Ed Foote on the Box (was NY Times Article)

[John Ross]

Hi,
I tune some pianos, about 10-15 times per year. I have found that the FAC
#'s change.
I think it has to do with humidity. I keep on meaning to make a graph, of
temperature, humidity
and the pitch of a few notes.
I keep on forgetting.
Has anyone done something like that?
Oh, yes, I am using a SAT.
Regards,
John M. Ross
----- Original Message -----
From: <BobDavis88@aol.com>
To: <caut@ptg.org>
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2000 8:35 PM
Subject: Re: Ed Foote on the Box (was NY Times Article)


> In a message dated 02/24/2000, Ed Foote writes:
>
> >      We can't refine an aural tuning over and over again,  we must start
> from
> >  new every time, but, if we record our best aural tuning, we can
> continually
> >  modify it until is exactly like we want.
>
> Almost true, but the target keeps changing. The rabbit jumps halfway to
his
> hole once more with each refinement, but having achieved a "perfect"
tuning
> [where I brought my previous tuning in the box and refined it until I
> couldn't change anything] on a piano I tune every couple of weeks, I was
> puzzled at my dissatisfaction with the results six months later. I
wondered
> at first if I could perhaps be growing as a tuner, but surely not, having
> reached perfection....
>
> It turns out that I really DON'T tune the same piano the same way each
time.
> The explanation lies in the fact that the FREQUENCIES of the partials
change
> due to humidity and plain aging (the inharmonicity doesn't measure the
same
> every time), and the BALANCE of the partials (and even the frequency)
changes
> with voicing. Different voicing requires a different stretch.
>
> Since I agree completely with your basic feelings toward the Box, Ed, I
hate
> to niggle; but we refine the box tuning with the ear, and the ear with the
> box, a superb tuning results, then the piano we are measuring changes. At
the
> highest level, there are still some refinements necessary at every tuning.
>
> >        There may be tuners that can do a better job without a machine
than
> >  with one, but I don't see how.
>
> Or why. I would still stack that stored, refined tuning up against most
> strictly aural tunings, my own included, on a time-after-time
repeatability
> basis.
>
> Bob Davis
>