Newton Hunt writes: > On a decent piano (note that I did not say instrument) I > would defy any tuner to distinguish between a good SAT > tuning and an aural tuning while the piano is being played. Most piano technicians, as Newton correctly observes, would not be able to distinguish between an SAT tuning or an aural tuning, all other things being equal. I know I couldn't if I tried. However, if you do a SAT tuning for a client who has a notion that all electronic tuning instruments are inferior , that client (i.e., the person who is paying your fee for tuning the piano), is most likely not going to be happy with his "perception" of your tuning, regardless of whether you or I or Franz Mohr, or anyone else, approves of it. This is, of course, not the fault of the SAT or the technician who uses it. But it is reality and it is for this very reason that I believe technicians should be able to tune the same either with or without the SAT (and in all fairness, most technicians can and do). I also believe that aural technicians should make every attempt to learn how to use the SAT and benefit from it, even if they don't "approve" of it . My greatest fear is that some ham-fisted neophyte "tuner" with more money than "cents" goes out and buys an SAT and descends upon the unsuspecting public, tuning merrily away with little or no skill, leaving dead or dying pianos in his wake and trashing the reputation of anyone who uses an SAT. This, again, is not the fault of the SAT or the technician who uses it. I, too, am really enjoying this forum. Our thanks to Jack Reeves for setting it all up for us. Kindest regards, Thomas D. Seay, RPT The University of Texas at Austin
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC