Again, fair enough. A quick repeat and I'll drop it.
 
If you want these things fine. But do NOT call the builder at 10:00 p.m. to
complain about the repetition or the leaky dampers. Accept them with
understanding and gratitude as an added part of what you call a necessary
compromise. It is the fault of mechanics and the real world, not of the
builders or a bunch of "idealists," that the transposers do not work
perfectly. If players accept that gracefully, then there is no harm done on
any side.
 
owen
 
>I'm sorry but some of your responses are putting me on the verge of a rant
>myself, something which I try not to indulge in too often. Idealism is all
>very well--I admit to having aspirations to someday playing only with period
>instruments, but bucks are bucks and there are so few jobs for harpsichordists
>that I suspect that day may be far off, if it ever arrives. I have toyed with
>the idea of, when my new instrument is ready, leaving the Gough at 440 and
>making it my modern instrument harpsichord (poor dear), but, since it is small
>enough to fit into a hatchback, it is very likely that it will still have to
>serve me for period gigs outside of the city. As for being able to borrow
>harpsichords, some people seem to think, Don Simons's pointed remark on the
>subject notwithstanding, that there are just scores of them floating around,
>begging to be borrowed!
>As far as institutions go, the best thing would be to have two harpsichords,
>one at modern and one at low pitch, but these days you are lucky if your
>college even has one!
>Forgive these ravings, there are just a few things I feel absolutely adamant
>about, and this is one of them!
>
>Rebecca