<html><body> <DIV>Hi Ed,</DIV> <DIV>Yes, I use the f2 test for the fork. I find that f3 doesn't work that well fo rme anyway.  I was taught to use f3 but I already knew about the f2 test from seeing Jim Coleman do it on the Randy Potter video.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Speaking of test, how you test octaves when you get way up in the trebble?  Do you use 17th exclusively, or is there another test I could use?  I know that for 4ths the third sixth test works and for 5ths, the major third minor third works, minor third is the first and major is the scond interval.  They are to beat at the same rate I think. Is that correct?</DIV> <DIV>Marshall</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">-------------- Original message -------------- From: ed440@mindspring.com > Marshall- > > My Walker blue fork is calibrated to armpit temperature, and is accurate to > within plus or minus 0.3cents of 440hz, since I must remove it from my armpit > briefly to use it. I have not been able to get this close a result with the > nickel plated fork, but perhaps I've been impatient with armpit warming time on > the larger fork. > > You need not worry about this if you're getting the Acufork. > > I hope you're using the F2 test note method. It should be very accurate with > the Acufork, as you can have a long period of time to count comparison beats. > > Ed > > > > > >Hi Ed, > >Sorry for the delay in responding. I spend a couple of hours telemarketing > >my tuning services. I figure, by the time I land some jobs tuning, I'll > >have been practicing at the same time, and have more experience under my > >belt. > > > >The fork I have is the blue walker fork, blued steel I think it's called. > >They have nickel plated ones as well, but I don't konw anything about the > >properties of these forks. I like the idea of the acufork because I don't > >have to worry about striking the fork, listening, adjusting the pin, fooling > >with the mute etc. It would save me time,to just leave it on and adjsut the > >note to meet the right pitch. I might treat myself to one for an early bday > >present and make 41 a good year like 40 has been. > >Marshall > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: <ED440@MINDSPRING.COM> > >To: <PIANOTECH@PTG.ORG> > >Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 2:48 PM > >Subject: electronic pitch source > > > > > >> RicB wrote: Dean Reyburn used to offer > >> an electronic pitch source that was quite inexpensive. Seiko I think, > >> and they were not exactly on the nose... but within a 0.5 cent window or > >> something. > >> > >> Ric- > >> The Seiko is fine for calibrating electronic devices, but not aural > >> tuning. It has an extremely loud second partial and a very soft first > >> partial. > >> > >> Marshall- > >> For the time being, you might do better to carry your fork in your pocket, > >> and maybe get it calibrated to pocket temperature. (I'm assuming it's a > >> steel fork. Aluminum forks are too temperature sensitive.) > >> > >> The Sanderson tool gives four pitches, so it's not much more expensive > >> than four top quality forks, not to mention the 50cents sliding scale. I > >> want one, too. > >> > >> Ed Sutton > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > > > > _______________________________________________ > pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives </BLOCKQUOTE></body></html>