This whole discussion led me to spend the afternoon messing around with Tunelab in the shop on a Yamaha console. The pitch raise worked out OK, but I was not happy with the tuning curve that it came up with for the fine tuning. After messing around with it for quite a while I gave up. It seemed to do well on the lower half of the piano, but I couldn't get the stretch in octaves 4 and 5 to match what my ear wanted. In order to get the curve where I wanted it in that area, the treble part of the curve was through the ceiling sharp! The program is made to be able to custom adjust the curve, but I could not get the shape that I wanted no matter how I tried. People keep comparing ETDs to computers. But if I was using a calculator that made me want to check its answers every few minutes, I would throw it in the garbage!! I'm absolutely convinced that ETD's can help you accomplish a mediocre tuning in less time and less stress. But, like many have said, you can't rely on it for the correct answer. You have to know how to tweak it. The pitch raise is perhaps the best aspect of them. I can also see how you could get a temperament figured out pretty efficiently. Beyond that, I don't trust 'em. Sometime I'll have to spend some time with someone who really knows the program. Maybe there is something I'm missing. It would be interesting to try Cybertuner and see if the results would be more to my liking. Anyways, for now I'm sticking to the old fashioned way! Ry On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Kent Swafford <kswafford at gmail.com> wrote: > The recent tuning discussions on pianotech have been more interesting than > I can communicate, more educating than I care to admit! > > It is great to know that using intervals to check unisons is a technique > that is in general use in some places. I only listen to temperament > intervals with all strings open, so if unisons are off, temperament is off. > Since we as tuners are interested in interval widths, if a unison has a > string that is sharp by x, and another unison has a string that is flat by > x, then the interval between the two is off by 2x. We use intervals to check > unisons because doing so effectively "doubles", that is, compounds the > unison errors. > > It is also good to know that others are finding OnlyPure a path to > ever-more-clean unisons (and the improved hammer techniques that cleaner > unisons require). Experience those clean unisons and you'll get hooked, for > sure. > > While I think this discussion has been pianotech at its best, there might > still be room for improvement. 8^) > > For obvious example, I don't see why one would want to hear about the > weaknesses of ETD tuning from a strictly aural tuner. Similarly, I don't see > why one without aural tuning skills could expect to persuasively argue that > aural tuning skills are unnecessary if he hasn't actually experienced the > benefit of aural tuning. Shouldn't we speak from our strengths? Persons with > both aural and visual tuning skills are the ones who can speak to the > strengths and weaknesses of each. Only those with significant experience > with a number of different ETDs can speak to the relative merits of each > ETD. For example, it would be amusing to hear a specific ETD dismissed by > one unfamiliar with its actual use. > > Kent Swafford > > > -- Ryan Sowers, RPT Puget Sound Chapter Olympia, WA www.pianova.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20110130/b8b3d4dc/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC