David Love wrote: >A change from 438 to 440 would be more like 8 cents. > >David Love >davidlovepianos@earthlink.net > > > David : Ah yes... sorry for any misunderstanding. I meant to say 2 Hz and it came out 2 cents. Thanks for spoting that. Grin... thats what happens when you are not used to thinking in cents. Funny... the only time I think in cents is when I want to describe the stretch in the high treble... and only then to clarify what a 3:1 12th stretch comes out to. In the bass I simply think octave types, and in the temperament range I think bps. Marcel : I am curious as to why Marcel would think that a 2 cents pitch raise would make more sense.. thats like from 439.5 to 440. Do you feel pitch raises should be left out of the whole thing? Cheers RicB >>We started with 438 and did a 2 hour tuning at 440. We did two isolated >>tunings thus, and every tuning afterwards was part of a hammer change >>and regulation package, which you probably remember. In all cases tho, >>we were going from 438 to 440. I'll ask them when they made the change >>when I go back in October. >> >>Cheers >>RicB >> >>Marcel Carey wrote: >> >> >> >>>Richard, >>> >>>Are you sure that you only had to do pitch raises and lowering of 2 >>>cents? >>>When I was in the Academy 4 years ago, the first tuning exam was 436 >>>to 440, then we had a few from 437 to 440. That made quite a pitch >>>raise. Have they changed the rules??? >>> >>>For me, 2 cents makes more sense. >>> >>>Marcel Carey, RPT >>>Sherbrooke, QC >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>_______________________________________________ >>pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > > >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC