>Antares wrote: >I think it is necessary for every tuning apprentice / student / professional >to first tune thousands of pianos aurally in order to get trained properly, >develop a tuning 'ear' and so know by instinct how to make a decent tuning. >In that case, when the battery of the ETD is low he/she can continue solving >the Chinese puzzle. Ron K. wrote: >This concept has always bothered me..... > >So, who is paying for that training, A store, the clients, the apprentice, whatever---if someone wants to learn bad enough, they will. > and does it line up with the 2nd point >in the PTG code of ethics? (listed below) > >2. I will render the best possible service under the circumstances, always >keeping the best interests of my client in mind. Yes it does. Using one's ears is the zenith of this craft; if it's not, you should hang it up and do something else. It's all about how a piano sounds (and feels)---isn't it? Find a store and do floor tunings for cheap. Get the work in. Do pro bono work for poor churches, old folks' homes, schools. My tunings after tuning 100 pianos---before I ever went into a paying clients' house--- were a hell of a lot better than a lot of tunings I've heard since by guys who are "in and out:" clockwatchers. Guys who accept that their tunings "aren't the best but they're acceptable. To who? To you? Really? In your gut, in your heart of hearts? Or acceptable to the mythical "THE CLIENT," who "can't tell the difference anyway," according to many tuners I've talked to and heard from. I refuse to accept that paradigm. I have some personal pride in my craft. > >I know... "We've always done it that way." For good, good reason. This throwing of the baby out with the bathwater by this generation of technicians is starting to bother me. Have you ever heard a really fabulous aural tuning---by Mohr, by Virgil Smith, by Bill Garlick. Gorgeous. Inspiring. Musical. Magical. Capable of providing strong psycho-acoustic illusion. Beautiful. You want to abrogate that? Please, Ron. Stop and take a look back. You stand on the shoulders of unnamed, unremembered yet gifted craftsmen/artists/piano technicians. Honor them. > >I liken aural tuning to vintage wine-making. When it's a good year (tuning) >it can be very good, but when it's a bad year (tuning) it can be awful. Why would it EVER be awful, if you're a professional? >Some machine tunings aren't the best, but they are usually acceptable. Speaks for itself. Frightening. >It may be time to rethink whether it is best for our profession to teach >aural techniques first, given the above code. I think it would be better to >teach "assisted" aural tuning, leaving the full aural experience for those >that wish to pursue that option. I couldn't disagree more. "Uh, this is a craft based on using your ears, but don't use your ears to do the most basic, oft-repeated, arguably most important thing we do as professional craftspeople..." Sound crazy? It IS crazy. > It's enough in the beginning to focus on >unisons, and hammer technique. This is not a job for sissies. Do it all. Use and trust your God-given talents. > In fact, as Antares wrote, it may be best >for experienced techs to focus on unisons, and hammer technique, too! Absolutely. AND the temperament, AND octaves, AND stretching musically. > >Ron Koval >(can-o-worms opener) I'd say that. You got my dander up...... :---) > > >_________________________________________________________________ >Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online >http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 > >_______________________________________________ >pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC