<!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 5.50.4611.1300" name=GENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=#ffffff> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>    Richard Brekne = wrote; </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>    "<FONT face="Times = New Roman" size=3>I have to admit that since becoming fascinated with Virgils so = called beatless<BR>octaves my tunings have stretched out significantlly. = Getting three very clean<BR>sounding notes (4:2:1) is actaully pretty easy.. tho its = still hard to stretch<BR>much beyond that. I tend towards just a tad wide on = the double octaves... no<BR>wider then leaves them sounding "apparently" = beatless. Combined with this unison<BR>approach I was on about with Don a while = back gives a real nice "cling" to the<BR>total result... but its quite stretched = compared to what I was doing a couple<BR>years ago. I havent found an easy way to = get RCT or Tunelab to precalculate this<BR>for me yet... but then I havent spent = a lot of time trying either."</FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>    I've got a couple of = responses to my earlier postings about not stretching too much, and I'd like to = clarify things just a little bit.  </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>    Tuning in the = mid-range of the piano, a 4/2, 2/1 double octave is just fine with me, in fact, I do it = all the time. I don't consider my tunings too conservative at all. I allow as = much stretch as possible, without an objectionable beat to the double octave. = </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>    The responses I have = read seem to indicate to me that quite a few tuners like to tune so sharp that the = octaves in the "killer zone" have noticeable beats to them. They'd have to, = given some of the things I've heard. I find that when I tune pure double octaves in = the top octave, they have a pronounced beat. That's about the only place where I = don't really care, because people generally play melodically up there, they're = not playing octaves, and if they were, they would probably not mind a little = beating. </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>    I also take into = consideration the kind of player they are; for instance, if they play jazz, they're = going to not necessarily want a real sonorous sound, the way a classical pianist = who plays Brahms would. In that case, the more stretch the better. = </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>    I've also worked = with tuners who want to stretch things to the max; for instance, I know one Concert = Tuner who tunes his A4-A3 octave at 4/2 plus 2.5 cents. If he tunes a relatively = pure 4/2 in this region, it sounds dull and lifeless to him. I checked one of his = tunings once, and the double octaves had a beat rate of between two and three = beats per second. I just try to avoid this kind of thing. Maybe my classical = upbringing. (Yeah, I play Brahms occasionally).</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>(But I prefer Poulenc.)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>    I also have no = compulsion against stretching the lowest half octave down way past 6/3. Just = because the machine says that that's where it's supposed to go, doesn't mean that = it's right. I'm talking F1 down to A0. As long as it helps out the double and = triple octave. I usually do this on grands, not uprights.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>    Someone asked me why = I have my priorities the way I posted. Unisons, Octaves, Fifths, Fourths, Thirds, = Tenths, Seventeenths.  Well, that's the inverse order in which you are = going to get complaints. My temperaments are perfectly equal (Excuse me Richard), but = do you think anyone notices? No, but they will notice a fifth that's a little = busy, because "there's this one piece, where I play this one chord,,,,,,,,,,,,,)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>    I've attended = classes given by Jim Coleman Sr., where he had three pianos tuned with three different = amounts of stretch, and asked technicians to vote for which one they liked best. = You know, they all sounded pretty good, as long as the unisons were crisp, and the = octaves not howling. So why don't we quit striving for perfection and throw the = machines away?  Don't worry, be happy?   Because if we care about = what we do, then we have to feel that we have done the customer a service. = </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>    I admit, if you want = to tune a little on the conservative side, you had better go over the piano twice, = pounding as you go, because what can sound in tune when you start, can = quickly go south after a few hard blows. Takes a little more work, but I think = that the customer deserves it, especially if you're charging for a concert type = tuning. Amazing how many people don't care what it costs, they just want it = right! (BTW,my rates are not terribly out of line, but they get a good sounding = piano when I'm done. I really never have any complaints, just a lot of compliments.)</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>    On the other hand, = even the people whom I've talked to & observed have</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> admitted that if you go too far, things fall apart = rapidly. ( Like the first time they turn on their air-conditioning).</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>    I hope that I = haven't rattled anyone's cage too badly here, I mean, it's all a point of view. Some = people may like Picasso stretchers, some people my like sonorous tuners, most won't = be able to articulate what it is or isn't they like or don't like, but they'll = call you back if they like your work.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>    Kevin E. = Ramsey</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><A href="mailto:ramsey@extremezone.com">ramsey@extremezone.com</A> </FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>