Hi I see we are on another one of these ETD vs Aural tuning debates again and have the following seemingly obvious but for some reason nearly always overlooked basic truths. First, an ETD tuning and a aural tuning are executed with different tuning priorites as their basis. No mater what the marketing hype says, the ETD (except verituner) does not compare intervals note for note during the tuning and has therefor no direct way whatsoever of insuring any particular relationship between various coincidents for all the various intervals used by any particular aural tuner. Even the verituner has its own tuning algorithm and will result in a tuning all its own. The ETD is by definition of its own tuning algorithm bound to yeild a different end tuning then an aural tuner just as one aural tuner will vary from another. Secondly... as to comments that go along the lines of whether an ETD tuning is good enough. The simple fact that they are accepted if not in many many cases welcomed by artists should answer this question adequately enough I think. There seems to be some hint of an argumentation which sees the ETD's consistancy as a negative to some degree... if so this is a pretty odd tact to take since consistancy is something all aural tuners strive for. All this said again... An ETD tuning is not a creative endeavour in any sense of the word. If you are simply following the dials.. ie the ETD's <<programed tuning>> then at very best your imput is so minimal as so essentially constitute a negligible effect on the end tuning. For what ever it is worth... an Aural tuner has the ability to colour a tuning in a fashion not attainable by an ETD tuning. I would go so far as to say that unless the final pass is tweaked strictly by ear... an ETD tuning has no chance of such coloring. As to whether or not any aural tweaking constitutes an inherently better tuning or not... if the public rejects ETD tunings.. then they do and if they dont they dont... thats about as objective a measure as is possible. The rest of it falls into the purely subjective and is about as valid as saying that Franz Mohrs tunings are inherently better then Georges Ammanns tunings... or the oposite. At some point one gets past comparitives that deal in objective concepts like <<better>> or <<worse>> and are forced to set these aside and deal with pure and simple differences one either chooses to like or dislike onself... personally. Cheers RicB
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC