On 11:59 AM, Kent Swafford wrote: > It is interesting to read of your > experiences. > > I have described my refinement > procedure for years as "looking for > the fewest, smallest changes that will > make an improvement." Seems similar to > your procedure in recording studios. Not exactly. I am not looking to "make an improvement". I am only looking to get rid of obviously audible problems. There are a lot of possible small changes and improvements that I will ignore - even if I have time for them - because the gain is not worth changing the sound of the piano in the middle of the piece or a movement. To me that's counter-intuitive, but that's what they kept drumming into my head - don't change anything unless you really have to... > I have also tried to make a point > about critical work, that is, that one > should regularly practice at such > work, and I suggest an attitude of > "every tuning a concert tuning." That's true for the initial tuning - but it doesn't hold where the greater value is continuity of pitch as much as possible, and avoiding sudden changes in the sound of the piano in mid piece or mid-movement if it can be helped... > When you have a great deal of everyday > practice of fine tuning under your > belt, the transition to > concert/recording studio work can be a > piece of cake. Sure, if one understands what it is that is expected. In the recording session touchup the expectations are quite different than in concert tunings... > I still believe one of the best ways > to approach a new or critical > situation is to plug in the procedures > with which I am already familiar. I very much suspect that the reason they kept telling me about minimizing the changes that I make in mid session is precisely because some tuner new to the demands of recording followed their own familiar procedures - and after splicing various takes together, the piece came out sounding like it was played on two different pianos, because of the sum total of improvements that the tuner following their accustomed procedures felt compelled to make touching up the piano. They really did drum it into my head - both in Boston and in California... > If you are up to it, you might re-read > my posts, to catch some points you > obviously missed. Ditto... And - by the way - I read them numerous times. I still don't see what I could gain from using an ETD for the sort of tuning for which - as far as I know - no algorithm have been devised (or could be, for that matter). But I can see where it would be a distraction. > Meanwhile, my ETDs go with me wherever > I tune, no apologies, and tuned pianos > seem to result. Same here - but there are times when I leave it in the case. And tuned pianos seem to result. And furthermore, I seem to be able to hang on to clients who have reputations for changing tuners like socks. It could have something to do with me humoring them and even taking their preferences into consideration in terms of techniques that I use or don't use - even if they might have no basis in any reality that I know of... Like being flexible when it comes to ETD use... It seems that each of us feels that the other doesn't get what is being written. I suppose, then, if we are going to keep talking past each other, perhaps we should take this private... And yes, Kent, I did learn some things that I didn't know before - and for this I thank you. Best wishes, Israel > Peace, > > > Kent > > > > On Feb 8, 2011, at 12:54 PM, Israel > Stein wrote: > >> On 2/6 11:59 AM, Kent Swafford wrote: >> > On Feb 6, 2011, at 4:52 PM, Israel >> Stein wrote: >> > >> >> Well, Kent, please do share with us >> how you would approach a touch up >> using your ETD when you have 15 >> minutes until the next "take"... >> >> >> >> Israel >> >> > I can only speculate as to the >> source of your skepticism. >> >> I believe that John Formsma went a >> long way to explaining that - even >> though some of his assumptions are a >> bit off base, the general drift >> pretty much sums up my source of >> skepticism. Your situation is nothing >> like my situation, and in the sort of >> situation I am referring to (and I >> will clarify this later), that visual >> display could be a source of >> distraction and misdirection. I'd >> rather not deal with that possibility... >> >> > One possibility is the fact that you >> use a specific ETD that I determined >> about a dozen years ago >> > is not the one that is best suited >> to my needs. >> >> Again, thanks to Mr. Formsma we found >> out details. Perhaps you are right - >> if I were to personally experience >> the joys of OnlyPure, I might be >> converted. Or not. But I only have my >> familiarity with Accutuner and >> Cybertuner to go on - and those (when >> appropriate) and my ears (when >> necessary) do me just fine, and I am >> not about go to a third system for >> the few years that I could reasonably >> expect to be up to critical gigs. I >> am not getting any younger and my >> life's current circumstances have >> essentially put me out of the >> "recording sessions" (as I describe >> them below) business... >> >> > That said, I reject the notion that >> the 15 minute touch-up is a special >> or unusual situation. >> >Take for example the tuning I >> completed this morning: >> >> And this I will dispute to no end. In >> the sort of "recording sessions" that >> I am referring to - where they pay me to >> stand by for however many hours or >> days they keep recording - there is >> an imperative that does not exist in >> any other area of piano tuning that I >> can think of: to keep changes to the >> minimum necessary when doing >> touch-ups in the middle of a movement >> or a short piece. I have been told >> this by enough tuners (who got me >> into those gigs) and a major label >> producer to boot, to take it >> seriously. This is definitely what >> others here wrote about - where the >> piano is tuned in the morning and >> touched up many hours (or days - as >> John Formsma writes) later, "whether >> it needs it or not". This I treat as >> any other tuning. By the time I get >> to that piano, there will be problems >> in splicing different "takes" no >> matter what I do or don't do to the >> piano - so I might as well re-tune it >> to whatever level of quality I have >> time for, using whatever tools I have >> available, including the ETD. >> Strictly speaking, this is not what I >> would call "working a recording >> session". It's just a tuning, like >> any other tuning. >> >> > Many tunings are done with an >> absolute deadline. I strongly suspect >> that your 15 minute recording studio >> touch up closely resembles the last >> 15 minutes of any tuning done on >> deadline. >> >> Really doesn't Kent. You don't come >> in cold into the last 15 minutes of a >> "deadline tuning" as you call it and >> have to do very >> picky work. You've had one or several >> passes to get there. At a recording >> session touchup, you are expected to >> go from zero to sixty with no >> preparation, essentially... And >> sometimes with the musicians watching >> - and perhaps hinting that they would >> like to get back to it as soon as you >> are done, and the sooner the better. >> The "15 minutes" in theory could end >> up being somewhat less...Or at least >> seem that way... >> >> They break in the middle of a >> movement or a short piece when >> someone "hits the wall" and needs to >> refocus - they don't want to take >> longer than absolutely necessary (or >> everyone else could lose focus) - or >> when someone hears something wrong >> with the piano and want me to fix it. >> It's typically a note or two, and >> they are sitting there and staring at >> me while I find it and fix it - and I >> really don't want to start setting up >> the machinery just to look for one or >> two bad notes. It'll take longer, and >> it won't do me much good anyway - >> judging by how you describe your use >> of the ETD... So I am going to skip >> some of the description of your 1098 >> tuning - I am sorry, it isn't the >> same thing. I am trying to do >> something completely different, under >> totally different conditions, with a >> quite different goal in mind - >> getting rid of the audible offending >> notes or intervals, while keeping the >> changes to a minimum. You (and >> others) might disagree with this >> approach - but this is what I was >> told to do in several disparate >> situations in different time zones >> and by people who do a lot of this >> sort of work for major recording >> labels - so I'll stick with it.(I am >> wondering how Dave Doremus' >> experience with fortepianos and >> harpsichords fits here...) >> >> > As one goes through the scale, drift >> is immediately apparent by watching >> the display; as long as the drift is >> >relatively uniform without sudden >> changes, the drift may not be >> particularly audible in aural checks, >> so there may >> >be no absolute need to retune just to >> suit the display, nor to (off)set the >> machine. Fingers can still be used to >> mute >> >strings of the trichords needing >> attention, and having noted the >> general level of drift of previous >> notes, it is easy to >> >determine which string(s) moved (the >> most) and make appropriate >> corrections in the strings that will >> yield the best >temperament. This >> appears to me to be one of the best >> reasons for using an ETD because one >> can easily analyze >> >the mistake before making any >> "corrections", and help one enhance, >> not exacerbate, the quality of the >> temperament >> >when time is so short. >> >> Ah, but the ETD analysis would be >> with reference to the to the "ideal" >> pitches that the ETD suggests through >> the scale - not with reference to the >> pitches that I am actually leaving on >> the piano, because their individual >> drifts (nothing drifts absolutely >> evenly) are not significant enough >> to correct. (As John Formsma points >> out, perfection of temperament is the >> least important consideration here). >> So the ETD may suggest a larger >> correction to that bad note than is >> necessary to deal with the audible >> problem. It might prejudice my >> judgment as to how picky I need to be >> here to satisfy the demand of the >> moment. In the situation (and under >> the "minimize change to the extent >> possible" imperative) it is giving me >> too much information, and perhaps >> misleading information. >> >> > This morning when I hit the break at >> the octave 5 action bracket, I came >> upon a note that was sharp where all >> the previous >> >section had been slightly on the flat >> side. The ETD suggested and aural >> checks confirmed that this note, one >> of only two or >> >three in the entire scale needed to >> be completely retuned. >> >> And this is precisely where I don't >> want an ETD suggesting to me to what >> extent the note should be moved - I >> want to make the judgment myself, >> without being prejudiced by a visual >> display, because where that note ends >> up might not be the ideal place as >> far as the original tuning is >> concerned - it will be a compromise, >> meeting the dual demands of "taking >> care" of an offending note while >> minimizing change. Watching a rapidly >> moving display might lead me to >> conclude that the note is worse than >> it really sounds - our minds are very >> prone to such suggestions.. >> >> > I profoundly do not care whether you >> yourself use an ETD in the recording >> studio, but to suggest that the very >> presence of an >> >ETD can by itself be somehow >> "unprofessional", as I understood you >> to have said, is an unfair and >> incorrect characterization, >> >in my opinion not in line with the >> calm and rational analysis that you >> have brought to so many other issues >> in our field of >> >endeavor. >> >> Well, Kent, I'll return the >> compliment by saying that I have >> known you to be a level-headed person >> who doesn't jump to unwarranted >> conclusions - but nowhere did I use >> the term "unprofessional". Perhaps I >> got a bit carried away by >> hyperbole - (I have been known to do >> that). In this case I think I used >> the word "insanity". So I'll trade my >> "insanity" for your "unprofessional", >> and let's call it even. >> >> I did write that I don't want that >> ETD to be seen when the artists are >> there watching me as I am do a quick >> touchup during a short break (or at >> lest that's what I meant) . I'll use >> it to do the initial tuning - sure. >> I'll use it during longer breaks >> (like lunch?) - when it's safe to >> re-tune the piano (Once they are done >> with a movement or a shorter piece). >> But in the midst of the recording >> session, when continuity of pitch is >> important - I don't want that visual >> display suggesting to me a change >> that is perhaps bigger than that >> demanded by my ear... And I don't >> know what attitudes artists unknown >> to me have towards electronic tuning >> - I think Cy Schuster (are you here >> Cy?) can tell you all about a very >> vocal client of mine - teacher and >> performer - and her attitudes toward >> ETD tuners that got spread all over >> Pianoworld and the Modesto, CA >> area... I really don't want to be >> explaining the relationship between >> electronics and my ear to another >> skeptical artist during a critical >> gig - and I have plenty of war >> stories where I had to defend my ETD >> use to musicians (and successfully >> proved that I can meet their >> expectations using my combined >> methods - where "ETD only" tuners >> failed). >> >> OK, got it off my chest - back to >> work now... >> >> Israel Stein >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20110209/b5bfeeab/attachment-0001.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC