<HTML>In a message dated 12/29/02 8:21:44 AM Central Standard Time, Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no writes: I<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"> suppose the perfect tuning will last long enough for a concert, a recording session, to give a customer those few extra hours of refinement. Cost effective has to be in the picture to be sure... but we want to be careful of finding reasons to not do the best we can... in all circumstances. </BLOCKQUOTE> [Compared to a recent statement...] <<"the improvement I can make by ear to most of my machine tunings is not noticeable to anyone else, so what, me worry?"  [Does he *still* read MAD Magazine???]  If I am the only person that can tell the difference, what I am spending time on it for,  my own entertainment? I can't afford that.  A good tuning is one with little wasted time in it. I recognize a tolerance, and when within it, it is a moot activity to go further.  I can't afford much more moot! >>    [then] <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Ric Moody Wrote (Snip) >     I would love to bring this piano to a "National" and have any > person tune it by whatever---machine or aural method.   Then > critique it the next day  by  any tuner and expect to hear,  "This > is what you call a professional tuning?" </BLOCKQUOTE> Well, that's exactly what I did at the "National" in 1998 with Wally Brooks breathing down my neck, telling me I looked like a *beginner*, trying to *learn* how to tune a piano.  Tuned it the night before, rolled it into the classroom the next morning and "BEAT" Virgil Smith.  }:P (He got to tune his *in* the classroom that morning).  }:P  }:P Bill Bremmer RPT Madison, Wisconsin <A HREF="http://www.billbremmer.com/">Click here: -=w w w . b i l l b r e m m e r . c o m =-</A></HTML>