aural/electronic tuning and PTG rules

John Musselwhite john@musselwhite.com
Wed, 17 Apr 2002 10:42:09 -0600


At 07:57 PM 16/04/02 -0400, Charles wrote:

>As for the rule, I understand the point of keeping people from creating
>their own levels of superiority, but I think that rule raised some freedom
>of speach issues.

If I recall the original rule read something like "Members shall not 
advertise that their method of tuning is superior to others."  I don't 
remember it mentioning ETAs at all. It was in effect when I joined the 
Guild along with a number of other good things that ultimately went by the 
wayside.

The intent had nothing to do with free speech, but rather it was to prevent 
people from advertising that they were better tuners than their peers for 
any reason. That's merely professional courtesy anyway.


>Now, as for what's next... Will someone be prohibited from saying, "WT is
>better than ET?" Sorry, I couldn't resist... :)

The day that happens I'll return my membership card. Temperaments are 
another tool we can use to make pianos sound better. I think we all have an 
obligation to understand how that tool is used, even if we don't use it 
ourselves.

Incidentally, I've been keeping the Moore Representative Victorian on the 
64 note spinet beside my desk here and it definitely sounds better than it 
does when I try to force it into something resembling ET.  I'm curious 
about whether having just two strings per note on a short-scale piano lends 
itself more towards HTs rather than ET.  Any comments?

Anyway, I hope that clarifies this a little. I'm sure one of the elder 
statespeople will correct me if I'm wrong about the advertising rule.

                 John




This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC