Standing on shoulders

[dpitsch]

Let's see, Rick Baldassin.  I remember working with him in the Utah Valley Chapter around 1979-1980.  We designed one of the Direct  Interval Tunings systems.  Dr. Sanderson invented almost the identical system at the same time.  When we presented our
findings to each other, we were amazed that we had come up with the same answer!  Interesting how we kind of verified each others' research.  Gee that doesn't seem like 20 years ago, time flies.

Sy Zabrocki wrote:

> >From Sy Zabrocki--RPT
> David Pitsch has mentioned Direct Interval Tuning (DIT) several times this week. Maybe not everyone is familiar with Direct Interval Tuning. Rick Baldassin published a fine article on this topic in the Feb. 1991 issue of the PTG Journal on Page 25.
>
> Baldassin listed an 18-step system for the Accu-Tuner and an 18-step aural system all in the same article.
>
> From:   dpitsch[SMTP:dpitsch@ix.netcom.com]
> Sent:   Friday, June 12, 1998 11:28 PM
> To:     Pianotech
> Subject:        Standing on shoulders
>
> I would like to thank the many members of the list who responded to the
> recent posts on tuning.  If anyone has been offended with what I wrote,
> especially Virgil Smith, please accept my sincere apologies.
>
> Some members of the list were kind enough to let me know that ETD or VTD
> have gotten soooo gooood, that recently students have been passing the
> PTG tuning exam using them.  Thank you, but this has been happening for
> decades.  Is this a good thing to be happening?  Perhaps not, maybe so.
> We all have stood upon the shoulders of tuners who have gone before us.
> And I personally believe there is much that remains to be discovered,
> both aurally and visually.  I do not think we are at the end of research
> & development as far as VTD goes.  Kind of like, the more you know, the
> more you realize what you don't know ...
>
> Jim Coleman gave a very good history (June 8th) on ETD that does not
> need to be added to.  But there were simultaneous developments happening
> in the aural tuning department.  As the visual aides got better,  sort
> of a synergy effect happened.  Some of you newer technicians may not
> know this side of the story.  In the 1970's when the SOT was the hottest
> ETD available, we heard the words  "contiguous intervals" being used
> more and more.  Granted, at least one tuner wrote about using aural
> contiguous interval checks at least as far back as the 1950's.  Even
> before that perhaps.  But as the accuracy of the ETD improved, we began
> to realize that contiguous interval checks were more and more
> important.  Some of us were not happy with the 0.5 cent accuracy of the
> SOT, so we modified them during the late 1970's, trying to get the
> accuracy down to 0.1 cent.
>
> We were getting closer to what aural tuners' limits are.  By 1978 many
> tuners had agreed upon one thing, that the temperament octave could, and
> should, be divided into contiguous major thirds, each having the same
> cent spread.  Aurally it worked better,
> changes in the temperament could be made with only four notes having
> been tuned.  A far cry from the old circle of fifths temperament!  ETD
> were getting close to being able to set this augmented triad by
> measuring equal amount of cents.  Now we had a way both aurally and
> visually to give the correct beat rates to each temperament we tuned,
> whether it be a spinet or concert grand, poorly scaled or not.  By the
> time the first SAT reached the market, around 1980, numerous temperament
> systems using contiguous intervals both aurally and visually had been
> designed.  We started learning phrases like "Direct Interval Tuning",
> "Octave Division Temperaments", 2:1 versus 4:2 and 6:3 octaves.  You
> won't find those phrases in Braid White's book!
>
> As the accuracy of the ETD improved, in many respects, so did aural
> tuning.  We could tune by machine, then listen and check by ear.  Or we
> could tune aurally, then double check our work visually.  Students
> learned faster.  Pros could  record an aural  concert tuning for
> duplication at a later date.  Pitch raising became easier.  Tuning forks
> became passe.  Many of us shortened the time it took to tune a piano.
> The Certified Tuning Examination was born.  And so on ...
>
> Now we are in the 1990's, with improvements in VTD coming more
> frequently.  Has aural tuning become a dinosauer?   We continue to
> advance electronically with our tuning aides, but can you still tune a
> piano if your ETD or VTD goes dead?
> How does a tuner know when the machine is malfunctioning?  Does your ETD
> pick up the wrong partial in the bass, and you end up tuning the note a
> third lower than it should be?  Can you achieve the same accuracy both
> aurally & visually?  Do you know when your machine is listening to the
> correct partial(s)?  How often are the notes checked aurally?  Does your
> machine read that an octave in the high treble is in tune but your ear
> tells you it is not?  Ever move your VTD around and get different
> readings?  Which reading is the correct one?   Do you force your
> machine's temperament upon a piano whether it works or not?  Are you
> listening to the feedback the piano gives and tune each and every note
> customized to the piano, the very best it can be?  How about a piano
> where A-440 is dead on, but the other notes are way flat?  Don't be
> surprised that your violin teacher has a tuning hammer and keeps A-440
> in tune.  Or maybe the last tuner set all of his A's OK, but was so far
> off on his temperament some fifths were beating wide instead of narrow.
> If you only measured the A's on this piano, what a shock when you begin
> to tune!  And which is better, to measure all of the A's or all of the
> C's to calculate out "the best" tuning?   Interesting, questions, and
> more questions ...