I aggree entirely Allan. Use both ear and machine. But I think really, that in the end only machine will be used. And no doubt the resulting tunings will be quite satisfactory compared to todays standards... if a bit narrowly defined. All this needs to be put in the greater perspective of other developments within the industry. Everywhere we look acoustic instruments are being replaced more and more with electronic or hybrids, many of these do not require tuning at all. As the instrument base disapates, so will the economic base for supporting proffesional tuner/technicians, resulting in a rather significant lessening of our numbers. As that happens general knowledge base will fall more into the realm of archived information that fewer and fewer will understand, bother to learn, or even have access too. In the end you will have a handfull of technicians spread around the globe that have a reasonably good idea of what they are doing, servicing the nostalgic remains of a glorious past. Very much like what we see today in the harpsichord/clavichord world. Now personally I dont have the slightest problem with this. All things must pass in time, and are most often replaced with something else... which is cool. The piano as we know it has only been around for a little over a hundred years... its immediate predecesor about a hundred more... and the general species about 300 years. Enormous bodies of music were made before that time, much of it on instruments no longer used, much of it lost or forgotten on some dusty shelve of some museum. So will it be with our time. And like our time, the music of the future will be an expression of the people living then... it will be their creativity, their endeavour. Why should we even dream of thinking that they should necessarilly just keep on copying what was done before them, instead of going in new directions ? Cheers RicB Allan Gilreath wrote: > > List, > > I think Ed is right on track here. So often when I read these disputes > it seems that the assumption is either all or nothing on either side; > either totally aural or totally machine. What's so wrong with using > both? I love using a nicely sharpened and tuned Lie-Nielsen hand plane > but my Ridgid power thickness planer is certainly useful. Even after > typing this, I re-read and see it isn't the best comparison. > > Expanding my art is vital to me but I also appreciate the advancements > of technology. For me they work in concert. If we keep our minds open, > keep training ourselves and work together rather than against each > other, we stand a much better chance of accomplishing what we desire. > > Allan > Allan L. Gilreath, RPT > > - -- Richard Brekne RPT, N.P.T.F. UiB, Bergen, Norway mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html http://www.hf.uib.no/grieg/personer/cv_RB.html
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC