not what I signed up for

[David Ilvedson]

This is a multipart message in MIME format

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
Well, gee, I know what a good tuning sounds like everytime I'm=
 done tuning with my SAT III.  The idea of what a good tuning is=
 so subjective it's ridiculous.   We have people extolling HTs as=
 the best sounding tunings, David Anderson claims his 4ths/5ths=
 tunings makes grown women cry...;-]  Bill Bremmer claims we're=
 all just tuning reverse wells anyway and we've never tuned a=
 real equal temperment.  Just what is a good tuning in your=
 opinion Mr. Brekne?   Or do only your ears do the talking?  

David Ilvedson, RPT






Original message
From: Richard Brekne 
To: Newtonburg 
Received: Sat, 05 Feb 2005 22:26:15 +0100
Subject: re: not what I signed up for



Andre wrote:

OK bud,
but then, after having tuned aurally for the greater part of my=
 life,
and, having been mauled and aurally sharpened by the Yamaha=
 Acadamy,
just like you, I have come to the humiliating but also=
 enlightening
conclusion that my ETD gives me that very same result not in two=
 hours

time, like at the Academy, but in 45 minutes (or less) every=
 time,
every day, and especially on every instrument.You know me=
 personally, 
you surely would not suggest that I don't know what I am talking=
 about?
(Although, I have already learned that in this life, anything is
possible).

I will keep thinking, and saying, that nowadays we finally have
extremely efficient ETD's.To me, an efficient ETD tells me=
 personally
about pitch, nothing else.

It helps me tuning the strings at the most compromised pitch.
The making of tone, is a different matter and far more=
 important,
because most people can not tell the difference whether a 5th is=
 almost
perfect, or not.

Over and out.
friendly greetings



Andre !

Would I suggest you dont know what you're talking about ????=
 grin.. surely you jest. If there is anyone who deserves the 
title of Piano Guru in my book, surely you are amoung the most=
 valued of these.

Still, my own concerns hold, and do not really come in conflict=
 with your enthusiasms for Verituner. I just find it suspect at=
 best to assume that 
tuning interests are served by developing the idea that we only=
 need the machine. That we need not  develop a musical ear for=
 ourselves, that we need not develop an theoretical =
 understanding of tuning in general, that we need not put the=
 machines solution (regardless of how good that is or isnt) into=
 the perspective of the subjective yet learned EAR.

Not having tried the Verituner myself, I of course can not speak=
 to its pros and cons beyond the fact that I am on record for=
 being in support of the general multipartial approach. The=
 single partial approach does not really do it for me. I find too=
 many examples like the one that started this thread that result=
 from out and out reliance on single partial tuning curves.  But=
 my point is not about whether their exists a <<good enough>>=
 tuning machine or not. It goes to what happens when we become so=
 reliant on them that we no longer can <<hear>> much less=
 <<understand>> what a good tuning is anymore.   I'm all for=
 using ETD's... but only as a supplement. Keeping the collective=
 << tuners ear >> trained, schooled, and ready can only be a good=
 idea as far as I can see.

Cheers
RicB


---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/d3/91/8d/e3/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--