[pianotech] "Repeatable" tuning

[David Love]

I think the issue regarding repeatability as Ed Foote originally mentioned
was probably meant with recording sessions in mind, which I believe he does
a fair amount of.  With things like cutting in when producing a master
recording, duplicating the tuning exactly can be pretty essential and can be
much more difficult to do aurally then from a memorized tuning.  

 

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

 

From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of Susan Kline
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 9:00 PM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [pianotech] "Repeatable" tuning

 

On 1/27/2011 7:05 PM, PAULREVENKOJONES at aol.com wrote:

Hi, Paul 

Two responses: First, I read:



It won't be the same tuning. It can't be. It may be nice, but it won't be
the same.

And I felt like saying, "Do the words 'close enough to make no never mind'
mean anything to you?" Then I read:



 

In neither case is the original tuning "repeatable". It is a false premise
from which to argue. In large, the use of ETD's to "repeat" tunings works
within rather constrained limits and works well for large inventories of the
same types of pianos, and as a substitute for those who suffer hearing loss
in the high treble. To claim as its major advantage over aural tuning that
fine tunings are repeatable from the numbers used in prior tunings is an
unsupportable claim. 

And that went down pretty well for me. What I think we need to do is define
what exactly we are expecting to repeat. Can we tune a piano aurally over
and over again and convince a machine that it is EXACTLY THE SAME, to a
tenth of a cent for each note? Of course not. 

In a concert hall, if I look out and see many large and small varieties of
oscilloscopes occupying the chairs, I'll need that adult drink. 

But if one asks, "can a repeat tuning give the same musical experience as
before, if played by the same person?" I think that the answer is yes,
within any reasonable limit. The pianist won't be exactly the same as he or
she was before, either. The hall won't be the same, and maybe the audience
has all come down with bronchitis. But the tuning can still be recognizably
the same tuning, within the capacity of a bright musician to tell. If
someone was making a recording on the piano, with a lapse of time between
between two recording sessions, and one tuned it for both, being careful to
get the initial A to match the fork very well, the engineers could cut
between tracks from the two days without any difficulty. I think this could
be said to be repeatable enough for any useful purpose. 



 

I am really open to counter-arguments on this. As we develop data here at
CSPT, in our research, it would be worthwhile to make it available. 


I'm wondering why this question of EXACT repeatability (with such a strong
accent on the "EXACT") is of importance to so many people here? Is it even a
virtue? Does it do anything for us which needs doing? 

Susan Kline

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20110127/6197d57f/attachment.htm>