<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> <html>   Billbrpt@AOL.COM wrote: <blockquote TYPE=CITE>  <blockquote TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">The first tuning with the VT was > > > > > impressive to say the least and the second tuning was stunning! > > > > > > > > Why should there be a discrepancy between the two?</blockquote> I've read most of what has been said about this.  While I'm not saying that this new ETD is not somehow more advanced than previous ones, I tend to side with the aural tuning perspective.  The "stunning" sound that comes from a higher degree of precision can just as easily be achieved aurally.  It's all in whether the person doing the tuning wants to work on that high of a level or not.</blockquote> ......snip snip <blockquote TYPE=CITE>  Bill Bremmer RPT Madison, Wisconsin</blockquote> I think, Bill,  I would have to aggree. I dont feel I can say I am quite there yet...but I certainly believe...no I know that it is possible to learn to out-tune even the best of ETD's...no matter how good they get.  As long as they are following an algorithm...they are bound by it and can achieve no better then that algorithm allows for. They can never be creative. And that, in the end is decisive. On the other hand, they are capable of certain aspects of the tuning process we are not capable of, and they can display much ( if not all ) of this information in a way that can augment what our ears tell us. As learning tools they have tremendous potential...probably a lot more then most use them for. What they can teach us tho... can help us rely on them less and less as time goes by. Verituner succeeds probably exactly because it treats the piano tuning in more the same sense as the human ear/mind combination does. It does not simply assume that a calculated curve of one (and only one) partial based on the sampling of two or four or six or however many notes,  will result in a satisfactory tuning. It seeks to surpass this technology...which I believe has come to its logical conclusion. No one can deny that the single partial calculated curve approach works well. All honor to Sanderson and friends for that. But as all other things.... something better was bound to come along. At least thats how the picture is beginning to look... to me that is...hehe IMHO and all that I am sure...:) -- Richard Brekne RPT, N.P.T.F. Bergen, Norway <A HREF="mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no">mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no</A>  </html>