etd for inharmonicity

[Jason Kanter]

what do I really want the machine for, you ask. I am not at all interested
in saving time on a pitch raise. I'm fascinated by the math of the string
physics, and I know that there is a degree of guesswork in aural tuning,
caused by inharmonicity, that the machine can help with. Aurally, I am often
uncertain which partial to use for a given octave, and even if I set the
temperament with beautifully progressing thirds and sixths, there is usually
a discontinuity in thirds and sixths progressing below the temperament
octave. So i look forward to using the machine to refine my accuracy.

Sheldon was indeed a very fast aural tuner. he regularly scheduled six
tunings a day. the first maxim he gave me as his apprentice was that there
is no conflict between speed and accuracy. he would tune the whole piano
once just to get all the tensions approximately right, then tune again to
get each note right.


|| ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || |||
 jason kanter * piano tuning * piano teaching
bellevue, wa * 425 562 4127 * cell 425 831 1561
orcas island * 360 376 2799
|| ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || |||

 
> From: "Richard Moody" <remoody@midstatesd.net>
> Reply-To: pianotech@ptg.org
> Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 00:32:25 -0600
> To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Subject: Re: etd for inharmonicity
> 
> Tune aurally---after all what do you really want the machine for?  To save
> 10 minutes on a pitch raise?   I agree about setting the strings.  I feel
> comfortable doing that aurally.  That takes time and I don't see how
> machines can save time in setting the strings.  But how could I as an aural
> tuner?
> I had the honor of substitute tuning behind Sheldon at his request in
> the late 80's.    Just the regular touchups on pianos he tuned once or
> twice a week.  Very solid tunings.  Much more time spent in aural checks
> than actual tuning.  I wondered how an ETD was a "tool" in this situation
> because you would have to set it up, have it look at every note, then tune
> whatever it said, and then go back and do the aural checks, which was where
> I was starting to begin with.
> The machines have seemed "chromatic" as you say and I have never gotten
> the same sense of setting pins as aural in the few times I have tried out
> machines.   They may be a little faster in setting temperament but I didn't
> feel secure in setting the pins.  Or if I felt I set them the same with the
> machine as I did aurally, I lost time.  Perhaps with practice I could have
> gotten better, but I was more comfortable on the aural side and felt the
> practice would be better spent there.
> I assumed Sheldon was an aural tuner but I never saw him tuning.  I met
> him twice at his shop briefly.  Once was to coach me on tying a bass string
> in a C7 for a concert at Greek Theater.  Lucky me, he was in his shop that
> Sat afternoon.  btw, the knot held---good teacher.     =-=ric
> 
> > 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jason Kanter <jkanter@rollingball.com>
> To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Cc: Jason Kanter <jkanter@rollingball.com>
> Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 4:44 PM
> Subject: etd for inharmonicity
> 
> 
> | . i apprenticed to
> | Sheldon Smith in 1970, passed the craftsman exam in 1971
> 
> | ... a secondary question; from my single use of tunelab, i would predict
> | that the machine encourages you to tune chromatically right through a
> | section and not to 'stop and smell the intervals' as a good aural tuner
> is
> | always doing. after all if you simply tune to the machine, chromatically,
> | what you end up with is a pointillist set of sound dots and you may not
> be
> | setting strings properly nor listening to the _musical_ sound of the
> piano.
> | am i right/ and if so, how do you counter this tendency to tune
> | chromatically/ [forgive my computer's errant shift key]
> |
> | thanks
> |
> |  jason kanter
>