Journal article

[Thomas D. Seay, III]

Dave Porritt from SMU writes:

>  Now about the only time I don't use it is for marketing reasons (you
>know the customer who calls and says "You don't use one of those electronic
>whirly-gigs do you?  I've got 'perfect pitch' and I can't stand that kind of
>tuning."

Why is it that most people who claim to have perfect pitch own Whitney spinets?

>  I think the accuracy possible with the Sanderson has forced at least a
>grudging
>acceptance by the more progressive or our colleagues.  I'm enjoying the
>dialog going on now about this.

I will readily agree with you, especially after working closely with one of
my colleagues at the University who uses the AccuTuner almost exclusively.
I feel that, when properly used and the appropriate aural checks are
performed, the AccuTuner does a wonderful tuning in less time than before
(certainly light years better that the dreaded  Conn beast). Now if only
the price of an AccuTuner would come down...

One of the summer musicals going on at UT was 110 in the Shade and it used
two Steinway B's tail to tail in the orchestra pit. Tuning these two pianos
together by only one technician is difficult at best and, at least
initially, the musical's director was reluctant to let us use an AccuTuner,
because of an impression he had that it would produce a lesser quality
tuning. When we informed him that he would have to raise the pit up to
stage level, put the pianos together keyboard to keyboard, and then put
everything back in place after tuning, he caved in and said that it would
be just fine to come on over and "bring that meter with you!".
Aarrrrrrrrgh!

Kindest regards,