Looks like I missed the Big Discussion, but here are a few related thoughts: 1) I love the feeling of approaching a wildly out-of-tune piano with just a tuning lever, some mutes, a tuning fork (often optional) and my own little brain and body-- to come away some little time later having brought order out of the chaos. Extremely gratifying, in a way that the use of any electronic aid would only detract from. 2) I love dealing with the tuning process in the arena of sound and careful physical response to the sound, the give-and-take among ear, hand and piano. A visual "aid" would bring into it an extraneous (if not distracting) modality, that of sight. 3) . . . not to mention the plain hassle of introducing another piece of hardware into this little party. 4) Accuracy, schmaccuracy-- is it important to be more "accurate" than the human ears that will be listening to the MUSIC ?? I place at least as much emphasis on effecting a tuning that is STABLE. 5) Of course, being a proud artisan, I believe I DO produce a tuning of accuracy and musicality, tailored to the instrument at hand. Am I mistaken? Who knows, but people, even very musical ones, seem to like my tunings. 6) Speaking of people: my customers tend to be very impressed that I tune aurally. People around here-- though certainly tech savvy-- seem to be less than awed by electronic doodads when applied to their pianos-- which stand unapologetically as fond testament to the highest achievements of the Machine Age. 7) Aural tuning says: Artistry. Electronic tuning aid says: Nerd. 8) So there. Joseph G., RPT Conway, MA From: "Paul McCloud" <pmc033 at earthlink.net> Reply-To: pmc033 at earthlink.net, pianotech at ptg.org Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 09:03:49 -0800 To: pianotech at ptg.org Subject: Re: [pianotech] [Pianotek] the big discussion This discussion reminds me of a dilemma my mother had as she ran her business, California Speech and Therapy. She was an audiologist, and she had an advanced degree in Audiology. She fitted hearing aids. There was this ongoing feud between the hearing aid fitters, and those like my mom who did the same thing but knew far more about it than just fitting aids. They both made a living doing the same thing. Or, opthamologists and optometrists. Who are you going to get your glasses from? Those of us who use an ETD, without understanding the underlying process of tuning, are like the hearing aid fitters. One aspect of the whole argument is the customer's perspective of us. I remember when I was new in the business, and one of the local tuners had just passed the RPT exam. He told me he felt more confident in his skills, and that the customer could sense this. When I passed the test, after spending loads of time studying for it, I had the same experience. I had PROVED that I knew more and when I talked to my customers, they picked up on it. They could tell that I knew what I was talking about. When it comes to getting a referral, that makes a big difference. If you're just there to tune the piano, and then leave with no explanation, grab the check and go, nothing to show except a receipt, they don't feel connected to you personally. And likely they'll just call anybody next time. Piano tuners are all the same, right? If you go through the program, take the test, get that RPT badge, it makes a difference. It may be subtle, but it is real. Whether Susan's tunings are all over the map, perfect, sloppy, whatever, she knows what she's talking about and makes the customer confident in her skills. That impresses people, and they will put a high value on her skill. Now of course, she's not sloppy or they'd just laugh her out the door. Whether they know she's an RPT or not really doesn't matter if they are impressed by her. Being able to tune AND understand what you're doing in depth give you (sorry!) the "aura". Paul McCloud, RPT San Diego > [Original Message] > From: Mr. Mac's <tune-repair at allegiance.tv> > To: <pianotech at ptg.org> > Date: 02/01/2011 7:34:14 AM > Subject: Re: [pianotech] [Pianotek] the big discussion > > > On Feb 1, 2011, at 9:22 AM, David Love wrote: > > > 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. > > Yep. > > > OK, now I'm done. > > You wish :-) > > Thanks for all the level headed input, David, > however convoluted at times it became. > > Keith -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20110201/51eb41b4/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC