ETD's; selling RCT and Mac powerbook

[Don]

HI,

I believe Dean is hosting a site where you can advertise your equipment.

At 10:36 PM 2/15/99 -0800, you wrote:
>List, 
>
>I'm new on the list and don't know whether it is an appropriate place to
>advertise this but here goes anyway. I am switching platforms not out of
>disatisfaction with Macs, but just want to have a windows machine in the
field
>to go with my windows desktop. I would prefer to sell RCT and machine as a
>bundle, but I'll certainly consider separating them.
>
>"Switching platforms. Need to sell Apple PowerPC 2300c powerbook 100 MHz,
603e
>processor, 1.1 gig hard drive, 14.4 Express modem, 44 megs RAM, active-matrix
>color screen; Duo Dock (full dock); monochrome monitor; keyboard; mouse;
3x CD
>drive; cover for keyboard, monitor and dock; surge protector; OS 8.1; misc
Mac
>software; Reyburn CyberTuner version 3.0.1f4. $1775 obo. (Or $675 for RCT and
>$1100 for hardware) Contact Alan McCoy at (509)448-8861 Spokane, WA emailto:
>amccoy@icehouse.net"
>
>Thoughts on ETD's:
>
>I tuned aurally for about 15 years, used SAT for about 3 years, and have now
>used RCT for a little over a year.
>
>1. Battery: SAT is the clear winner here. Laptops suck a lot of juice and
>battery technology is just not quite there yet. For my laptop I always use an
>extension cord. I know there are some RCTers who do use batteries
successfully.
>I just have made the decision to use AC so I don't have to worry about power
>management.
>
>2. Size: No clear winner. I was initially concerned about where I would
put the
>larger laptop. It has become a non-issue for me. I almost never put the
laptop
>on the piano. Pianos wiggle while being tuned and I don't like the idea of
>wiggling my laptop and I don't want to change my hammer technique to
accomodate
>the machine. And what I discovered and love about RCT is that 1) the RCT
>display,  that is what you actually look at while you are tuning the
piano, is
>so large and easy to read and 2) I don't have to manually noteswitch (except
>for some large pitchraise situations) so I put the machine on a chair, music
>stand, table, bench, floor or some other handy place. The machine is often 5
>feet away from me while tuning. Easily read and no need to manually
massage the
>beast.  OK, for some tuners the SAT is a clear winner because it doesn't
have a
>lid to flap around and it is small enough to fit most anywhere. But for me
the
>RCT display is by far better - more information and easier to interpret.
>(Incidentally, my clients who have always virtually ignored the SAT are
>invariably intrigued by the RCT display. It is somehow more immediately
>understandable to them - to me too!). 
>
>3. Computer: No clear winner. RCT requires a computer. For some that is great
>because of all the things you can do with the machine in the field. For
others
>it would be a headache. Your choice. But one advantage of a computer is that
>the software it runs can be updated easily. To update SAT it must be sent
back
>for a new board. How many SAT III machines are there out there? In the year I
>have had RCT it has gone from version 2.0 to 2.5 to 3.0. RCT updates are
>downloaded from the Reyburn web page.
>
>4. Pitchraising: I'll go out on a limb here and cast my vote for RCT.  Both
>machines are indespensible aids in pitch correction. There is no way in hell
>aural methods can achieve such accurate and quick pitch correction. Both
>machines are truly unbelievable. However, I think RCT is quicker and more
>accurate. Dean has put a lot of work (including technician feedback over the
>years) in coming up with overpull percentages and weighted averaging which
>combine to make accurate pitchraising automatic. Having said that I also have
>no doubt that a person with good knowledge of how specific pianos respond to
>pitch correction and who really knows how to use the pitchraise calculator of
>the SAT can achieve very accurate pitch correction. I think however, that
>accurate pitch correction is just more easily accomplished with the RCT.
>
>5. Bass/tenor break and related scale-challenged pianos: I'm not sure
there is
>a clear winner here either. You just can't stop using your ears and the
>computer between your ears. Some pianos just require unacceptable
compromises -
>either there is a glitch in the thirds and sixths, or the octaves, fifths,
and
>fourths are terrible, or all of the above. The SAT uses the 4th partial
and 6:3
>octaves into the bass, and RCT lets you choose the 3rd or 4th partial and the
>5th or 6th partial. I have tried both. If there is an advantage here I
believe
>it is with RCT because you can choose your poison. With both machines you
have
>to devise some method of compromise. I can't stand bad octaves or bad
fifths so
>I tend to favor them, but in so doing my thirds don't progress smoothly (what
>the hell - some pianos just have outrageous glitches!)  For this region of
the
>scale it is often simplest to just do it by ear rather than with either
>machine.
>
>6. Customization: Both machines allow infinite customization. But again I
will
>assert that customization in RCT is easier. Choose your octave style for your
>taste for this particular piano in this particular location. Tweak it with
the
>Custom Equalizer. You want tight octaves on your Yamaha C3 in the mid
range yet
>want to open up the top end for this concert? Definitely doable with SAT,
just
>easier with RCT. Want to really stretch out the Steinway D for Gearge
Winston?
>Use the 12th partial in the bass with octave style 8. But get those unisons
>dead! Again the SAT will do a great job as will RCT. I think RCT provides
more
>flexibility and ease in this regard.
>
>---Alan McCoy
>amccoy@icehouse.net
>Spokane, WA
>
>
Regards,
Don Rose, B.Mus., A.M.U.S., A.MUS., R.M.T., R.P.T.

Tuner for the Saskatchewan Centre of the Arts

drose@dlcwest.com
http://www.dlcwest.com/~drose/
3004 Grant Rd.
REGINA, SK
S4S 5G7
306-352-3620 or 1-888-29t-uner