Welcome Danny, You sound a little like Dave Anderson's separated at birth twin brother, except in the separation you had contact with ETD....;-] If you are scratching your head right now, you wouldn't be the first... David Ilvedson ----- Original message ---------------------------------------- From: Danny L Tassin <tassin@msu.edu> To: College and University Technicians <caut@ptg.org> Received: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 09:55:14 -0500 Subject: [CAUT] Aural-&-Electronic >Jim and all, >Touche' !! Bingo !! Right-On !! Etc., etc... >I feel like everyone is "draggin" this thing too far. I feel like there >should be no -- VS. -- in the description, but Aural--AND--Electronic. >Doctors, Mechanics, Engineers, Lawyers, Contractors, even Electronic >Technicians, etc., etc., etc. -- YOU name it... In "almost" every practise >of all kinds ( now days ), professionals are using "electronic aids." And, >WHY NOT ?? It's God's gift of invention to mankind, so lets use it to >better our performance(s). >I can tell you that here at Michigan State U., Bill Schneider, and myself, >tune virtually everything by ear. Yes, we put in our strip mutes and tune >every piano by ear. There's nearly 200 pianos here. It only makes the piano >sound better. Because each and every piano ever made is as differently as >the finger-prints on each and every person ever born on this earth. Each >piano must have it's own special care and attention in tuning because they >are all inherently different just as we all are as people. That's a given >standard. >However, all people's needs are special, and completely different. That's >why in today's modern world the "electronic age" has helped more people than >you'll ever know. I also believe, as you said so yourself, Jim, that the >ETD's that we own can and has helped more pianos ( especially ones I've >tuned in the past few years of my 20+ years-career ) than I can count. 18 >of those years I tuned everything I touched aurally. The "AID" of the ETD >only sweetened my results in pianos ( as you mentioned in the spinets ) that >I would have problems hearing some of the harmonic beats in the past few >years. But, the ETD's can "hear" those frequencies far better than any one >of us alive will ever hear. It's what they are suppose to do. That's why >they were designed -- to "aid" us into becoming better piano tuners. They >are wonderful for pitch raises, and THEN tune a fine tuning aurally. ( Yes, >Virginia, it'll have to be tuned twice after the pitch raise IF you want it >to be a "stable" tuning...) >As others said, I use mind strictly as an "aid" and NOT a crutch. With all >the generic tunings on these machines marketed today, not one of them will >tune two or more exact models of piano exactly alike. It won't do that. >Just like a PC. It can't "think" like a human until you put "human" >thinking into it. >The same with a piano -- whether a spinet up to a concert 9 foot model. >I think we ( piano technicians of today and tomorrow ) should hold VERY >strong to the principles and practises of tuning our instrument as it's >designed and meant to be tuned -- aurally. Any and all new people (i.e: >Associates, apprentices, technician's aids in shops/schools ) trying to >learn or being taught basic tuning techniques to become a piano tuner, >should NEVER use a ETD as a crutch to start. Here is a case in point. >I have a degree, also, in Engineering and C.A.D. Design. CAD (Computer >Aided Drafting) is electronics "designed" to help a designer/draftsman to >design and draw on the computer engineering plans for constructions in all >areas of engineering. In the "good" schools where Drafting is taught FIRST >on a drafting board before the student is ever allowed to touch a computer, >a draftsmen/designer of this caliper will always be the best person who >knows what they are doing on the "drafting board" if ever a need to go to >one and work has occasion to arise. I know first hand-experience from this >before I ever became a piano technician. >It's just like in piano tuning. It's one of those arts and Craftsmanship's >that require basic-to-advanced HUMAN skills before one ever touches an >electronic device. Air Force Jet Pilots still today train in Cessna's 150s >before they are EVER allowed advancement into a Jet Fighter aircraft. >Jim Ellis, I'm with you, friend. My co-worker, Bill, will agree with you >as well. Right, Bill ?? Right Robert ?? ( wherever you are in Ohio...) >Well, back to the "ole grind" and tuning those "daily" studio pianos. Wim, >all the faculty want their pianos tuned as often as they can get it. In >fact, that's when they are tuned -- as often as we can get to them. Think >about it ... >PS: There is a way to tune a stable piano very stable. It's like being a >magician: The hand has to be quicker than the ear ... We'll talk at K.C. >if you go this summer, Wim. I'll show you. My co-worker, Bill, showed me. >It's not a secret. I'll just have to show you. Maybe we'll do a class one >year at the Nat'l Conv. if asked. Associates REALLY need to learn this. >And, maybe those out there tuning who keep wondering, "how do I keep those >unions from slipping ?? " Magicians will never tell you their tricks. But, >piano technician can't wait to "spill the beans." >Dan Tassin,RPT >Piano Technician >Michigan State Univ. >E.Lansing, MI >tassin@MSU.edu > >> ----------------------Original Message--------------------------- >> From: caut-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces@ptg.org] On Behalf Of >> James Ellis >> Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:07 AM >> To: caut@ptg.org >> Subject: [CAUT] Aural-vs-Electronic >> >> I think the argument about aural-vs-electronic tuning has been run into >> the ground. I think a piano tuner in this day and time should be familiar >> with BOTH. Each one has it's own place in the scheme to things, but I still think some >aural proficiency should be required for whatever title the >> tuner is to be awarded. The tuner can always buy a machine, but he/she >> cannot buy aural skills. Those have to be learned. >> >> In my own work, I sometimes use an ETD as a solution for certain >> situations. Most times, I do it aurally because that's the method I >> learned 60 years ago and the one with which I am most comfortable. But >> if I want to make measurements and see exactly what's going on, the ETD >> does that in ways my ears could not possibly do, and I would not be without it. >> >> I don't have any one set routine that I use in tuning. I have a variety >> of them. If the piano is well scaled, any of them will work. If the >> scaling is crazy, some will work better than others, but none will work really >> well. At my age, I'm not taking any more spinets - only those I have >> already been tuning for years. In some cases, I will tune a temperament >> from F3 to F4. In others, I may tune from A3 to A4, or even from C4 to >> C5 on rare occasions in those spinets with wild inharmonicity. If one >> routine isn't going well, I will switch in mid-stream to another. I know I can't make >those pianos sound good - only better than they did before - and to my ears, they still >sound like "you-know-what". The big will-scaled grands sound fine no matter which >routine I use, and I may extend my >> temperament tests all the way from A2 to A4. >> >> Having said all that, my point is that arguing which tuning is better, >> aural or electronic, is like arguing which is better, a hammer or a >> screwdriver. It depends upon what you are trying to do with it. You >> just might need both in your tool kit these days. >> >> Jim Ellis >> >> _______________________________________________ >> caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives >> > >_______________________________________________ >caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC