<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1543" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Hi,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Only thinkin</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Battery how old? Temperature make a difference with
the battery?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Best to use a new battery and recal before
test.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>Joe Goss RPT<BR>Mother Goose Tools<BR><A
href="mailto:imatunr@srvinet.com">imatunr@srvinet.com</A><BR><A
href="http://www.mothergoosetools.com">www.mothergoosetools.com</A></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=formsma@gmail.com href="mailto:formsma@gmail.com">John Formsma</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=pianotech@ptg.org
href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">Pianotech List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, July 01, 2007 4:44 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Accufork & pitch reliability
- was Acufork II you want to sell?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>I'm glad someone else brought this up. I think my AccuFork II
also has some pitch problems. <BR>Measurement a couple weeks ago with a
friend's RCT showed variation of 0.4 cents, measured about five times in about
couple minutes. I was taking the RPT tuning exam at Kansas City, and the day
before the exam calibrated the AccuFork with the CTE's SAT III. <BR><BR>The
next day at the exam, the A4 I had tuned was 1.7 cents sharp. I had checked
with both B1 and F2, and was almost completely certain the beats were the same
as with the AccuFork. <BR><BR>After the pitch part of the exam was over, I
again checked the AccuFork with the same SAT. It was about 0.4 - 0.6 cents
sharp, judging from the speed the lights were moving. We didn't take
time to calibrate the AccuFork then; only to move the slider to the place
where it was actually A440 as measured by the SAT.<BR><BR>Now, I passed the
tuning exam with very high scores, so it was verified that I can hear beats
quite well. The only thing I can think of is that the AccuFork pitch drifts,
or I just didn't set the A4 pin and string correctly (not very likely).
<BR><BR>I don't have an ETD, so it's kind of hard to visually check the
AccuFork. Last night, I downloaded a guitar tuner program to my Palm. It
showed about the same pitch variation as the RCT.<BR><BR>What device should I
trust more? The Palm? Or the AccuFork? <BR><BR>Is there somewhere on the
internet that is a totally reliable place to get smack-on A440.00 Hz?
I'd like to figure out the problem, but don't really know which device to
begin with. I suppose I could download a trial version of TuneLab, but how
would I know it is more precise than the AccuFork? (Do ETDs drift too?)
<BR><BR>Yes, yes, I know I'm talking about 0.4 cents at most, so it's not that
big of a deal. But I would like to have it within 0.1 cents, if not dead
on.<BR><BR>JF<BR><BR>
<DIV><SPAN class=gmail_quote>On 7/1/07, <B class=gmail_sendername>terryb</B>
<<A href="mailto:t46xd8jb@xplornet.com">t46xd8jb@xplornet.com</A>>
wrote:</SPAN>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">Jim,<BR><BR>I
have an Accu-Fork II which I purchased several years ago, hoping to use it
as a pitch source for the tuning exam. According to my RCT it was 0.43 cents
flat. If it is left turned on for about one minute, it comes up to pitch.
I'll sell it for $75.00 (battery not included). Shipping would be via mail.
<BR><BR>Terry Beckingham RPT
<DIV><SPAN class=e
id=q_11382307d778d43b_1><BR></SPAN></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>