesy, and other list information may be found at > http://hurdygurdy.com/mailinglist/index.htm. To reduce spam, posts from > new subscribers are held pending approval by the webmaster. > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "hurdygurdy" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/hurdygurdy > > The rules of posting, courtesy, and other list information may be found at > http://hurdygurdy.com/mailinglist/index.htm. To reduce spam, posts from > new subscribers are held pending approval by the webmaster. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "hurdygurdy" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/hurdygurdy > > The rules of posting, courtesy, and other list information may be found at > http://hurdygurdy.com/mailinglist/index.htm. To reduce spam, posts from > new subscribers are held pending approval by the webmaster. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hurdygurdy" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hurdygurdy The rules of posting, courtesy, and other list information may be found at http://hurdygurdy.com/mailinglist/index.htm. To reduce spam, posts from new subscribers are held pending approval by the webmaster.
