Tuning Evaluation was Tuneoff

[Richard Brekne]

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
I aggree David. In fact I would think a testing procedure for tuning
exams could be rather easily constructed along these lines. Such a test
would be much much easier to administer. No master tuning would be
necessary for one thing. That would mean you wouldnt really need more
then one person to set up and administer the test. Aural verification
could be included and part of CTE training and required qualifications
could be an expanded demonstratable knowledge of such.... Just a
thought..

"David M. Porritt" wrote:

>   One additional method of evaluation might be to confirm what each
> tuner is attempting to do.  There is a wide range of acceptable and
> even great tunings.  Octave stretch has a wide latitude depending on a
> person's subjective preferences. Therefore, in addition to the
> traditional evaluations used in the past, each tuner should declare
> what his/her intentions were, and the tuning be measured as to how
> close they came to what they intended to do.  Lets say one tuner says
> he/she is going to tune 4:2 octaves from F3 to C8, and 6:3 octaves
> from E3 to A0.  When the job is done, each note can be measured to see
> if the intentions were carried out.  That way you'd not have a "it
> sounds pretty good" but a "the goals were or were not met."  That's a
> little more objective. dave
>
> _____________________________
> David M. Porritt
> dporritt@mail.smu.edu
> Meadows School of the Arts
> Southern Methodist University
> Dallas, TX 75275
> _____________________________
>
--
Richard Brekne
RPT, N.P.T.F.
Bergen, Norway
mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no


---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/1b/86/43/78/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--