<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html;=
charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY text=#000000 bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=580420705-21082004><FONT face="MS=
Sans Serif">I have no problem with floating pitch a small=
amount...3 cents sharp...maybe... but 1 cent flat=
max. I agree with "what's the point of determining=
with 15 minutes of tests how far off A440 you are...I will have=
gone the through the piano with a 3 cent pitch change in=
that amount of time....maybe 20 minutes. What is the=
nicest thing about a SAT III or equal is the ability to quickly=
go through the tuning and see what has changed. =
Tenor gone sharp? Whatever...I can't imagine=
stumbling around with a tuning fork anymore...and I can see=
where your coming from Richard. Change as little as=
possible for the most stable tuning. =
</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=580420705-21082004><FONT face="MS=
Sans Serif"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=580420705-21082004><FONT face="MS=
Sans Serif">David Ilvedson</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=580420705-21082004><FONT face="MS=
Sans Serif"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=580420705-21082004><FONT face="MS=
Sans Serif">----- Original message=
----------------------------------------><BR>From: Richard=
Moody <<A=
href="mailto:remoody@midstatesd.net">remoody@midstatesd.net</A>&=
gt;<BR>To: <<A=
href="mailto:tcole@cruzio.com">tcole@cruzio.com</A>>,=
'Pianotech' <<A=
href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A>><BR>Rec=
eived: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 01:09:29 -0500<BR>Subject: RE: Tuning=
with a fork and the Sanderson Baldassin=
procedure.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV align=left><SPAN class=580420705-21082004><FONT face="MS=
Sans Serif"><BR>To match a string on the piano with an A440=
tuning fork or A442 tuning fork takes a little more time than=
using a $19 pocket guitar tuner and is useful really only for a=
"test". BUT in reality you never match A440, you only=
determine how far you are from it and make a decision as the=
expert, to say, "this is close enough", or " the pitch=
needs to be raised and I need two tunings to get as=
good as I can get it. If the pitch needs to be raised you=
must make an expert guess how far above the pitch you should go.=
</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=580420705-21082004><FONT face="MS Sans=
Serif"> If the piano is sitting on 439 or 441=
and the contracts calls for 440, you are in compliance if you=
tune the piano to its A4 within this slight=
variance. So machine tuners adjust the=
machine, and aural tuners go ahead for the touch up. =
For some machine tuners 4 cents may look like a lot. =
But for musicians it is no problem. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=580420705-21082004><FONT face="MS Sans=
Serif"> </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=580420705-21082004><FONT face="MS Sans Serif">If=
you want to deliver the best tuning, any pitch raise should be=
touched up or at least "inspected" 24 hours later to allow for=
"settling"</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=580420705-21082004><FONT face="MS Sans=
Serif">and this is only the first of a number of considerations=
before changing the pitch of a performance instrument. =
Because to raise to pitch you must go OVER pitch which is a=
guess because you know the piano will come down---but how=
much??? So what is the point of determining with 15=
minutes of tests how far off A440 you are with a tuning=
fork? Just holding it in your hand for 30=
seconds will change its pitch as the cheapest electronic=
pocket tuner will show. So I have always advocated=
a range of 1 cps below or above the desired pitch is OK=
and the piano will be in better tune for the performance if=
tuned within this variance rather than raised or lowered=
to 5 or .5 cents according to the=
machine. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=580420705-21082004><FONT face="MS Sans=
Serif"> Lately I have been listening to the=
fork, putting it down, listening to A4 on the piano and if it=
sounds close enough, the tests come out closer than=
you would=
expect. For "accurate" pitch raises=
you do need to know the beat rates as determined by the fork=
or the reading of A4 by a=
machine. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=580420705-21082004></SPAN><SPAN=
class=580420705-21082004><FONT face="MS Sans=
Serif"> For concert tunings it is getting to the=
point where you should see what the electronic tuner=
says because these days most musicians carry a cheap pocket=
tuner. In the "good ole days" I bet it was between=
438 and 442 before they=
complained. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=580420705-21082004><FONT face="MS Sans=
Serif"> Of course you can go on and on, like=
listening to F2 on the piano with the tuning fork in your teeth.=
and comparing the rate of F2 and A4 (10th) on the=
piano. But still, if you have to raise pitch the rate of=
A4 on the piano it will beat sharp with the fork at first.=
By how much?? Experience is the=
best mentor.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=580420705-21082004><FONT face="MS Sans=
Serif"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=580420705-21082004><FONT face="MS Sans=
Serif">Richard Moody <A=
href="http://www.pnotec.com">www.pnotec.com</A> </FONT></SP=
AN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=580420705-21082004></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=580420705-21082004>
<P><FONT face=Arial>"By far the best proof is experience".<SPAN=
class=580420705-21082004> </SPAN>Sir=
Francis Bacon (1561-1626); English author and=
philosopher.</FONT></P></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=580420705-21082004><FONT face="MS Sans=
Serif"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=580420705-21082004> </SPAN></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma size=2><FONT face="MS Sans Serif"><FONT=
size=3> <SPAN class=580420705-21082004>[] =
</SPAN></FONT></FONT>-----Original=
Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> pianotech-bounces@ptg.org=
[mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Thomas=
Cole<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, August 20, 2004 11:40=
PM<BR><B>To:</B> Pianotech<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: Tuning with a=
fork and the Sanderson Baldassin=
procedure.<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;=
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">You don't=
need to count beats or make any calculations, although I did=
find it useful, at first, to tune a couple of contiguous thirds=
- for example, G2 - B2 and B2 - D#3 which have an approx. 4=
beats to 5 beats ratio - to learn what this relationship should=
sound like.<BR><BR>What makes this method work so well is that=
you can run a series of three contiguous thirds and easily=
decide if the middle one sounds more like the lower beat rate or=
the upper beat rate and adjust accordingly.<BR><BR>Tom=
Cole<BR><BR>Alan Forsyth wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid005801c4872f$ea8628d0$baf4193e@Aspire=
type="cite">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Arial>Isaac=
mentioned;</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV>"One of the nicest tricks I learned with the different Us=
methods is<BR>the 4:5 relation from contiguous thirds.=
............"</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Arial>I tried this once long ago but=
was flummoxed when it came to distinguishing the ratios. How on=
earth is one supposed to tell aurally whether one beat rate is=
25% faster or 20% slower than another beat=
rate?</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT=
face=Arial>AF</FONT></STRONG></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></B=
ODY></HTML>