The Final Result (more)

[Richard Brekne]

Greetings yourself.. No one is labeling anyone anything. Your whole posting is
completely removed from the subject matter as far as I can see.

The subject matter is basically the definition of what a piano tuner is.  Someone
who knows what they are doing, or someone who simply follows the dials.

In the former then it makes no difference how the result is accomplished, in the
latter it makes all the difference in the world.

A440A@AOL.COM wrote:

> Greetings,
>     A tuner that is trying to deny the same label to another that does the
> same work via a different way is simply an insecure reactionary.   A piano
> tuner is one that tunes.  There are good ones and bad ones, and a lot of
> persons in between.
>       A bigger question is "What does it mean to be "tuned".  A typical
> keyboard musician from 1750 would probably reject a 100% perfect ET that is
> the holy grail to so many of us today, so there is a bit of the subjective
> when we try to define a "tuner".  We may as well argue what is a tuning? (and
> I have had those sorts of "conversations".)
>        On the skeet range,  the guys shooting perfect scores with .410
> shotguns don't have to say anything to the ones that are using 12 gauge guns,
> it is obvious who possesses the finesse.  The tuner that shows up with a
> fork,   a hammer, and one mute doesn't have to say anything to the tuner that
> is using a machine, (unless they are sufficiently insecure).
>     To those that would label a colleague something less than a tuner because
> they use a SAT,  I can only say, let's hear your work.  Mine is out there, as
> exposed as I can make it, where is yours?
> Regards,
> Ed Foote RPT (with pretty good scores, too!)
>

--
Richard Brekne
RPT, N.P.T.F.
Bergen, Norway
mailto:Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no