Yes, as I read back through the thread I realize things have gotten somewhat convoluted. If I were to distill it down to a central point I would say this. The ugly little truth is that most aural tuners don’t tune as accurately as they think they do. I think the exam points that out. That’s not to say that they don’t produce acceptable, even high quality musical results. There is evidently some leeway in this thing that we do. But to suggest that using a device which produces on average a more accurate result also produces a less musical result doesn’t really make much sense, unless you would argue that a less accurate aural tuning is still more musical than a more accurate etd tuning. It would seem that there’s some resistance among some to accept the state of the art technology. Personal choices about how to approach this task or commitments to continue to develop aural skills for whatever reason are a different matter. OK, now I'm done. David Love www.davidlovepianos.com From: William Monroe [mailto:bill at a440piano.net] Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 6:53 AM To: davidlovepianos at comcast.net; pianotech at ptg.org Subject: Re: [pianotech] [Pianotek] the big discussion Point taken, David. I didn't mean to be overly specific to you. More, it's been suggested in this thread a few times by a few people, and I thought it worth revisiting. WRM
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC