Sorry about that..

[Lance Lafargue]

No need to apologize Terry, but you have to admit, on it's own it throws a
red flag.  ;) When I first got my SAT, for about three years I kept a
notebook in my case and wrote down many of the common piano's SAT #'s and I
was surprised at how varied each model was  (like several U1's all with
different #'s).  Also, I attended a class by Roger Jolly and he showed how
voicing a hammer will give different FAC #'s as well (changes
inharmonicity).  Most of the "why's" are over my head.  I need to be careful
not to get tunnel wisdom.

Lance Lafargue, RPT
Mandeville, LA
New Orleans Chapter
lafargue@iamerica.net


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pianotech@ptg.org [mailto:owner-pianotech@ptg.org]On Behalf
Of Charly Tuner
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 10:09 AM
To: pianotech@ptg.org
Subject: Sorry about that..


I apologize to any list-ees if my query regarding "SAT Help" was taken
wrong. (I feel like John Lennon after his "Jesus" statement! lol) I am very
comfortable taking FAC's and using my SAT II. I was just looking for a
comparison with other SAT II/III users as to what kind of numbers they were
getting from less than "well scaled" pianos, such as spinets, and espesially
  where you find wound bichords at F3. I am also aware of using 2 pages in
memory, or tuning the first plain wire string AFTER F3, then storing that
number on F6. I was just curious to compare what I was getting with others
in the same/similar situation. I should have been more specific.

Regards,

Terry Peterson
Los Angeles, CA
Associate Member, PTG

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com