No... it is not unreasonable. I in fact aggree that tuning forks should be accurate. My beef is that the requirement for this has no buisness being part of the exam in its present form. It takes too much time to and effort to arrange examinations for such a detail to be able to cause "failure" at the outset of the test. It further is a unneccary stress on the examinee. If this is something the PTG wants to insure, there are better and easier and much cheaper ways of taking care of the issue. The tuning exam itself is a different and seperate thing. If not, the insistance to establish pitch aurally does not make sense. Richard Brekne I.C.P.T.G. N.P.T.F. Bergen, Norway Kent Swafford wrote: > Richard Brekne wrote: > > >Sounds too me like some change in the test got implemented cause folks > >got the feeling they needed to do something, anything, but something. > > I've explained what the rules are and how I understand them to have come > about. You are under no obligation to agree. As a matter of fact you are > welcome to call for a return to measuring A4 in relation to the > examinee's pitch source. > > However, the current procedure has been in effect for quite some years > now and appears to be working well. The rules encourage tuners to take > the responsibility for the accuracy of their pitch sources, a > responsibility that does not appear to be technologically burdensome. > > :) Is it really too much to expect a tuner to be able to tune a $3 fork > in order to better tune a $75k concert grand piano? > > > Kent
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC