Verituner

[antares]

There are a few points that I miss in either Mr Bremmers comment or  yours:

I have stated in my emails that
a. I have tuned aurally for many (30) years (tuned between 40 and 50
thousand pianos)
b. I have learned (in Japan) to tune very efficiently and very precise
c. I work in a concert hall which is known for its quality
d. I now work with a machine that for the first time, in my experience,
gives a tuning that is the most accurate of all and made me so scared about
my own abilities that I immediately went back to aural tuning just to find
out about my abilities

Furthermore, and this is important... I have never said that aural tuning is
out or bad or less than what ever, I have had more than enough of my share.

I actually reacted to somebody who posed a question about the Verituner on
this forum and I gave a precise and enthusiastic response without saying
anything negative about other tuning machines or aural tuning in general.

And... most  'so so' comments about the verituner come from people who have
no working experience with it.

Lastly, I do not wish to go into a discussion about whether an ET tuning is
wrong as Mr Bremmer so diplomaticly brings forward. I always try to respect
the opinion of others without boldly shoving their opinion aside as rubbish
and all wrong 

quote from Mr bremmer :

 "I don't need a device that tells me what to do, especially if I know that
it's wrong to begin with"

unquote.

I do like aural tuning too, I do like my wonderful Verituner very much and I
do like ET very very much..... so let me have my fun, please.... Mr bremmer?

friendly greetings
from

Antares,

Amsterdam, Holland

"where music is, no harm can be"

> From: Richard Brekne <Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no>
> Reply-To: pianotech@ptg.org
> Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2001 22:42:47 +0200
> To: pianotech@ptg.org
> Subject: Re: Verituner
> 
> 
> 
> Billbrpt@AOL.COM wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>>> The first tuning with the VT was
>>>>>>>> impressive to say the least and the second tuning
>>> was stunning!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Why should there be a discrepancy between the two?
>> 
>> I've read most of what has been said about this.  While I'm not
>> saying that
>> this new ETD is not somehow more advanced than previous ones, I
>> tend to side
>> with the aural tuning perspective.  The "stunning" sound that
>> comes from a
>> higher degree of precision can just as easily be achieved
>> aurally.  It's all
>> in whether the person doing the tuning wants to work on that
>> high of a level
>> or not.
> 
> .......snip snip
> 
>> 
>> Bill Bremmer RPT
>> Madison, Wisconsin
> 
> I think, Bill,  I would have to aggree. I dont feel I can say I
> am quite there yet...but I certainly believe...no I know that it
> is possible to learn to out-tune even the best of ETD's...no
> matter how good they get.  As long as they are following an
> algorithm...they are bound by it and can achieve no better then
> that algorithm allows for. They can never be creative. And that,
> in the end is decisive.
> 
> On the other hand, they are capable of certain aspects of the
> tuning process we are not capable of, and they can display much (
> if not all ) of this information in a way that can augment what
> our ears tell us. As learning tools they have tremendous
> potential...probably a lot more then most use them for. What they
> can teach us tho... can help us rely on them less and less as
> time goes by.
> 
> Verituner succeeds probably exactly because it treats the piano
> tuning in more the same sense as the human ear/mind combination
> does. It does not simply assume that a calculated curve of one
> (and only one) partial based on the sampling of two or four or
> six or however many notes,  will result in a satisfactory tuning.
> It seeks to surpass this technology...which I believe has come to
> its logical conclusion. No one can deny that the single partial
> calculated curve approach works well. All honor to Sanderson and
> friends for that. But as all other things.... something better
> was bound to come along.
> 
> At least thats how the picture is beginning to look... to me that
> is...hehe IMHO and all that I am sure...:)
> 
> --
> Richard Brekne
> RPT, N.P.T.F.
> Bergen, Norway
> mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no
> 
>