Jim.... Thanks much for all you have done. The great tune-off proves that it isn't how, but how well a tuning is done. Looking forward to info on the new SAT III Dick RPT MT ---------- > From: Jim <pianotoo@IMAP2.ASU.EDU> > To: pianotech@ptg.org > Cc: S. Brady <sbrady@u.washington.edu> > Subject: Orlando Tuneoff Recount > Date: Monday, August 11, 1997 10:13 PM > > VIRGIL STILL WINS > > DETAILED RECOUNT > The votes were counted in hash-mark groups of 5 to give a graphic > display > > Selection Piano A Piano B Piano C Piano D > > All C's (2 hands 5 5 1 5 5 1 5 1 5 5 5 5 2 > All F's " 5 3 5 5 2 5 5 2 5 5 5 5 > All F#'s " 5 5 2 5 5 1 5 1 5 5 5 5 > All C#'s " 5 4 5 5 3 5 4 5 5 5 5 1 > All A's " 5 5 5 4 5 4 5 5 5 5 1 > Brahms Intermezzo 5 4 5 5 1 5 2 5 5 5 5 2 > Chopin Prelude 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 > Brahms B 5 5 5 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 > Chopin Etude 5 5 1 5 5 4 4 5 5 5 4 > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Piano A was moved to position D, Pianos B, C, and D were shifted > to Left for remaining sample selections. Time prevented an even > number of selections in this position. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Hymn variation 5 5 5 1 5 5 5 1 5 1 5 5 2 > Chopin C Maj Etude 5 5 5 5 5 1 5 2 5 4 > Claire De Lune 5 5 5 3 5 5 1 5 1 5 5 1 > Miller Jazz 3 5 5 5 3 5 3 5 5 > ================================================================== > Totals each piano 142 155 105 217 > > Totals for Coleman ***297*** > Totals for Smith ***322*** > > ================================================================== > | 619 total votes cast | > | | > | % for Coleman 48% | > | % for Smith 52% | > ================================================================== > > Notes: > > The first counting was done at Orlando. Seven ballots were thrown out > because of failure to use X's to indicate the preferred tuning on > some of the selections. They instead used their number scoring > techniques without indicating a preference on some samples. In this > counting, all votes were recorded, even in the case of indicated > ties by one voter (OK, so it was hard to decide), Virgil still wins, > but by a smaller margin. Virgil really wiped me out during the first > sample selections when his best piano was in the favored spot. When > plain 4 octave samples were played, he blew me away (my octaves were > a little wider than his with the pure 5ths tunings on both my pianos, > A and B. In the musical selections, I fared much better, and better > yet after the position switch. > > Some comments by the voters: > > "The best sounding tuning was piano A" > "The best was B" > "I liked C the best" > "Piano A" > "Piano B" > "I vote for # C, Liked the mellow tuning of B for Jazz, I liked the > brightness of tuning of C, I liked the tonal richness of D" > "Voicing plays too important a role to be discounted. I could not help > being influenced by it as the tunings were both OK and excellent. > Also, when piano A was moved to the opposite end, it sounded better." > "Very interesting. I enjoyed the explanation of the aural tuner." > "Great!" > "They all sounded so good, I'm just guessing on all choices." > "I'd be happy with any of them! Voicing does make a difference!" > "for Camera operator - I would have liked a close-up of the piano keys > while Virgil was tuning. It would let me know what notes were being > tuned and what tests were being used." > "Thanks! Could live w/any of them." > "All the pianos sounded great." > "Enjoyed it, Guys. Thanks" > "Virgil plays very musically." > "They both did a good job." > "All pianos very good - very much affected by tone." > > Well, there you have it, everything indicated by the voters. > The results of the two tuneoffs shows there is not a dime's worth > of difference between good aural and good visual tuning. > > Jim Coleman, Sr. >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC