In a message dated 1/27/2011 9:32:29 P.M. Central Standard Time, dahechler at att.net writes: That being said, however, the ETD would be - closer - to the same because it will have the same basic starting reference point - every - time. Meaning, the tuning is calculate-able, has the same amount of stretch in the same places, be more accurate, etc. Closer is an interesting word, and is a "wiggle" argument. The human ear undergoes changes, but usually not dramatically. Other than the calibration of the tuning fork, which can vary wildly, but for the sake of argument let's say is controlled and calibrated within the same variability of an ETD's internal variability (pitch calibration and variation on ETD's is as much recognized as that on tuning forks), then the starting point is the same. My ear can set A4 against F2 with a fork the same every time, certainly within a very narrow range, and certainly no wider than the "fundamental-only" pitch reading of the EDT. The argument of repeatability simply isn't compelling as the goodness of the EDT when we are talking about precision over time. As I said, inventory management issues, old age, and (as someone else mentioned) alternative tunings, are certainly strengths, and not dismissable. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20110127/612a28b0/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC