other story

[A440A@AOL.COM]

Terry asks:
<<Have you, or anyone else, found that an aurally well-tuned HT (Kirnberger

for example, but Vallotti or whatever) is any different from a VTD

well-tuned HT? <snip>
 on a S&S B tuning ET should result in a very nice tuning -  Take that 
tuning, tune that same piano with the appropriate

offsets for the desired HT. Compare that SAT III HT tuning to an aural

tuning of the same HT on an identical piano  Will there, or should there, be 
significant differences?<< 

Greetings, 
      Interesting question.  I have done this several times.  When first 
reading Jorgensen,  I followed his aural instructions, struggling a bit at 
first, but soon finding that the resulting temperaments met all the criteria 
he gave.  It was only later that I found what I could do with those little 
rows of numbers and a SAT!  I immediately punched them up and compared the 
machine's offset created well temperament with my aural results.  The 
difference is so small that I consider it negligible. Especially compared to 
the difference between ET and any of the other logical tunings you would use 
on a piano.  I do use my aurally refined SAT tunings as  basis for the offset 
temperaments I sell, but on any piano over 6 feet, (imo&e) the difference 
between basing  the offsets on a solid FAC/RCT tuning or a really close aural 
ET are academic. 
Regards, 
Ed Foote RPT