OK, I can accept that. But I think it's not unreasonable for those who can tune to think it is unreasonable to make it easier to get a qualification. I think if we continue to pursue the "least common denominator" idea, we quickly lose any and all credibility that RPT brings. Thanks for being straightforward. William R. Monroe. > Early in my tuning, I tried to learn aural tuning. I even took a class > at convention. But, alas, I absolutely can't understand the checks and > which one is faster/slower 3rds/4ths and all of that. If my ETD breaks, > then I can't tune until its fixed. > > Plus, in my case I have fallback work - player piano rebuilds and reed > organ rebuilds - currently booked to 2011. > > Duaine > > William Monroe wrote: >> Duaine, >> >> In my opinion, it is like learning math before using a calculator. >> One really should know how to perform an operation before letting the >> machine take over. Otherwise, what are your checks? Even if your >> clients are 100% satisfied with machine tunings, if it malfunctions in >> some way or other, how would ever know, and how would you accurately >> check to confirm if there was an error? >> >> Same with a calculator. I balance my checkbook with one, but I always >> look at the numbers and see that they make sense. If they don't I >> double check. If I didn't know how to do math, I'd never even know I >> should be double checking. >> >> Please recognize I'm trying to be constructive here. >> >> William R. Monroe
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC