self tuning piano????

[David Ilvedson]

Yeah, but Del, you don't like to tune pianos, so this is probably a plus for you!...;-]

David I.



----- Original message ---------------------------------------->
From: Richard Brekne <richard.brekne@grieg.uib.no>
To: PTG <pianotech@ptg.org>
Received: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 20:51:17 +0200
Subject: Re: self tuning piano????

>Del... I think you might benifit from reading Vonneguts Player Piano....for
>that matter Galapagos might be a good one for you too :)  ..... Have a nice
>convention did you ?

>grin

>Cheers

>RicB



> Delwin D Fandrich wrote:

>>You're absolutely right, Wim. This thing can't possibly work. And while
>>we're at it, let's trash a few other ideas that are so far out there that
>>they also can't possibly work: the internal combustion engine comes to
>>mind.
>>All those moving -- metal sliding against metal, what a stupid idea --
>>parts
>>and trying to vaporize liquid gasoline fast enough to burn with enough
>>force
>>to produce power...ridiculous. Not only is the basic idea unworkable, think
>>what it will do to the economy. All the wagon makers, horse farms and
>>stable
>>workers will be out of jobs, not to mention the rig repairers and wagon
>>technicians. Surely the world will be awash in unemployment if the big
>>manufacturers go ahead with these foolish ideas. And I understand there are
>>a couple of fool brothers somewhere who are even working on a way to get
>>one
>>of these engines to power some kind of mechanical contraption they call an
>>aeroplane. This aeroplane thing -- as ungainly and as heavy as it is --
>>they
>>hope to get off the ground and make fly through the air. Now everyone knows
>>just how stupid that idea is. Why that thing is a whole lot heavier than
>>air.
>>
>>Well, I'll not go on. It's clear that we must trash every new idea that
>>comes along in this business. And the sooner the better. After all, the
>>piano business is so robust and thriving just now it would be a terrible
>>shame to do anything that might upset things. It would never do to take an
>>idea with some obvious problems and develop it over time and actually make
>>it work. Like the spelling checker, for example. Does anyone else remember
>>how ungainly and awkward they were when they first became available?
>>Impossible to use! Not to mention buggy, slow, inaccurate, incomplete --
>>really more trouble than they were worth. Besides, if one were ever made to
>>work well, think what it would do to the editing industry. Now they are so
>>simple and efficient they actually can be set up to run in the background
>>and make even pathetic spellers like me look good. And editors -- at least
>>the one to whom I'm married -- are busy correcting bad grammar, typos and
>>awkward sentence structure. (No, she didn't edit this -- all of the
>>grammatical, typos and structural errors are my own.)
>>
>>Have a nice, comfortable and non-challenging day one and all....
>>
>>Del
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: <Wimblees@AOL.COM>
>>To: <Pianotech@ptg.org>
>>Sent: July 01, 2002 1:51 PM
>>Subject: self tuning piano????
>>
>>
>>> In the July Journal is a hillarious article about the self tuning piano.
>>I
>>know this story has been on the list before, but I just want to be sure all
>>of you read it, just for the fun of it. It is absolutley unreal to think
>>that someone could actually justify the invention of this "tool". What is
>>even more discouraging is that someone from the piano industry actually
>>paid
>>this guy to develop and install the system in a real piano.
>>>
>>> Here are a couple of misnomers which lead this guy to think the systme
>>works. He thinks one of the reasons strings go out of tune is because
>>tuning
>>pins slip. To solve this problem, he actually has developed a "string
>>lock",
>>to permantly clamp the strings in place, making tuning pins superflous.
>>Tuning pins and strings do not move. (unles the pin block is bad).
>>>
>>> Another problem with the system is that the piano will be re-tuned
>>repeatedly to a tuning set at the factory. This tuning will be done by a
>>"Story & Clark Master Technician". Oh, I know the kind. The one in the
>>booth
>>at the end of the production line, competing with the noise of the
>>stringing
>>department. I am sure that will be a great tuning. For comparison, it took
>>4
>>CTE level tuner 5 hours to tune a piano at the convention. Do you think
>>there might be a differnce between the two tunings? I wonder if the piano
>>can be reprogrammed? Will Ed be able to do his thing on it?
>>>
>>> Mr. Gilmore's experiment "have shown that varying the pitch of a string
>>50
>>cents requires, on the average, about one watt per string". Oh that's
>>great.
>>A pitch raise of 50 cents, with all the strings being tuned at the same
>>time. I wonder what the effect on the soundboard will be? Do you think it
>>will stay in tune?
>>>
>>> Mr. Gilmore, if you're lurking, please just concentrate on your job as a
>>engineer, and leave pianos to people who have expericen tuning and
>>repairing
>>them. I'm sorry you spent so much time and engergy, not to mention money,
>>on
>>a system that is a failure. You might be able to sell a few of these things
>>to unsuspecting customers, but you have done the tuning industry, not to
>>mention the whole piano industry, a great diservice inventing a usuless
>>electronic device. You should be ashamed of yourself for even attempting to
>>justify your invention.
>>>
>>> Wim Blees RPT
>>> Tuscaloosa, AL


>Richard Brekne
>RPT NPTF
>Griegakadamiet UiB