RCT

[Roger Jolly]

Hi Paul,
              I really don't have a straight answer for you, and maybe
there isn't one.
Given the inconsistencies, and the number of variables, all I can say is
that I tend to rely on RCT for the basic tuning, then tweek for satisfaction.
However more tweeking is done via regulation and voicing. If we are wishing
for a simple answer to a complex problem, I'm afraid we will be disappointed.
The good thing about ET's, they have raised the high bar for many of us,
because we search for perfection.  Will we get there? I doubt it.
Just my take on it.
Roger



At 11:05 PM 19/09/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Roger Jolly wrote:
>> 
>>   I am always in awe with the top aural tuners, in the way they compensate
>> for poor scaling, bad regulation and voicing. With the grands that I
>> regularly service, I take a more holistic approach, minor reg and voicing
>> with every tuning, and charge accordingly.
>> 
>> Roger
>
>Roger,
>
>All I am saying is that in some respects my aural tunings were better
>than my RCT tunings and in some respects the RCT tunings are better. 
>The aural tunings seem to be more sensitive to the idiosyncracies of the
>instrument while RCT seems to achieve greater consistency thoughout.  My
>question is, how can I make decisions about how to select and modify
>RCT's customization features to replicate some of the strengths of my
>aural tunings for a particular piano?
>
>Paul
> 
Roger Jolly
BaldwinYamaha Piano Centre
Saskatoon and Regina
Saskatchewan, Canada.
306-665-0213
Fax 652-0505