Accu-Tuner (version I) price

[Andrew and Rebeca Anderson]

John,
The stock tuning program in the VT100 is rather FACish in that it 
only changes interval priority on those three points.  You don't have 
to leave it that way.  I programmed mine with a balance of three 
different appropriate intervals for each octave of the piano and I am 
pleased with it now.  The standard tuning is easy to improve on, but 
if you identify which partials you work with in each octave and then 
permanently program them into the VT100/Pocket, it will tune the way 
you do without fail every time.

In theory you could have partial priority set for even narrower spans 
on the piano but averaging priorities across each octave has worked 
well for me.  You do start by tuning A3 and A4 first, or the whole 
temperament octave, and then tune from the bottom up.  That is quite 
simple compared to the other "calculated" curve offerings currently available.

Suffice to say, I'm quite pleased with my VT100 and will get the 
Pocket version as a backup in due course.

Andrew Anderson

At 11:41 AM 11/21/2007, you wrote:
>On 11/21/07, Jon Page <jonpage at comcast.net> wrote:
> > Why buy old technology? I'm thinking of selling my Verituner100
> > since I now have the VT Pocket. The VT does a superior tuning
> > without the need for the fancy footwork required of other ETD's.
>
>In my opinion, the VT does a good job on well-scaled pianos.  It is
>limited on spinets and consoles.  I'm told one can alter the "stock"
>tuning programs for these problem pianos to more closely match what a
>good aural tuner can do.
>
>In my efforts to program the device to that end, I was spending too
>much time trying to program the durn thing, then having to use aural
>tests on every piano to check whether the program was doing it right.
>In frustration, I decided to ditch it and go back to aural only.
>
>If I had to use an ETD, I'd go with a Reyburn CyberTuner.  I've not
>used the RCT, but it seems to approach calculating a tuning better
>than the VT.
>
>--
>JF