Ed Foote on the Box (was NY Times Article)

[S. Brady]

John,
	There is a table similar to what you're talking about. It's on
page 22 of the June, 1995 Piano Technicians Journal. NOt in graph form,
but a simple table showing date, RH%, and FAC numbers.

Steve

On Sun, 27 Feb 2000, John Ross wrote:

> 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
> >
> 
> 


_________________________________________________

Steve Brady, RPT
Head Piano Technician, University of Washington
Editor, Piano Technicians Journal