How To Choose an ETD was ... something else

[David Love]

In the temperament octave I see no advantage in tuning aurally.  The ETDs do
a fine job.  Leaving the temperament octave is another story and the ear (at
least a skilled one) probably does a better job of blending irregularities
and choosing which type of octaves work the best.  A combination of ETD,
with use of direct interval tuning and aural techniques have proven, for me,
to be the best and fastest.  Standard tunings without a pitch raise should
take about 45 minutes.  Therefore the simplest, lightest, longest battery
life and most straight forward machine is the best way to go, IMO.  For me,
that's a SAT III.  For institutional, non demanding tuning, a straight ETD
tuning is a stress free, easy way to get the job done quickly and with
acceptable accuracy.  

David Love
davidlovepianos at comcast.net 

-----Original Message-----
From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of John M. Formsma
Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2006 12:55 PM
To: 'Pianotech List'
Subject: RE: How To Choose an ETD was ... something else

David,

I like the way you think!

In my time of using two ETDs, I found that it did become a substitute for
listening. When you have a visual device in front of you with blinking
lights, or multi-partial measuring, all the razzamatazz makes you start to
wonder if your little ol' ears are good enough. So you start trusting it
more and more, 'til you're bowed down in near-reverence to the thing.
(Slavery 'twas for me.)

In my last tryst with my Verituner 100, I was tuning a Steinway D to compare
my work with what it calculated. (This was a new piano I'd tuned about 5
times since January, and had recalculated each time, so it should have been
the best tuning already. And, I'd just done it a week before this, so it was
pretty decent to begin with.) The aural tuning method I chose was open
unisons. The temperament was not that much different, but aural was
smoother. The treble would have been too flat (and I was tuning in the
Expanded Style already). I used every applicable aural test to verify what
my ears were hearing. The low tenor would have been just a tad flat in
places, and parts of the bass a bit too sharp. It was the best tuning that
I've done on that piano, and it "sang" as never before. It was the most fun
I've had tuning in a long time. Too busy watching rotating displays before,
I guess.

So I kissed the little machine good-bye, and said thanks for the memories,
babe, but I'm moving on. ;-)

The bottom line is, as I see it, one still must be highly skilled in aural
ability to achieve the best results. After all, don't ETD manuals recommend
using the ear to verify, and that the ear is the final authority? So, if
you're using an ETD, but constantly checking with aural tests, why not just
tune aurally to begin with?

Just my one little opinion. 

John Formsma

P.S. I liked this quote so much, David, that I thought I'd just quote it
again. "If you're a young (or young at heart) passionate, committed student
if piano technology, why wouldn't you want to learn how to use your ears in
the most taxing, intimate, and focused way? You would, if you wanted to
wring the maximum benefit from your learning.  That's why I believe every
serious student of piano technology who wants to be a working, every-day
Pianotech will be best served by learning how to tune a piano with ears
only."


-----Original Message-----
From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of David Andersen
Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2006 1:10 PM
To: Pianotech
Subject: Re: How To Choose an ETD was ... something else


Folks---note the difference; Don says "if used properly,"  Ed says "who
starts relying on" the ubiquitous ETD.  And there's the rub: I believe it's
up to the individual, and his/her mentor, the degree to which the student,
from the beginning, replaces or augments the function of the ear with the
machine.  

If the machine is actually used as a teaching tool---to SHOW somebody
visually how close or far they are from ideal, and let their body note that
info---then  I say what an incredible tool; what an ear and perception
enhancer.  

If, however, the machine is used as a substitute for
listening, as something like paint-by-the-numbers, where you're just filling
in where you're told to, I believe it can hurt an essential learning
function of the students' body and being; further, I think it
can---CAN---lead to a steady lessening of the students' ability to truly
listen with the whole body in a relaxed way, which, to me, is the
fundamental component of doing world-class piano work.

If you're a young (or young at heart) passionate, committed student if piano
technology, why wouldn't you want to learn how to use your ears in the most
taxing, intimate, and focused way? You would, if you wanted to wring the
maximum benefit from your learning.  That's why I believe every serious
student of piano technology who wants to be a working, every-day pianotech
will be best served by learning how to tune a piano with ears only.

I think it's better from a self-esteem or confidence POV as well; you know
you can go anywhere in the world, with just you and a lever and a tone
source, and tune any piano.  It means something psychologically.
The idea is to build your skillset, and the sense of power and
accomplishment that comes with that, until you "feel" like a total pro to
the world at large, and you can, by telling the truth, hold the reins of
most every work situation you find yourself in.

Just some thoughts on a gorgeous Sunday AM in SoCal.....

My best to everyone....

David Andersen

P.S.  I'M GETTING EXCITED ABOUT ROCHESTER ....OOOHHHHH.....