<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <STYLE type=text/css></STYLE> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16608" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY> <DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=523084702-18032008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>So what do you do with those of us who are kinesthetically dominant?  The visual is a confirmation of what I feel and hear.  It doesn't determine what I hear......</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=523084702-18032008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>\les bartlett</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR> <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left> <HR tabIndex=-1> <FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> caut-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces@ptg.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Dave Davis<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, March 17, 2008 9:44 AM<BR><B>To:</B> College and University Technicians<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [CAUT] Electronic Tuning Preferences<BR></FONT><BR></DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif"> <DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif">Ed,</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif"> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif">We will consider adding the info to the Chapter Tool Kit when your team has something compiled. </DIV> <DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif"> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif">Dave Davis, RPT, Chairman</DIV> <DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif">Chapter Resources Committee<BR></DIV> <DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif">----- Original Message ----<BR>From: Ed Sutton <ed440@mindspring.com><BR>To: College and University Technicians <caut@ptg.org><BR>Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 6:47:39 AM<BR>Subject: Re: [CAUT] Electronic Tuning Preferences<BR><BR>Someone on the Journal is.<BR>My experience and opinions are similar to yours.<BR>Physiologically, our brains are "visually dominant," i.e. visual information <BR>overrides aural information, so I have the concern that<BR>staring at a spinning display can make us less aurally sensitive, may even <BR>prevent a beginner from learning exquisite aural discernment.<BR>During his talk in Rochester, Askenfelt said "Sound is just a boring fact. <BR>I'm only interested in what I can photograph or measure," and later, in <BR>response to a question "I don't know, that's something that only you tuners <BR>can hear."<BR>Could we also reach the day when tuners said "I don't know, that's something <BR>only the old aural tuners used to hear. I've looked at every note on your <BR>piano, and they all look perfect."<BR>Besides, hearing is fun. I intend to hear as much as I can, as long as I <BR>can.<BR>Ed S.<BR><BR>----- Original Message ----- <BR>From: <<A href="mailto:rwest1@unl.edu" ymailto="mailto:rwest1@unl.edu">rwest1@unl.edu</A>><BR>To: "College and University Technicians" <<A href="mailto:caut@ptg.org" ymailto="mailto:caut@ptg.org">caut@ptg.org</A>><BR>Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 9:20 AM<BR>Subject: Re: [CAUT] Electronic Tuning Preferences<BR><BR><BR>>I wonder if anyone on the exam committee and the Journal is taking  notes <BR>>on this topic.  It will come up repeatedly because newbies will  always <BR>>wonder about the very issues that have been raised in this  thread.  An <BR>>article that outlines the aural/etd tuning controversy  would be a good one <BR>>for the Journal and should be put Chapter Toolkit  so that chapters have <BR>>ready access to information about some of the  issues.  It would be good <BR>>for Associates to have in their exam prep  materials.<BR>><BR>> Secondly several years ago I made the deliberate decision to be an  aural <BR>> tuner just so that I wouldn't lose the aural skill that I had  worked so <BR>> hard to master.  For several years I went over to the "dark  side" and <BR>> tuned almost exclusively with the ETD.  In one of those  epiphany moments <BR>> that I described in my last post, I realized that  the quality of my <BR>> tuning wasn't up to my old aural standards.  It  wasn't a judgement <BR>> against the ETD; it was a realization I wasn't  paying attention to my <BR>> work.  As I started to wean myself away from a  heavy reliance on the ETD, <BR>> I realized that my aural skills had  atrophied.  So I decided that if I <BR>> wanted to keep my aural skills at  the highest level, I would rely on my <BR>> ears rather than my eyes.  Philosophically I decided that because music <BR>> is primarily an aural  phenomenon, access to my brain should be via the <BR>> ears when tuning.  My eyes are an equally valid way of accessing my brain <BR>> for tuning  purposes, given the accuracy of ETD's, but music is not seen, <BR>> but  heard.  Also maintaining a refined aural skill links me to all those <BR>> folks who have tuned before me, and have explored all the various <BR>> intellectual facets that make tuning an interesting mental as well as <BR>> practical pursuit.<BR>><BR>> So I wouldn't call myself a hybrid tuner any more.  I use an ETD for <BR>> setting my A and for pitch raises.  Otherwise I gladly open myself to  the <BR>> satisfaction that aural tuning gives me as well as all the quirks  and <BR>> failures that exclusively aural tuning can engender.<BR>><BR>> Richard West <BR><BR></DIV> <DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><BR></DIV></DIV><BR> <P><FONT size=2>No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>Checked by AVG.<BR>Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.7/1331 - Release Date: 03/16/2008 10:34 AM<BR></FONT></P></BODY></HTML>