Canned aural tuning

[Michel Lachance]

Dear list,

This is my first long posting in this forum.  English being not my
first language, I apologize in advance for all the strange wordings
you may encounter.

When talking about tuning techniques, I distinguish between THREE
categories:  Aural, regular electronic devices (PT-100,
Sight-O-Tuners, Korg etc.) and intelligent devices with memory pages
(Sanderson Accu-tuner, Reyburn Cybertuner).

What a lot antagonists of SAT's don't seem to understand is that it is
actually possible to do an AURAL TUNING with the device.   A tuning
MADE AURALLY on a given piano and stored into the machine.  How one
could see an advantage of using a canned tuning instead of a fresh
one, they might ask?  Besides the fact I can proceed with my best
AURAL tuning when even though I have a cold with fever and having a
band playing on the stage, I have a more consistent answer:

One basic expectation when we turn the tuning pins with the hammer,
would it be made visually or aurally, is that the string will stay on
that precise pitch.  And I am trusting my ears as being able to do an
impeccable job on that.

The first noticing one makes when using a SAT, and often with
amazement, is that the pitch of a previously tuned string does drift
if the piano was not exactly on pitch (let's say by 5 cents off).  The
ear is not always aware of that drift as it is done along with the
whole section of the strings.  It is sometimes perceptible only at
some ends of sections.  But the reading on the LED display of the SAT
makes no doubt about it.

When I was a strict aural tuner, it was a common practice for me to
reajust some sections after the tuning when the piano was not quite on
pitch (I am talking about a minor difference that usually not call for
a pitch raise).  Sometimes, octaves that I knew that they were clean
and straight when tuned, then went slightly wavy.  I always thought I
was not a good tuner enough to not be obliged to reajust my tunings.
I realised afterward that I was not exactly right.  Here a simple
statement I can make from experiencing the SAT:

MORE A STRING IS NEAR FROM ITS DESIRED PITCH, MORE IT HAS CHANCE TO
STAY ON ITS TUNED PITCH.

There is a program in the SAT that allows to pitch raise a piano in
less than twenty minutes with a astonishing precision.  You may live
in a perfect world but where I live, in Province of Quebec, it is
common to see pianos that are off-pitch by 5 cents and more after a
year.  I usually then give a quick pre-tuning with the SAT, even if I
am to tune that piano aurally (yes, I want to keep my aural skill in
good shape).  This will garanty me that when I will tune a string, it
will be nailed right on that pitch.  And I no longer have to reajust
sections except few unisons.

I think that nothing can beat the ear when tuning great instruments in
optimal conditions.  A tuning is done for the ear and only the ear is
able to judge if a tuning is appropriate.  Only the ear also has the
flexibility to custom a tuning by bringing up or down the treble or
adjusting the bass strings after the taste of a pianist.

But I want things to be fair with my ears:  When I tune a string, I
want it to stay right where I put it, and I just don't want to deal
with the eventuality it could slightly drift during the tuning process
because of a minor change in overall tension.  That's why I want the
piano to be as close as possible to A-440 before the tuning and I
don't want to loose time to make it so.  That's why also I believe
that the SAT is the best tool an aural tuner could use.  It would
assure a more stable tuning by doing a quick pre-tuning when the piano
is slightly off-pitch.  Even with a difference of 5 cents, it is worth
doing it.

Yesterday I came across a piano that was off by 30 to 50 cents.  IN 15
MINUTES, that piano was up to pitch all the way long within 2 or 3
cents.  Who wants to take up the challenge with a tuning fork?

I have an idea for a tuneoff that would more reflect the reality:
Tune five pianos in a row, and than pitch raise and tune a third class
piano with a radio playing on one side a tweety bird on the other.  I
may be wrong, but I think the SAT user will have a distinct advantage
on the aural tuner.  NOT BECAUSE ELECTRONIC TUNING WOULD BE BETTER
THAN AURAL TUNING, although aural and electronic tuning can be the
same with a SAT, but because external conditions are sometimes quite
unfair to the human ear.

Michel Lachance, RPT
Fleurimont, Canada