> >My question to this group is: Do you feel that our temperament standards >are a little too high? I would like some feedback. I am not promoting >Historical or hysterical tunings. In all of the classes where I have done >this type of test, it was conceded that both tunings were good tunings. > >Have I opened a "can or worms" or what? > >Jim Coleman, Sr. > Careful Jim, reality is a very dangerous thing to dabble in. In all likelihood, if I weren't one of the "grandfathered in" that Gina mentioned, I very possibly would not have thrown myself on the "tuning test" sword more than once, well, maybe twice, before either passing, or giving it up. The point is that when the "minimal standards" are set at the edge of where a PTG certified tech feels he/she can comfortably function on a day to day basis, in a variety of situations, with less than wonderful instruments, maybe it's time to re-think the motivations for setting the standards where the were in the first place. I'm all for competence in the tech, and reasonable minimal allowable standards, but I agree that it should be scaled to the hardware we work with, and realistic expectation of result rather than the egos of those that establish the standards. On the other hand, realistic expectation should be kept as high as is possible under any given set of circumstances. It seems to me that the only way to accurately judge realistic, rather than ideal standards is to follow all the "successful" and "respected" tuners in the PTG (another judgement call) for a week and record all the tunings they do in the field, against "master tunings" of all the pianos they tuned in that week and compute a "mean tuning" score to determine what actually passes for good work out there in the world. I would bet that the observed quality of work would range from incontestably great to something you wouldn't particularly want anyone to know about. This can't be practically done, of course, which is very probably how the temperament scoring section got this way in the first place. In some of the "Guild" systems in effect in other professions today, the "masters" can (and do) withhold "master" status from an "apprentice" until the "apprentice" produces something so amazing that the incumbent "masters" are too embarrassed to reject it. Granted, tuning is more easily quantifiable then a carving of an Alabaster Winged Snigwidget in full cry, but standards must be set in either case. In short (yea, right!) I agree with your ideas, and reasoning. Otherwise, please pardon the ramblings. Ron
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC