He wouldn't catch any flak at all if he'd just live and let live, Jer. Player techs -- always room for plenty of good player techs. He doesn't have to be a concert technician. He doesn't have to be an RPT, or even an aural tuner. I'm just not going to let him tell me I'm inferior to him because I am one. sssssssssssssssssssssssssssnnnnnn On 2/2/2011 5:41 PM, Gerald Groot wrote: > > I know one thing. I do appreciate the Duaine's and Rick Davies that > works on player pianos. Frankly, I hate working on them and won't. > Rick Davies lives about 60 miles from me. He is not an RPT but yet, I > am proud to call him my friend and to recommend him all of the time > for every referral I receive regarding player rebuilds because he does > good work. I sure don't know what I'm doing when it comes to all of > that player crap and I readily admit it too and so, I leave it to > these guys. There are plenty of player pianos out there and will be > for eons to come yet. > > Jer > > *From:*pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] > *On Behalf Of *Dean May > *Sent:* Wednesday, February 02, 2011 8:23 PM > *To:* pianotech at ptg.org > *Subject:* Re: [pianotech] 4ths 5ths > > Fortunately the rich and varied human experience may not require one > to fit into one of Wim's three narrow categories. > > >>There are three different levels of tuners. There are those who tune > aurally, but are not able to pass the tuning exam, which requires very > aural basic tuning skills. These tuners are convinced that the tuning > test is flawed, but are happy to tune at their level. They make enough > money from their customers, and do not see need to try to improve > their tuning skills. << > > Or perhaps they are able to pass the test. Perhaps they are not > necessarily convinced the test per se is flawed, but after thirty > years in the business see no compelling reason to subject themselves > to the process or expense. They continue to improve their tuning > skills, make plenty of money, are gratified to hear continuous reports > from new customers that their pianos have never sounded so good, > derive great satisfaction from being able to solve problems that have > stumped other tuners, love being able to share tips with younger > techs, and thoroughly enjoy being able to restore music to a house by > bringing life to pianos for minimal cost that other tuners have condemned. > > Personally I have no desire to cater to the CAUT industry, which is > the most compelling reason I can come up with for me to take the test > at this stage of my life. (I'm 53 years old and too tired. I should > follow Terry Peterson's lead). The thing I love most about this > business is connecting with lots of regular folks for customers, and > for the most part, they have no idea what RPT means. I don't have RPT, > yet I lead all the area tuners, one of whom is a CAUT RPT, in my > pricing. What does that say? > > One of the biggest problems I have with the test is that, being a BSME > PE, I understand the nature of testing instruments. To pass, I will > have to study to take the test. I know there will be artificial > questions on the test that have little to do with the nature of my > business (e.g., when did A440 become the industry standard pitch). I'm > busy enough. I'd rather all my study efforts be devoted to improving > skills that actually help my customers, not passing a test. > > The main benefit to RPT status is for younger technicians to offer > some instant credibility. Certainly not the only benefit and I do not > intend to denigrate the status. I commend those of you who have > it. What I wish to say is please cut just a little slack to those of > us who have been doing this for awhile and have chosen not to go the > RPT route for our own reasons. > > Consider Duaine Helcher, the list's favorite whipping boy. This man > obviously has a few clues about pianos, and has spent considerable > time in continuing ed and perserving rare player piano information. > Yet some of you talk to him with such condescension like he is totally > ignorant bcause he won't pursue RPT that it gets embarrassing. Give > the man a little credit. He has some good things to share. Do you > really want him to stop posting to this list? > > I figure, like most of you on this list, I spend 200-300 hours per > year on continuing education, both in learning and sharing with > others. Think about how many hours per week you spend on this list > alone, multiply by 52, then add in chapter meetings, conventions, > research for individual jobs, etc. I love being in a craft profession > where one is continually challenged to get better. Thanks to all on > this list who share so generously and as a result have made me a > better tuner/technician (even Duaine). > > Dean > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:*pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] > *On Behalf Of *tnrwim at aol.com > *Sent:* Wednesday, February 02, 2011 6:50 PM > *To:* pianotech at ptg.org > *Subject:* Re: [pianotech] 4ths 5ths > > Allow me to make one final comment on this thread. > > There are three different levels of tuners. There are those who tune > aurally, but are not able to pass the tuning exam, which requires very > aural basic tuning skills. These tuners are convinced that the tuning > test is flawed, but are happy to tune at their level. They make enough > money from their customers, and do not see need to try to improve > their tuning skills. > > Or perhaps they are able to pass the test. Perhaps they are not > necessarily convinced the test if flawed, but seeno compelling reason > to subject themselves to the process. They continue to improve their > tuning skills, make plenty of money, are gratified to hear continuous > reports from new customers that their pianos have never sounded so > good, derive great satisfaction from being able to solve problems that > have stumped other tuners, thoroughly enjoy being able to restore > music to a house by bringing life to pianos for minimal cost that > other tuners have condemned > > Then there are those tuners who use an ETD, and are satisfied with > the results they get. They do not see a need to try to improve on it. > They think the tuning exam is not necessary because they know, in > their heart, that the ETD gives them the best tuning that can possibly > be gotten out of the piano. Most of their customers are happy with > their results, and they do not see the need to try to improve on their > tuning skills. > > And then there are those tuners who are able to listen to the results > of an ETD, and not only can hear the minor flaws it produces, but can > do something about it. These are the tuners who are willing to spend > the extra time and effort to correct the minor flaws, and do the best > tuning that instrument can produce, not necessarily because their > customer demands it, but for their own satisfaction, which is why they > became an RPT in the first place. > > Wim. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul T Williams <pwilliams4 at unlnotes.unl.edu> > To: pianotech <pianotech at ptg.org> > Sent: Wed, Feb 2, 2011 11:52 am > Subject: Re: [pianotech] 4ths 5ths > > Susan, unfortunately, you're preaching to a wall. Quit feeding the > cat. If you feed a stray cat, he'll come back again and again. > Please just call it quits with this guy. You and he are never to > agree, and that's that. Let's all just let this go and go back to our > lives and tuning the way we see fit. The eternal argument isn't just > between you two (and a some on Wim), and keeps creeping up every 6 > months or so and then we're all back to the "circle the wagons", here > comes the enemy thing. > > The strange, but funny thing is, 99% of the home-owned piano people > would ever know what method is better, can't hear the difference, or > care: Only the most professional pianists and other master musicians > will be able to tell; AND, the beauty of the tuning is in the master > of the hammer skills and ears to hear; not the devices he/she uses to > get it there. Some aural tuners are awesome, some ETD tuners are > awesome. I will give you this, however, Susan; You have to use your > ears and intuition, period! Merely looking at a machine will never > make a great tuner. JMHO. There again, another can of worms that must > be used for fishing, not arguing. > > Nothing you, I, or anybody on this list is going to change the way > Duiane or any other is going to do "their" thing. It's too bad to not > be open minded, but those with a barred door can not open it. > > Let's please drop this thing! > > Thank you. Still aural, with an occasional ETD helper... JUST TO HELP! > > Paul > > > From: > > > > Susan Kline <skline at peak.org <mailto:skline at peak.org>> > > To: > > > > pianotech at ptg.org <mailto:pianotech at ptg.org> > > Date: > > > > 02/02/2011 11:54 AM > > Subject: > > > > Re: [pianotech] 4ths 5ths > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > On 2/1/2011 11:30 PM, Duaine Hechler wrote: > You are being the most boisterous against ETD usage. > > > I'm being the most boisterous in favor of aural tuning. > > What you take as dissing ETDs in general are my attempts > to explain why I (not anyone else, _I_) don't want to use > one. > > My problem with you isn't that you use an ETD. It's that > you seem to hate anyone who uses aural tuning instead of > one. > > Also, I believe the many experts here, most of whom use > ETDs every day, when they say it can't stand alone. > > Now, these ears of yours ... It's not a physical problem, > obviously. It's a strain on your patience and concentration, > because the beats are hard for you to hear. This happens to > some people, especially when they are beginning. The trick > is to find out WHERE (at what pitch) you should be > listening for the beats. > > They are higher partials, not the fundamental. You obviously > can hear them somewhat, or you couldn't tune unisons and > octaves. > > If you set up an interval, and want to hear the beats, start > with thirds in the middle register, which are going not too > slow, not too fast. Mute off the two notes so each is a single > string. Start tuning one of the notes, till you get a good, > prominent beat. Some of the beats for major thirds are so > prominent they practically knock your socks off! That should > give you an idea of the pitch at which the beat is occurring. > You can hum it. If I were there I could hum it at you. > wow - wow - wow - wow etc. > > Once you figure out which pitch to listen at, the whole thing > should ease up and not be such a big problem. You can gradually > listen to faster beats and to slower ones. > > You have noticed that when you hear a fifth or a fourth, it > has a curl to it? It's like a vowel sound. You can vocalize > the vowel sound and then get it to go the speed you want as > you tune the note. This kind of slow-beating interval is > highly useful to evaluate how even your temperament is. It > can be a vocal thing, like oooaaaawwwwuuuu. For unisons, also, > vocalizing helps. You want to get long open vowels, like ah > or oh, instead of eeeee or diphthongs, like eeeeyyaaaa. > > Don't worry about beats per second. Theoretically it's good > information, but most of the determinations you need are relative > instead of numerical. It's good to have a rhythmic memory of > how fast the F-A at the start of the temperament sequence goes. > Then one tunes the octave F, and fiddles the C# in between so > that the three thirds progress. None of that takes counting > against a stopwatch, or anything. And there are four notes of > the scale in pretty good places. > > Heck, it's a start. Just master that and you should feel an > awful lot more confidence and comfort. Listening for fourths > should stop being an ordeal by the Inquisition. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20110202/2d204ddd/attachment-0001.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC