Aural vs. electronic again, was "Re: Another newbie question"

[Bill Ballard]

At 10:39 AM -0500 1/19/03, Charles Neuman wrote:
>From: Bill Ballard <yardbird@vermontel.net>
>>  Are you aural or electronic? (not a trick question, BTW)
>
>Maybe it's not a trick question, but I'm not so new that I don't know the
>dangers of answering that question! I carefully avoided the recent
>discussion on it. I also know it's against PTG policy to advertise that
>one way is better than the other. But I'll take my chances. Here's my
>answer:

A fine answer. You're doing a great job on the oral dissertation, kid. <g>

My main reason for asking is  that last month we had two post from 
weekenders who said that they tuned their home piano just exactly as 
the Machine told them to, and it sounds bad. So can somebody mail 
them   the real TuneLab file please?

Not that I would ever profile, but it was a big relief that the last 
time you worried about that was a couple of years ago.

At 10:39 AM -0500 1/19/03, Charles Neuman wrote:
>I guess the message I get is that the ETD is a useful tool, but ultimately
>it's best to think of tuning as an aural activity.

Hands up, all  ETD tuners who do your final unison tuning with the 
machine. The machine is only for the first-pass structuring of the 
tuning. There's a fit and finish to it which has to be aural (and 
experienced), and not just in unisons work.

At 10:39 AM -0500 1/19/03, Charles Neuman wrote:
>My theory is that it
>provided a non-equal temperament that has key color, which is why it
>sounded good. (Heck, I might as well walk into two minefields today.)

Like, ET has an off-white color, but when you leave it out in the sun 
and it rots and sags, it takes on color. (Pay attention, Charles, I'm 
trying to step on the first one for you.)

At 10:39 AM -0500 1/19/03, Charles Neuman wrote:
>One said to tune the temperament aurally and THEN check it with
>an ETD. The other said it's useful to look at the ETD WHILE you are tuning
>your temperament. They would probably admit that each way has its place,
>but it was interesting to hear the two opinions expressed.

Quite likely you ran into two completely different personal 
preferences, in these two guys, not just in the educational use of 
ETDs.

At 6:24 PM -0800 1/19/03, Susan Kline wrote:
>If I'm roughing in a tuning, I put the hammer on the pin,
>play the notes, and pull immediately, leaving it about where
>I want, then taking the hammer on to the next tuning pin.
>Now suppose I'm using the ETD. I have to look at the thing,
>see which way the lights are going, change the direction,
>and wait a second to see if they are more or less stopped.
>Then take the hammer on to the next note. And maybe work
>a switch?


The further irony is that, while we ordinarily would be equating the 
feeling of the pin and wire moving compared to the sound of the 
change in pitch actually occurring, we're being asked to watch it. 
More to the point, watch for it. That is as in, wait for the ETD's 
GUI  to display it before we even know whether it needs correcting.

My experience this summer was that I was usually much faster at the 
CRT on a reasonably endowed laptop, in recognizing what needed to be 
done. Usually be a factor of 3 or 4. I don't think the faster chip or 
clock would make the difference.

At 6:24 PM -0800 1/19/03, Susan Kline wrote:
>and tweaking and stabilizing unisons is what
>takes me the bulk of tuning time, anyway.

Therein lies a tale.

  Bill Ballard RPT
NH Chapter, P.T.G.

Reality is the first casualty of technology
     ...........NPR Commentator Daniel Schorr
+++++++++++++++++++++