<HTML>In a message dated 12/23/01 12:14:02 PM !!!First Boot!!!, tompiano@gate.net writes: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I have one concert hall that I have invested at least 15hrs. of tuning-data-input time. The only problem is that I'm never satisfied with my saved results, even when I'm sure I imputed  data correctly and my tuning is complimentary as possible. </BLOCKQUOTE> I have tuned both concert hall D's at UA for 5 months now and I always tune them to the canned tuning in my SATIII. The first couple of times I tried to make a few changes, but found that the changes I made corresponded with what the machine was telling me. What I wasn't doing was making absolutely sure the lights stood still. The other thing I found is that I educated the piano players to the tuning I put on the piano. With the tuning being consistent, the players know what to expect. They like what they hear, compliment me on it, and now expect the piano to sound that way every time. This has also educated me. I used to hear it different (I didn't stretch the upper octaves as much). This has saved me a lot of time. All I do now is turn on the SATIII and let it do the tuning for me. The only time I "experiment," is with some of the practice room pianos. But even then, I usually go back to what the canned tuning tells me. The only other time I experiment, is on a piano that is not in the machine, and I have to set my own FAC. Then I rely more on my ear to tell me if it right or not. Wim</HTML>