True or False

[DAN G. LITWIN]

On 7/28 Jim Coleman, Sr. said:

>>> On Sat, 27 Jul 1996, DAN G. LITWIN wrote:
>>>
>>> 1)  accu-tuners which measure  "FAC" and calculate a tuning,
>>>  will produce a  tuning which often needs aural touch-up.
>
>I respectfully take issue with the word "often" in the above paragraph.
>I believe the word occasionally fits the facts a little better and here
>are my reasons.
>...
> if one were to make the changes aurally to (for example) improve
> the temperament, one does this at the expense of forcing errors
> in smoothness perhaps one or two octaves higher
>...
>On a well scaled piano, these problems are just not there for either
> type of tuning when it is well done.
>
>Jim Coleman, Sr.
>

Perhaps I was not clear in my original statement.

You focused on the temperament.  But, indeed, the temperament is the best thing
the SAT does in an FAC sense.  It truly never does need work.  But somewhere
around either C5 or C6 (can't recall which), the SAT switches to a different
partial to tune by.  At this point I OFTEN find contracted 5ths.  I can fix
these and go on.  It does not push trouble up into the higher octaves.
And rarely, but still, I have found this same problem in the bass as the switch
of partials occurs.

Dan Litwin - Jerk Tuning
San Diego