> Back to how all this affects the orgional thrust of this discussion,,, the > Verituner... it would seem to me that if one could claim with complete > validity that the use of the Sat with no help from experience ears to set a > tuning on a piano is indecernable from an ear tuning of highest quality,,, Boy, unless I am missing something BIG, no one has, or no one in their right mind would, make that claim. Such thinking is totally incorrect. (Hey, am I sticking my neck out, or what? :-) It would theoretically be possible IF the piano were scaled with inharmonicity of the targeted partials running right along the same smooth curve that the SAT might calculate - but that will not happen in practice - or at least don't hold your breath. > then any improvement on the Sat at all would be moot to begin with. It would be, if the above claim were reasonable. But it is not. > How then > is is possible that so many (so far without expection of those who have spoken > here) can report such an improvement ? Regarding the Verituner, it samples each and every note tuned, and measures numerous partials on each note. The Verituner then makes a complex series of comprimizes among all these data to reportedly come up with a very accurate tuning, one that reportedly rivals, or comes close to, or whatever, a very good aural tuning. The SAT measures the inharmonicity between two partials on each of three notes. If you choose to not modify that calculated tuning with aural checks, that is all you get. But keep in mind there are many ways to use the SAT. First of all, it is highly beneficial to modify calculated tunings with the results of aural checks guiding you. You can also use it in a manual manner where you never even calculate a tuning - you use it to measure and match (or whatever) partials of your choice, in the same manner as the aural-only tuner does. I think just about anyone would agree that great tunings produced by a technician using a SAT is the result of either of two things: 1) A lot of luck AND a good piano; or 2) a significant amount (and maybe a lot) of aural input. Terry Farrell ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Brekne" <rbrekne@broadpark.no> To: <pianotech@ptg.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 5:39 PM Subject: Re: ETD unisons > Hi Jim. > > And let me start off by saying what a real pleasure I had meeting and talking > with you in Reno. You were one of the very few I had time to chat with being > tucked away up in the exams room the whole convention. I coulda done lots > worse :) We had fun helping that dutch fellow prepare didnt we ? > > Anyways...what I want to know on this subject matter is if you can honestly > say, hand on heart that your tuning in that tuneoff with Virgil way back when > would have been the same had you been totally ear-cuffed to put it that way. > If you had simply not been able to hear period, would your tuning have been > the same ? Also, then what criteria was used to evaluate these two tunings ? > And what qualifiers are necessary for (if it was so) the experiment to work > again ? An experienced ear tuner ?? a well scaled grand (whatever that really > is) ?? Anything else ? > > I suppose given all I have learned about these matters this past three years > is going to make me a skeptic regardless, as I said in my last post. We all > know that evenly spacing any given partial will result in all others being to > some degree or not uneven. That in itself should be enough tho there is more > to point at for sure. > > Now dont anyone get me wrong.. I am not in opposition to the use of ETD's... > quite the opposite and that should be clear to anyone who has read all what I > have had to say on the matter. I have improved vastly because of my experience > with them and continue to do so. But I see no reason to overstate their value > either. > > In stating I belive its possible to learn to out tune a machine there are no > value judgements placed on any tuning method that should disturb anyone. That > is unless one finds it disturbing to encourage a continuing learning process. > > Back to how all this affects the orgional thrust of this discussion,,, the > Verituner... it would seem to me that if one could claim with complete > validity that the use of the Sat with no help from experience ears to set a > tuning on a piano is indecernable from an ear tuning of highest quality,,, > then any improvement on the Sat at all would be moot to begin with. How then > is is possible that so many (so far without expection of those who have spoken > here) can report such an improvement ? > > I see too many loose threads hanging, to be convinced. Sigh.. I suppose I will > remain so (for whatever it is worth) until I get the chance to run a blind > test myself and see. > > My best to you Jim. > RicB > > "Jim Coleman, Sr." wrote: > > > Hi Richard: > > > > Actually I did tune unisons with the machine in the Tuneoff with Virgil > > Smith. However, I recommend that ETD users always keep their ears turned > > on. It is faster to tune unisons by ear, If one is using firm blows, I > > think better accuracy can be obtained in the mid-range because we can > > then be listening to high partials during the unison tuning and thereby > > get better accuracy quicker. Keeping ears turned on is also good quality > > control for ETD users in case a slight visual error is made. Likewise, > > the use of an ETD is good quality control for an aural tuning. Many > > former > > aural tuners testify that their tuning has improved since the use of ETDs. > > It is certainly the case with me. I think it is also true that for those > > who have learned to tune both ways, it is fun to tune aurally again. It's > > just more work. I like to use "the best of both worlds." > > > > Incidentally, it is not a good idea to tune Bass unisons with machine > > only. The two strings are seldom well matched, making perfect unisons > > impossible either aurally or electronically. Compromise is achieved > > quicker aurally. > > > > Jim Coleman, Sr. > > -- > Richard Brekne > RPT, N.P.T.F. > Bergen, Norway > mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no > >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC