[CAUT] electronic tuning device preference?

[Leslie Bartlett]

 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. 
                    There certainly is little objectivity in a nebulous
concept of "better or worse"....... To whom?  Why? How?  As Owen Jorgensen
is noted to have said, there are not "better or worse" temperaments- there
are only DIFFERENT.   A local technician with two masters degrees in music,
both in performance areas, says that in the 21st century there is no
legitimate reason NOT to use an ETD.   His is an opinion- and he has
academic clout to back it up. His opinion is no less "objective" than one
who uses "better or worse" and calls it objective.  If different tuners
"tweak" differently, it is subjective in nature.  There is so much more to
consider than just "better or worse" when talking about any kind of tuning.
Why not just acknowledge they are different, and, as has been said, the
market will ultimately decide if the ETD tuning is adequate or no.  We
tuners are, after all, the servants of the public, not the other way round.
In our pleasure of our own abilities, we seem to forget that if the audience
doesn't like our tunings, we'll be out of jobs. Then it matters little about
the esoteric arguments of aural vs. electronic. I have even heard techs say
that since "we" are the ones knowing the "truth" about tuning, if the
customer doesn't like the tuning, we should simply tell the customer he
knows not of what he is speaking..........  Wow- if that were my tuner, he'd
be gone in minute and with no pay.     Can't we all just get along and admit
there will be "differences" which make for incredible band-space verbiage,
but not much objective substance in the end?
les bartlett