<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN"> <html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" = xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" = xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; = charset=iso-8859-1"> <meta name=ProgId content=Word.Document> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 9"> <meta name=Originator content="Microsoft Word 9"> <link rel=File-List href="cid:filelist.xml@01C3A2C0.B6629380"> <title>RE: ETD's</title>  <style>  </style> </head> <body lang=EN-US style='tab-interval:.5in'> <div class=Section1> Mary-<o:p></o:p> <![if = !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>= Basically, what Ron Koval = said:<o:p></o:p> <![if = !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>= “As to time, I think that = is less dependant on the machine, and is determined by the tech.  After working the way through the learning curve, = the tuning pretty much takes me the same amount of time as with using RCT.  Yes, I did slow down a LOT = everytime I’ve changed machines, and even techniques on the same = machine.”<o:p></o:p><= /p> <![if = !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p><= /p> What with learning a new machine, and the fact = that VT produces a much better tuning if 2 passes are used on its first time at = a particular piano, I initially added about 20 minutes to my service call = time.  But now, half a year later, = still doing 2 passes on most pianos, I’m back to my 80-90 minutes = comfortably; 60 minutes if I get gritty.  = I’m using the VT for private customers after I get off work at the Conservatory.  = <o:p></o:p> <![if = !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>= We use RCT here, and I don’t think it ever = added any time to my tunings over what the SAT III took me.  These are all pianos that are tuned 3-8 times a year, and = usually take 50-60 minutes for the strictly tuning part.  And there is often a pitch change needed, but I use = the pitch-raise function for a 1-pass.<o:p></o:p> <![if = !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>= Clear and concise…wow, = thanks.<o:p></o:p> <![if = !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>= Lawrence Becker, = RPT<o:p></o= :p> Piano Technician<o:p></o:p> College-Conservatory of Music<o:p></o:p></sp= an> University of Cincinnati<o:p></o:p></sp= an> = <![if = !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>= -----Original Message----- From: Mary Smith [mailto:MarySmith@mail.utexas.edu] Sent: Monday, November = 03, 2003 11:42 AM To: College and = University Technicians Subject: RE: = ETD's <![if = !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> Lawrence,<o:p></o:p>= <![if = !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>= Thank you for that clear and concise comparison. Could you share with us the time it = takes you to do a good, solid tuning with each of these ETD's? That is, do = any of them take noticeably longer than another? Thanks.<o:p></o:p>= <![if = !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>= Mary Smith<o:p></o:p>= UT-Austin<o:p></o:p>= <![if = !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>= <![if = !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>= <![if = !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>= </div> </body> </html>