[CAUT] Sacrifice (was tuners- technology)

[Fred Sturm]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
On 3/2/05 8:31 AM, "Wimblees@aol.com" <Wimblees@aol.com> wrote:

>> No matter how hard I try, I have never been able to get a good sounding
>> unison from just having the lights stand still. (SATIII).

    Really =B3never?=B2 There can certainly be problems interpreting the SAT=B9s
display, and when a string produces a =B3jumpy=B2 display, yes, it can be a
problem tuning a really clean unison using the display alone. According to
Jim Coleman, the =B3jumpiness=B2 is generally a result of a feature of SAT: the
ability to hear and display two pitches of a =B3falsely beating=B2 string
simultaneously.=20
    Going on the assumption that this was true, my approach when using an
SAT, and when I ran into a problem unison or string, was to experiment with
positioning the machine, finding a placement and angle that would produce a
relatively clean display. Usually there would be two such positions, each
producing a different display (ie, one saying sharp, the other flat). Tunin=
g
a clean unison was a matter of choosing the =B3better=B2 pitch/display (by
experimenting). In practice, this was not as tiresome or time-consuming as
it sounds.
    I find that the RCT (which I currently use) seems not to have this
problem, at least to the same degree. Sometimes I do need to move the mike
closer, but the display isn=B9t usually ambiguous. At any rate, I find that i=
t
is easier to interpret, using all three visual feedback elements (spin,
growing, blushing). My typical concert tuning (no pitch change needed)
consists of playing each unison in turn, and when I hear one that is a bit
off, reading each string individually and adjusting accordingly. I have not
found a bit of problem relying on the display to produce unisons that are a=
s
perfect as any I have ever heard.
    I did the same with SAT, and the same was true except that there might
be more adjustment of the position of the machine. For instance, all string=
s
could read =B3perfect=B2 but I still heard the unison as off. I would move the
machine until I could get a different display on one or more stings, then
hone in on getting that display to stop. And, yes, although it sounds more
cumbersome than =B3just tuning the danged unison by ear,=B2 I found it
time-saving. Why? Because if the machine is having trouble hearing, so will
I. And when using the machine, I am able to do a smaller pitch move and be
certain of just exactly what I have done and how stable it is, while aurall=
y
it takes more time and effort to be certain of small moves and their
stability.
Regards,
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico


---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/7a/4f/e8/31/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--