Electronic tuning devices

[Kent Swafford]

Clyde Hollinger wrote:

>List:
>
>I use a Peterson Model 520 Audio/Visual Tuner to help me with the
>temperament and do everything else aurally...
>When I took the tuning test, I passed the temperament using the strobe
>but actually scored better doing the aural temperament.  The CTE asked
>why I use the thing.  For me it's still a little faster because I'm used
>to doing it this way and I've gotten no complaints, but I'm still
>hankering after an SAT or RCT.  Maybe one of these days!
>
>Incidentally, the procedures that interest me most are those which yield
>better results and yet take less time.  Will my using an SAT or RCT meet
>these two criteria?
>
>Clyde Hollinger, RPT
>Lititz, PA

RCT may be just the ticket. (The SAT might be good for you too, but I 
lean heavily towards RCT these days.)

RCT can give you a temperament as fast as the Peterson but will be as 
good as or probably better than your aural temperament. Need to tune in a 
noisy environment like I did this morning with two little lovelies 
playing "Mother, may I?" in the same room? No problem. Need to pitch 
correct a PINO (Piano In Name Only) that probably has never been properly 
tuned in its 40 years? No problem. Need to tune two pianos together, 
maybe a Steinway D and a B'dorf' Imperial? No problem. Need to have the 
tuning _done_ in 35 minutes and need to measure the pitch level of the 
piano throughout the scale quickly and accuately so that you will know 
for sure the average pitch level of the piano before you start so you 
won't spend _any_ time pitch correcting? No problem. When you get RCT, 
you'll wonder how you ever survived as a piano tech without it.

Kent Swafford