Flat A

[Richard Moody]

----------
> From: Horace Greeley <hgreeley@leland.Stanford.EDU>
> To: pianotech@byu.edu
> Subject: Re: Flat A
> Date: Monday, May 12, 1997 10:40 AM
>
> John, et al,
>  had this C fork/A fork discussion with Franz Mohr over 15 years
ago.
snip
>
> If your technique is sound, you "should" be able to establish a
given pitch
> (A=440Hz, if one needs that) from just about any reasonable
starting point.

Right and then the Musician's Union wants the pit piano tuned to
A441, or maybe 2 in the summer time.   Or the just supposing,
recording studio will pay for the three of four tunings to match the
pitch for an over dub, which seems to be 438. (They speeded the tape
up) Then there is "A 442" for the symphony and A 445  Philharmoanic
pitch that some Europeans use  or used to.  I hope they go back to
A440. There are times when you are asked and expected as a technician
to provide the pitch requested. Or worse match the pitch they supply.
 Some of the requests are hard to meet with a fork.  When I was asked
to tune to 441 I had my argument all prepared with enough technospeak
do dazzel even the most eurudite musician. After all this was the
great musician's union, if I could convince them... But before I
could even get one word out, he said so it would be at 440 when the
theater heated up from the audience.

	>
> What bothers me in these tuning discussions is the _seeming_ lack
of
> concern for music.  "As good as a machine."

	Well how many technicians are musicians, or allowed to become
"certified" without being one and/or using a machine?   As long as
there are no requirements or recognition for playing or aural tuning
the "concern for music" will be as superficial as Mrs. Murphy's mop.
However there are one or two good answers to the question, "If you
don't care to play the piano the piano, why would you care to tune
it?"

	"As good as a machine"   There used to be only one  way of having
your tuning critiqued.  Another tuner.  Depending on your
geographical location and luck, you might get a revue from one of the
greats.  A critique from Franz Mohr, very good, I hope you pass it
on.  For others not so fortunate there are the electronic tuning
devices.  I was critiqued by a very good tuner who was known to name
musicians and manufacturers.  He was gracious enough to allow me to
put a meter against his temperament to see if that would suffice in
his absence.  Lo and behold the little $150 model "worked" and gasp
it even showed a "variation" which was allowed to stand because
aurally it produced a better fifth than the machine.  And to those
who say, "well  you should have  the $1500 model, I say "there's the
rub"  (that is politesse).

>When was the last time you saw
> someone sitting in an audience watching flashing lights during a
> performance?  (Other than a misplaced recording engineer.)

	Anybody know what ET's  the various symphony players are using? and
why or why not?  Mine came from a bassoon player, which I had to give
back, but he found another one.  (The co. had stopped making that
model)

	From the concern of music, you can't beat an ET for establishing
pitch, just talk to musicians who use them.   For establishing
temperament for performance, Horace's analogy of the flashing lights
is more in line.  Now that we have disk clavier and piano disk are we
to expect performers to switch it on to get thru the difficult
parts?.   Ever wonder why the soloist uses no music?  Do we as
technicians have "levels" we can rise to, and be recognized for, at
least within the profession if not the music community?

Richard Moody