Aural versus ETD tuning training

[A440A@aol.com]

Ric writes: 
> I debate the

whole validity of this continuing "value debate" about ETDs and Aural

tunings. I certainly debate the value of the so called Tuneoffs in

providing us with any fundemental insights relative to the question they

were to address   <snip>  Why it should wake such

fervour, aggravation, and conflict amoung so many really puzzles me. I

mean... whats the point of that ? Or perhaps one subscribes to the idea

that there is nothing more to learn ??

Greetings, 
   There is always more to learn. sometimes history. Today, the fervor, 
acrimony, and negative vibes in the Machine/Ear contention only affect a 
small minority in either camp.  Vocal, yes, but not totally representative of 
our trade-group at large.  Among those most strongly affected are the 
fearful, and  usually, where the fear is strongest,the anger hottest. 
   The history of competition may have begun when a skilled ear could 
"out-tune" the Conn Strobo-tuner, so near the beginning, the machine earned a 
reputation of signaling a tuner only capable of second-rate work.  The tuner 
who had worked his way up by their ears, (knowledge was harder to come by 50 
years ago), might be forgiven his resentment of a high school band teacher, 
who knew nothing but the names of the notes and the dials, knocking off four 
or five customers a week with "box" tuning.  I remember it happening. 
      However, I know that many tuners who toted those brown boxes around, 
enjoyed a career of happy customers, even though some established tuners 
feared that if everybody had one of those boxes, they would be out of a job.  
Since tuning was the income producer for most, it was $urvival!!   Lotta heat.
    Things have changed.  Today, we have machines that meet what seems to be 
all expectations,  and we have denigrating comments.  The purists among us, 
(and I seem to suffer at least a streak of it), want to feel that if the 
machine can replace the ear, then the art of tuning dies.  We feel compelled 
to protect "ART" as though it is our sacred mission.  Curse the machines, 
down with Machina!   Anyhow, we resist accepting that art is not simply 
replicating it every closer to perfection.  I suppose the pertinent question 
to be debated here is "Can craftsmanship be taken to the level of art?"  Most 
of us think so, but in the commercial world, the difference between a merely 
Guild test-passing result and the master tuning it is compared to are lost to 
99% of the customers.  So, the contention between machine/ear camps is now 
about how close to perfection can one or the other gets. Today, the debate is 
about aesthetics, not survival.   
      For starters, "perfect" isn't available.  We all make the moral 
decision on "how close is close enough" several hundred times each tuning and 
every one of them may not be totally optimum.  Does it matter? And if so, 
then to whom?  That is what the ET tune-offs tried to decide.  What was shown 
was not that techs couldn't hear the difference, but that preferences were 
about evenly distributed between aural and machine.  From this we may decide 
that for practical purposes, on good scales, there is no difference. 
      Obscure occupations such as ours,(not everyone walks around every day 
thinking about pianos),  view our knowledge as something of value, and in the 
past, tended to keep it close, lest someone else begin stealing our 
customers, grabbing our grands, whatever.  The machines make that possible, 
as Jim's story of a newbie stepping and acquiring a veteran tuner's business 
for himself.  The aural tuner may protest that his tuning is more artistic, 
but the paying customer is actually where reality sits. ( In this case, since 
no price was mentioned, I am assuming that the machine tuning sounded better) 
  This could happen to any of us, but it is the natural way of competition 
and results in better quality work. I think the machines will be the reason 
that poor aural tuning just won't be accepted, anymore.  I hope so.   
     I have tried it both ways, I can get near equal results by either ear or 
machine, but there is no comparison in how much work would be involved 
without the technology.  The improvement I can make by ear to most of my 
machine tunings is not noticeable to anyone else, so what, me worry?  Do I 
feel shortchanged by allowing the machine to lead the way, not at all.  You 
can dig a very fine grave with a shovel, but a back-hoe can be a beautiful 
thing.  
   
 
Ed Foote RPT 
www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/
www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/well_tempered_piano.html