RCT vs SAT (warning, long)

[Frank Weston]

In comparisons of VTDs on this list, RCT and SAT are invariably mentioned. 
Why not TuneLab?  In particular, why not TuneLab because it costs a
fraction of RCT or SAT assuming the user owns a PC laptop.  I am seeing
Toshiba models advertised new now for $699 that are fully capable of
running TuneLab, which would make TuneLab a less expensive choice, even if
a computer had to be purchased.  I have used Jim's discussion below to
insert some comments about TuneLab.  I don't sell, or profit from the sale
of TuneLab.

----------
> From: Jim Coleman, Sr. <pianotoo@IMAP2.ASU.EDU>
> To: Kent Swafford <kswafford@earthlink.net>
> Cc: pianotech list <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Subject: RCT vs SAT (warning, long)
> Date: Sunday, May 31, 1998 3:17 AM
> 
> Hi Kent:
> 
> I have deliberately avoided getting into a public battle of RCT vs SAT.
> When you say that the computer gives RCT a definite performance
advantage,
> I have to disagree with your opinion. The RCT which I have is a 2300c.
> Although I have been more fortunate than others, I have not had to send
> mine back to Apple for service. However, the number of times it has let
> me down on the job in 1 1/2 years is many more times than the SAT or the
> SOT has let me down in some 15 years.  I do not call that performance
> advantage. Fortunately I can still tune aurally. Just yesterday after
> taking the trouble to sample 5 A's on the piano, the moment I clicked on
> the Chameleon to calculate the tuning from those samples, the machine
died
> on me. I finally ended up selecting a similar piano in memory to tune by.
> I would prefer to have used a custom tuning for that particular piano. I
> have never lost a calculated tuning with the SAT.

I have used TL for two years without one failure or problem.  I have never
lost a tuning or had the machine die.  Mostly these are features of
Toshiba, not TL.
 
> 
> It only takes 1 minute to calculate a custom tuning with the SAT. With
RCT
> it takes 1 minute 46 seconds to calculate a standard OTS tuning with
> default selections already made and the computer already on and warmed 
> up. I started with the selection of the Chameleon and ended with the
> appearance of the spreadsheet of the complete tuning. Would you call that
> performance advantage? If you added the extra time for a cold boot up, 
> starting the program, etc., it could easily go over 4 minutes.
Performance?
> If you add in the number of times you have to remeasure because of noise
> factors, null points etc. it could be much worse.

The time it takes to calculate a custom tuning with TL depends on the
quality of the tuning you wish to do.  TL gives the option of taking as
many or as few measurements as the user desires and feels necessary.  The
graphic display in TL shows the user exactly what assumptions are being
made, and believe me, if only 3-6 measurements are taken, a lot of
assumptions are made courtesy of the software in any VTD.  In the bass
section particularly, you can be assured that most of these assumptions are
wrong.  Starting from cold with TL, the time to develop a tuning consists
of computer warm-up time (zero, if you use your computer as a scheduler,
database and street atlas, and keep it running in the car from job to job),
time to take measurements (same as SAT and RCT if you elect to do only a
few measurements), time to calculate a tuning using the graphic editor
(from 30 seconds to a half hour depending on the number of measurements and
quality of tuning desired).

> 
> It takes me longer to tune with accuracy with the RCT than it does with
the
> SAT. The SAT has only one display mode and it relates to beats. Two beats
> per each rotation of the LEDs. I waste more time with the RCT in trying
to
> decide when the Spinner pattern is stopped and whether it is sharp or
flat.
> Part of this can be blamed upon the transient nature of piano tones. This
> is obvious when you can't get the full blush to stay on for more than a
> brief moment without a lot of fussing around. At the number 2 Spinner
speed,
> in the Cents measuring mode the full blush indicates .1 cent accuracy.
The
> Spinner is too jumpy to suit me at that default speed. I prefer the Hertz
> mode or measurement because it relates more to what we hear and the 
> spinner is less jumpy. At the default speed of 2 in Hz mode, the full
blush
> is indicative of .4 cent accuracy. At least at this speed, you can tune
> faster with confidence because it is a little easier to make your
judgments
> as to sharp and flat. But it is still easier for me to make those
judgments
> with the SAT, especially when utilizing the 4 LED stopping method
combined
> with making the pitch judgments consistently in regard to the time
portion
> of the decision. A technique of hitting the key hard and immediately
playing
> softly enables better accuracy on both machines because the curve of the 
> frequency change is smoother with a soft key blow. When one can tune with
> the SAT to hold 4 LEDs on for just two or three seconds, the accuracy I
> perceive is better than trying to hold a full blush on the RCT with a 
> similar spinner speed. Sure, it's possible to hold a longer full blush
with
> a much slower spinner speed, but then where is the accuracy that is
boasted?

One of the strongest features of TL is the tuning display(s).  The strobe
style display is intuitive and stable.  The phase display is a tremendous
tool for tuning the high treble, and makes it possible to view each string
in a unison individually in the top two octaves without muting.  Tuning the
top octaves without muting is entirely possible, and a big time saver,
particularly on uprights.

> 
> The RCT has some neat features also. It has automatic note switching. 

So does TL.  Note switching can be limited to adjacent notes, or expanded
to switch to any note sounded.

> The SAT III also has it. The RCT has the ability to change an equal
tempered
> tuning into an historical tuning. The SAT III also has that (up to 14
> different kinds). 

TL has the ability to store an unlimited number of historical temperaments.
 Entering a historical temperament is as easy as typing in the offsets from
ET as published in any number of places.

The RCT has temperament sequencing so that you can tune 
> in the order of your favorite Temperament. The SAT has a collection of up

> to 4 different temperament orders which can be utilized.

Temperaments can be named and stored in any order, called up in any order,
just like opening a file in Windows.

 Both machines
> have an infinite number of ways to stretch a tuning scale according to
one's
> preference. The SAT III is smaller, easier to handle. 

The graphic editor and the numerical editor give TL a big advantage in this
area.  TL can measure, store and display inharmonicity on each and every
note and partials up to the 12th if desired.  The graphic editor makes it
quick and easy to select any set of partials for any set of notes and
develop a stretch curve to suit.  You have to see it to fully appreciate
it.    

The SAT battery is
> a very definite advantage, I do not even have to carry a bulky charger.
When
> after a week or two when I get the first indication that the battery is 
> getting low, I can still tune another piano or two. The SAT III has a 
> battery power indicator which shows ahead of time when you're getting
lower.
> The RCT also does, but you don't have much time left until you must go
get
> the charger (don't leave home without it)

I just plug my Toshiba into the wall.  There is no external charger, and
the cord is extremely long.  If I can't easily find a socket, I have more
than enough battery to tune two pianos in a row.  Battery is really not an
issue.

> 
> There are definite advantages to having a computer with you on the job. 
> There
> are small organizers which are cheap and take care of most of those
things
> for which you may need a computer on the job. The thing that still
> bothers me is that I have tied up over $4000 in my RCT and I still don't 
> have everything I would like to have on it for other purposes. The
Operating
> system has been upgraded 4 times since I bought mine. I'm still 2 systems
> behind the latest version 8.1. I could use a modem, I could use a CD
drive

You can get a Toshiba with a modem, CD drive, soundcard, etc for less than
$1000.  You do have to run Windows and admit that Apple is handicapped by
lack of decent software.  The Apple vs. PC argument is one I don't want to
get into, but my observation is that in the real world where price,
reliability, stability, functionality, and choice of software do matter, PC
based laptops are the only sensible choice. (flame shields up)
 
> (I have to borrow one now to load any of the newer software. Where does
it
> end? I just want to tune pianos, basically. I don't really need a
computer
> to tune pianos. Besides, I have a good IBM type at home.

> I did buy a DOS emulator program so that I can run my business software
on
> the MAC. It doesn't run windows '95. Where does one stop with all this 
> stuff. I just want to tune pianos easier and better. I know, I said that 
> before.

Why not just get a PC in the first place?  The TL software is free for
trial from Bob Scott's webpage.  You can try it on your desktop.

Frank Weston