>From Jim Coleman, Sr. My comments will be interspersed in Allan's. On Tue, 30 Jul 1996, MR ALLAN H DAY wrote: > -- [ From: ALLAN DAY * EMC.Ver #2.10P ] -- > > To all, > Debating the merits of aural tunings vs. Accu-tunings is probably > healthy. But like any controversial issue there will always be strong > opinions on both sides. A few of my aural tuning Colleagues in VT are > happy converts to the Accu-tuner. I can see their points I almost took > the plunge myself. > There are 2 points however that kept me away from using one: > 1. Tailoring the tuning to the artist. I see all the verbage about > FAC's and calculating the stretch factor to accommodate the > inharmonisity of the piano. However, where that might be arguably good > for the piano what if the artist doesn't like it? What if the artist does not like a particular aural tuning? Jim C. > After one has developed a rapport with an artist you can please > him/her by executing their favorite tuning according to their > individual taste. Its like being a chef rather than a recipe follower. > How does the accu-tuner deal with this need to over-ride the > arbitrary nature of its program? One can deal with the Artist's ideosyncracies in much the same way an aural tuner does. Find out what difference the Artist prefers and then adjust the style of tuning to accommodate. If they prefer a sharper treble, one can increase the stretch numbers starting with the A4 number. If they like sharper tuning in the top octave where many arpeggios reside, one can increase the C6 stretch number. (There are other compensations that are required here) If one one wants more flattening in the Bass, the F3 number can be increased. If one wants only certain notes tuned a certain way, those deviations can be added to the standard tuning. Violin players usually like the entire treble a good bit sharper than standard tuning. No problem. Jim C. > 2. A recent graduate of the N. Bennett St. School brought his machine > over to show me. He said that the instructors at the school advise that > one should always check or proof the accu-tunings aurally to make sure > it sounds correct. If you know what's correct to begin with, why use > the machine? He couldn't give me a satisfactory answer. Or at least one > that justifies the cost of the machine. The thing that usually surprises aural tuners the most when they first get the AccuTuner is how often the machine shows up their errors in their aural tuning. So the checking and rechecking works both ways, not just one way. One can be careless or sloppy in aural tuning just as one can be in machine tuning. When you check both ways, you have more security. The other thing an aural tuner discovers after beginning to use a machine is that his "perfect tunings" are not the same each time. This tends to make one a little insecure at first. How do I know? And this was after I had been a traveling Concert Technician. Jim C. > > I would be interested to read what others have to say about these > points. In the previous paragraph one line reads: "if you know what's correct to begin with . . ." The problem here is that as a profession we have not defined well what is correct. It is often arbitrary. With FAC tunings, the general rule is that the double octaves are kept clean throughout the scale. Aural tuners probably deviate in both directions from this rule. This does not make either method "the correct way." We just do not have any unanimity on this. Steve Fairchild's Aural Tuning Emulator program provides for any rule of stretch that a person could wish for and still maintains consistency. A certain amount of this kind of flexibility is available in the new Reyburn Cyber Tuner which runs on a Macintosh compu- ter. If the REAL Concert Technicians can ever decide about the one correct way to tune, it can be easily duplicated with a machine in the hands of a skilled operator. Jim C. > > I can see the practical application in a university setting or other > multiple piano circumstances. I fight fatigue at the end of a 5 tuning > day. I assume the machine cuts down the fatigue factor. And then there > are the wild pianos that just can't seem to be tamed aurally. A > colleague says its for those pianos and easy pitch raising that he > bought the Accu-tuner. > Allan > > > Thanks for listening. Jim Coleman, Sr. <pianotoo@imap2.asu.edu>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC