Bill Maxim's SAT question (Long)

[Jim Coleman, Sr.]

Hi Bill:

You are right that the SAT will show a decay in pitch usually as the tone
decays. I think this is caused by the greater amplitude of the prompt sound
causing a slightly higher tension in the string. As the width of the 
amplitude decreases, the tension lowers slightly and the LEDs begin to
drift. When there is a beat in a single string, this indicates that the
string is vibrating at two frequencies at once. The SAT will indicate this
by the LEDs vaccilating back and forth. I like to tune to the higher
pitch just to be on the safe side when there is a beat in the string. 
However, in tuning a clear middle string first, I like to tune it so 
that the
decayed pitch is right on. I still strike the key hard and notice that the
prompt sound is a bit sharp, but I replay the note softly to see that the
more stable sound in right on. This seems to give me the same advantage
that Virgil Smith talks about in his deliberately sharp tuning. Yes, the
prompt sound will show the dots drifting in the sharp direction. However,
if I tuned that initial tone right on, then the more stable tone would be
flat.

My usual method of tuning these days (not pitch raising) is to tune downward
from A4 or the nearby treble break. I really sock these middle strings in
solid. After I descend 4 notes, I can play the major 3rd above and listen
as well without it interfering with the display. After going down 7 notes,
I can play the note a 5th above without it interfering with my display.
This gives me what I like to call "the best of both worlds". After arriving
at the Tenor break, I begin tuning above the treble break, doing the unisons
as I go. I continue to use aural checks (usually the 3rd-10ths until the
3rd-17ths become available) keeping in touch with the 5ths, the octave-5ths
and eventually the double octave 5ths and triple octaves. If my octave 5ths
indicate that I can tune a little sharper than the regular FAC tuning
program, I invoke the Double Octave Beat control which stretches the tuning
abit more by .1, .2 or .3 beats per second in the double octave. The normal
FAC tuning give about .3 beats per second in the double octave anyway, so
I may want to increase that a little bit. This is progressive and will 
increase the high treble much more than that. If you find it beginning
to stretch too much for your personal taste, you can decrease the DOB by
.1 DOB and maybe later by .2 DOB. I like to keep a good balance between the
 octave 5th and the double octave 5th. This will usually give a pretty good
balance of the triple octaves on most pianos. This will, of course leave
the upper single octaves a bit on the wide side (which I don't mind at all).

After going back to the Tenor area, I tune out the unisons, pulling the
temperament strip one note at a time. I do not back wedge while tuning
unisons. If the tuning is solid enough, there is no need to back wedge.

I like to utilize the DOB of the SAT III to tighten up the Bass octaves
a little more than the regular FAC tunings when I am tuning medium or
small pianos. I think the Bass octaves sound better when they are tuned
as pure 6-3 type octaves. For larger pianos, I stick to the FAC program
in the Bass and occasionally stretch even a little more on 9' pianos.

In order to tune 6-3 type Bass, I can utilize negative Double Octave Beat
control to stop the LEDs of the upper note of the octave I intend to tune 
and then tune the lower note of that octave to stop the lights (LEDs). This 
will make the m3rd-M6th tests equal for that octave. This gives more 
precision than I can consistently obtain tuning just by ear. I may refer
to the downward progression of the 10ths or the 17ths, but I give preference
to the sound of the octave and the 6-3 matching. This method of Bass tuning
gives good results on most all pianos except Lester spinets which have the
3 string unisons in the upper Bass. They must be tuned as 4-2 type octaves
until you get down far enough that the 6-3 begins to sound good.

Bill, you mentioned below that you like to let the lights rotate a bit
to the sharp side in the treble. You can do this more easily if you use
the DOB control, then it will be more consistent.

In your last paragraph you mention my tuning in the Aural & Visual Tuning
Techniques tape. Yes, for speed, I did follow that different procedure.
However, I agree with Dr Sanderson that tuning the unison as you go gives
more precision along with better stability. If I know ahead of time that
I am going to have to do two pitch raises before the Fine Tuning, then I
will use the strip method all the way. The reason for doing two PRs instead
of just one is to possibly avoid string breakage by not making the first
pullup too high to the point of danger.

Thanks for asking. I realize this may be more than you needed to know, but
I thought that some of the others might like a more uptodate explanation.

Jim Coleman, Sr  (referred to by some as Dr. Harley)

on Wed, 11 Aug 1999 Maxpiano@AOL.COM wrote:

> List -
> 
> I've been using an SAT since February (SAT III since June) after tuning 
> aurally about 45 years.  I have a few questions that I don't recall being 
> discussed on this list in the years I have been on (but then, I miss a lot 
> because I don't have time to keep up with reading all the posts).
> 
> >From the start, the SAT showed me something I had only marginally been aware 
> of in tuning aurally, and that is that many strings change in pitch as the 
> tone decays.  This seems particularly noticeable from about F5 on up, and is 
> usually a drop in pitch.  Some strings, however, go up in pitch.
> 
> What is the cause of this change?  Is it a change in the plane in which the 
> strings vibrate?
> 
> Where should one try to stop the lights, on the attack or the decay?  At this 
> point I set them if possible in the middle, where the attack is sharp and the 
> decay flat.  The results please me as well as any aural tuning I have done.
> 
> I would also be interested in knowing how many of you SAT users normally try 
> to stop the lights consistently in octaves 6 and 7.  I find myself settling 
> for increasing motion as I approach the top.  At this point I am satisfied if 
> it sounds as good as or better than I would do by ear.
> 
> My purchase of the SAT was spurred on by the promise of working faster (and 
> earning more).  I have been using it consistently now fir 6 months except for 
> rare occasions when I had to revert to aural tuning because things were not 
> going well.   However, to this point I see no measurable increase in speed.  
> I think it relieves me of some stress, and it is really a help on pitch 
> raises.  I can record the exact amount of offset on non-standard pitch 
> tunings.  I think what is happening is that I am getting more picky.  And I 
> am very well satisfied with the results I am getting. 
> 
> Finally, do most of you visual tuners mute the whole piano or tune unisons as 
> you go along?  A friend loaned me a Coleman/Diefebaugh tape made perhaps 1980 
> promoting muting the whole piano (as well as the SAT over the SOT), stating 
> that tuning one string of a unison and going over the whole piano, then one 
> outside string over the whole piano, and finally the third, would lead to 
> more stable tuning.  The thesis was that this would better allow the strings 
> to move over the bridge without rolling it.  However, in the SAT manual, Dr. 
> Sanderson recommends tuning unisons as one goes along.  Dr. Jim Coleman, what 
> is your position now?  
> 
> Bill Maxim 
> 
>