<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> <html> I wish I could really be of help here Wim, but I think perhaps I'd like  Bills Bremmers comments here as well as Eds and Ron Kovals. But it seems to me from the little experience I've had that knowing how to do these by ear may help assure the machine tuning comes out right on each instrument. I have also heard several times that HT's dont require nearly the same amount of stretch as ET. My own hunch is that HT's actually require quite a bit less stretch... as in not much at all. Havent a clue yet as to why because on the surface of it its easy to think that the octave relationships would be more or less the same. But perhaps not. In anycase... I have started working up an aural routine for Ellis' #4 BB so'st to compare it with what I get from Tunelab 97 and RCt. Cheers RicB Wimblees@aol.com wrote: <blockquote TYPE=CITE>A visiting professor had me tune a Boston 193 (6'4") to a Jousse temperament. He wasn't totally happy with it. He then had me tune the same temperament, but with slight variations, according to how he liked it on a Yamaha C7. It still didn't sound exactly like he wanted it. Does tuning a temperament on one piano sound different if it is tuned on another piano? How can I make the adjustment? (I used the SAT III HT settings). Wim</blockquote> "The idiot actually attacked, was the way I heard it" Prince Wan Nogam Ah when reporting to his king about the death of Dr. Winningston -- Richard Brekne RPT, N.P.T.F. UiB, Bergen, Norway <A HREF="mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no">mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no</A> <A HREF="http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html">http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html</A>  </html>