Standing on shoulders

[David ilvedson]

What exactly "sweet" means would be a start.  It would be very 
hard to tell the difference between the aural and machine tuning 
except that the aural might have a few more errors/variables in 
it.  Back long ago Kurtsweil came out with their keyboard which 
emulated a grand piano.  If you played the G# below middle C it 
had a noticeable beat in the unison.  Every single one of them 
had the same beat in the G#.  Maybe it made it more piano like 
to the designers?

David Ilvedson, RPT
Pacifica, CA

> Date:          Tue, 16 Jun 1998 19:12:27 -0400
> From:          Carl Root <rootfamily@erols.com>
> To:            pianotech@ptg.org
> Subject:       Re: Standing on shoulders
> Reply-to:      pianotech@ptg.org

> Gregory Torres wrote:
> > I find personally that when comparing a machine tuning with an aural one  I
> > found the aural more "sweet". Maybe the ETD tunings are "technically" more
> > accurate but I personally will tune aurally when faced with a nice
> > instrument and am not pressed for time. JMHO
> 
> We should be able to measure the 'sweet' tuning, compare it to the 'dry'
> technically accurate one, and determine what it is that makes the
> 'sweet' one better . . . . IF we can all agree it's better.  If we
> agree, then that becomes the new model.
> 
> Everything we do . . . .  regulation, tuning, voicing . . . . . can be
> measured for the sake of comparison.
> 
> Carl
> 
> 
> 
>