At 02:01 PM 2/7/2008, Paul Bruesch wrote: >Well, if you tune a piano that's 50c flat, you don't just "follow >the steps" of bringing the piano "to pitch." While it might not make >sense to a lay person (e.g. a piano owner/player) that you need to >bring it over pitch to have it wind up at/near pitch, it's a >well-known fact to piano techs (and one that is quite difficult for >me to try to explain to those lay owners.) Likewise in regulation, >if (a) affects (b) affects (c) affects (a), then any worthwhile tech >who is regulating a piano will go back and check/adjust (a) after >doing (c). That's what the exams are all about, isn't it?? Making >sure someone doesn't just learn a rote HOW method?? Rather that we >learn the WHYs as well. > >Paul Bruesch >Stillwater, MN Actually, Paul what you write merely supports my contention. We don't teach "88 steps of tuning". We teach "Pitch raising", "temperament tuning", "octave tuning" and "unison tuning". Then we put it all together. Likewise, there is a lot clearer and less potentially misleading conceptual framework with which to present "Regulation" than "X steps". And if you spend some time analyzing screwed up regulations with students and listen to what misconceptions they came out with from some of these "step-by-step" teaching methods you might a clearer picture of what I am talking about... Israel Stein.
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC