On 12/31/17 2:24 PM, Clare Snyder wrote:
On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 13:27:59 -0600, -MIKE-
wrote:

On 12/31/17 1:13 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
Bill wrote:

As I indicated in my post, a 100% accurate level would be a
PITA.

100% literally would be impossible but 100% practically speaking
- why would that be a PITA? Because nothing would ever satisfy
it?

Well, if so, a ruler for example - I always considered that 100%
accurate practically speaking but that hasn't stopped anyone
from using it as far as I know?


The point he's making is that close enough is close enough for most
uses of a 2 or 4ft level. If you need more accurate, you go to a 6
or 8ft level.

A 6 or 8 foot level is not necessarily more accurate than a 24 inch
level - and in fact there are 4 inch or 6 inch levels that are MORE
accurate than the runof the mill 4 or 6 foot level

I didn't say it was, nor imply it.
You get a more accurate reading per the application by using the longer
level.
It also helps you find a more accurate reading because it bridges the
bow in a stud farther than a 4footer.
As an example, my 6' level is less accurate than my 4' level, but in the
above application, it give me a more accurate reading, in context.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com