TubeNet

...

I'd like to echo Norm's recommendation. Norm had the stated mouthpiece scanned by Kanstul for precise duplication, and I have since ordered a copy for myself. The work Jim did looks flawless and the mouthpiece is a wonderful match for my York CC.

...

enigma wrote:

Norm Pearson wrote:
The cost was $50 for a mouthpiece that I supplied. I also had him change the rims on a 30C and 30F.


Norm Pearson

Just to clarify. That $50 means you sent your Laskey to Mr New who then cut off the rim, soldered a blank on, turned it to C4 dimensions and then plated it??
If so that seems to represent astonishing value!?

I gave Jim New my mouthpiece and he charged $50 for the alteration (plating and all) That is a great value. I used to do custom mouthpiece work and I wouldn't do it for that price. FWIW

Jim charged me $125 for a duplicate of Norm's mouthpiece.

What speaks the most about Norm Pearson's post is the time which he originally posted. According to my computer, it says that Mr. Pearson posted his message at 8:58 AM! That's 6:58 AM in Los Angeles! I can only conclude that Norm was so excited about his new mouthpiece that he either could not sleep all night OR it was the first thing that went through his mind when he woke up that morning!

Seriously, for $50, I can not get a mechanic to diagnose a problem with my car or take my dog to the vet to get his shots. To spend $50 to achieve a beautiful sound is a steal.

-Matt Good

...

I don't get it? Why drag up an ancient thread to then erase it?

Puzzled...

Actually, Mr. Pearson is just being a responsible poster - he posted a price that was paid several years ago, which may even have been a "sweetheart" deal by the vendor, and now doesn't want the vendor to have to go through the hassle of answering " why $$ now, and only $ then?" from anyone else. The price paid was great, and if you need this kind of work, you'll need to explore the current pricing and availability. More importantly, we know that the service and work was well done. Just like you wouldn't want to negotiate a price for an instrument on the open forum, this past pricing could be abused.

TubaSailor wrote:Actually, Mr. Pearson is just being a responsible poster - he posted a price that was paid several years ago, which may even have been a "sweetheart" deal by the vendor, and now doesn't want the vendor to have to go through the hassle of answering " why $$ now, and only $ then?" from anyone else.

Had he done it a year or two after the fact, the explanation might make sense; however, if consideration for the vendor were indeed his motive, it does rather beg the question of why it took him nearly six years (SIX YEARS!) and 480-some pages/17000 threads to get around to it--especially since the post naming the vendor and the price are still there--rather than doing so earlier, which, presumably would have spared the vendor a steady barrage of "why $$ now, and only $ then?" questions over the past 4-5 years.

PGYM,

There are many reasons people do what they do. I'm not exactly certain why Mr. Pearson owes you an explanation. Perhaps you will take the opportunity to make that clear in your next post.

Why, for example, would an artist have in their contract a rider stating the presenting organization is obligated to provide them with 4 16.9 oz bottles of Evian at precisely 45 degrees?

Because at some earlier point in their career, they were told water would be available backstage. What they found, however, was a rusted water fountain with barely a trickle emanating from its rusted spout with an odor so putrid the elephant enclosure at the Central Park Zoo would have been an upgrade. So the next time, they felt they had to specify bottled water be available. And it was. They filled a milk jug with the water from the fountain. The next time, the performer specified Evian (it just happened to be her favorite). And Evian was provided, but it had been left in someone's car on a 101 degree day until 15 minutes before the performance started. So the next time, she asked for it to be chilled. And it was. In fact, it was frozen. And on it went, until she finally said, "4 16.9 oz bottles of Evian at 45 degrees."

Why did Mr. Pearson pull up the old post? Because it became necessary. At some point, should I be required to guess, someone used that post against the person providing the service, who may, most respectfully, have asked Mr. Pearson if he wouldn't mind terribly removing the post.

Fundamentally, however, it was necessary, and so it was done, and that's really all you need to know.

Mitch wrote:There are many reasons people do what they do. I'm not exactly certain why Mr. Pearson owes you an explanation.

If you had bothered to read what I wrote, rather than simply reacting in a knee-jerk manner to what you ASSUMED—wrongly—that I wrote, you would have comprehended that I neither asked for nor demanded an explanation from Mr. Pearson, but simply observed that Mr. Pearson's action does beg the question of why now, rather than at some earlier point; particularly since editing one's own post, even a stale post in an active thread, cycles the thread to the front page.

Mitch wrote:Why did Mr. Pearson pull up the old post? Because it became necessary. At some point, should I be required to guess, someone used that post against the person providing the service, who may, most respectfully, have asked Mr. Pearson if he wouldn't mind terribly removing the post.

Fundamentally, however, it was necessary, and so it was done, and that's really all you need to know.

Since, as you admit, you are GUESSING as to the circumstances that led Mr. Pearson to pull his post, I submit that, unless you are materially misrepresenting your involvement as a party to the circumstances that "made it necessary" by presenting what you know to be fact as a "guess," absent confirmation of your "guess" by Mr. Pearson, your "explanation" is nothing more than fairy dust and star shine.

Furthermore, even should Mr. Pearson deign to enlighten us as to the reason, it still begs the question of why, if—as TubaSailor proposes—his motive was simply to "be a responsible poster," he allowed SIX YEARS to lapse before "acting responsibly," as well as the further question of why he edited all his posts EXCEPT the one identifying the vendor by name and the price of the alteration—which, if your hypothesis is correct, means that he did NOT do as the person providing the service requested.

Finally, since the price quoted by Mr. Pearson was posted by the customer, not by the vendor, and was quoted in relation to work contracted between Mr. Pearson and the vendor, the vendor is under no obligation, either legal or moral, to offer or to honor that price to ANY other potential customer, even on the same day, much less six years after the fact.