[CAUT] Sacrifice (was tuners- technology)

[David Love]

I find that the machines are nice for tuning unisons in the top octave.


David Love
davidlovepianos@comcast.net 

-----Original Message-----
From: caut-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces@ptg.org] On Behalf Of
Fred Sturm
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 6:12 AM
To: College and University Technicians
Subject: Re: [CAUT] Sacrifice (was tuners- technology)

On 3/1/05 9:11 PM, "Don" <pianotuna@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Let's not forget that the lowly unison apparently defeats *all* the
EDT's
> (that I have tried).
Hi Don,
    Interesting statement. I can see where you would get that opinion:
often, tuning each string of a unison by "stopping the lights" (whatever
the
display is) _will_ result in a less than perfect unison. Yet I find that
if
I examine more closely, using either SAT or RCT (haven't used any other
ETD's), I will find that maybe I was hasty in deciding I had actually
"stopped the lights." Bottom line is that I find I can tune far, far
cleaner
unisons using the device than not. And far more solid.
    It's just a tool. It's like a finely graded ruler. It takes great
care
to obtain a good, precise cut on a piece of wood using a precise rule.
Just
having the ruler that is divided by 32nds instead of 16ths doesn't make
you
a better measurer.
    With regard to your statement that "Inharmonicity varies with
humidity
and the barometric pressure," and the general notion that a piano might
be
different every time you approach it, I can see some evidence for that
point
of view. OTOH, from a practical point of view, I have found that I can
use
stored tunings repeatedly for same model pianos, and find no perceptible
difference in the quality of the tuning. With the caveat that the stored
tuning has been vetted a bit, that more than one reading has been made
on a
given model of piano, and that wildly different readings have been
discarded.
    My conclusion has been that those occasional outlandishly different
readings are a result of "para-harmonicity," which I would define as
apparent production of partials that are fairly far out of line. I think
there are probably many factors that lead to these readings, and that
one of
them must be sympathetic vibrations from other strings on the piano
(even
though damped). Together, perhaps, with pitches generated by the
soundboard
assembly itself (the whole works, including bridges and strings). This
is
the only explanation that makes sense to me for occasional wild
differences
between readings taken before and after tuning a piano (once through),
especially when the piano was not that far off pitch.
    There are mysteries out there, and ETD's are by no means infallible.
But
they are a wonderful tool to have in the arsenal. I would, like you,
never
be without one.
Regards,
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico

_______________________________________________
caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives