Pitch raising

[David Ilvedson, RPT]

A piano at the correct tension sounds much better than at -100 cents...

David I.


-----Original Message-----
From: Clyde Hollinger <cedel@supernet.com>
To: pianotech@ptg.org <pianotech@ptg.org>
Date: Saturday, December 16, 2000 8:32 AM
Subject: Re: Pitch raising


>Wim and everybody,
>
>My comment on paragraph 1:
>     I agree with you that a string will likely break at a certain tension
>whether done in small increments or "one swell foop."  If a technician is
of the
>opinion that every piano *has* to be tuned to A440, may as well do it fast.
>     But I am not of that opinion.  For example, a client I first tuned for
in
>1995 has an old Foster upright, didn't want to pay for a pitchraise, but
has had
>the piano tuned every year since.  It is now up from 100 cents flat to 45
cents
>flat.  Last year it tore a low bass string and this year two treble
strings.  I'm
>not taking it any farther up.  What would have happened if she had
permitted me
>to raise it right away?  Broken strings all over the place, I reckon.  As
you may
>remember I have a mild paranoia about breaking strings.
>     I don't see this as an ethical question.  It's just that different
people do
>things different ways.  I'm getting paid for what I do, we're both happy,
and the
>piano is closer to pitch than it's been in decades.
>
>My comment on paragraph 2:
>     You wrote that it is cheating the customer to charge extra depending
on how
>low the piano is.  That depends.  The way I do pitchraises, one pass will
be
>sufficient up to 50c flat; between 50-100 cents I do the treble twice, and
more
>than 100c I do the whole piano twice, in general.  Consequently I charge
50% more
>than the "base" pitchraise charge for 50-100 cents change, and double for
more
>than 100 cents.  I think that is fair, and the customers seem to agree with
me.
>     On the other hand, I know of a tuner who reportedly charges double his
>normal tuning rate to include a 50c pitchraise, and double *again* for 100c
>pitchraise and tuning.  If he would charge $70 for a regular tuning, a 50c
>pitchraise and tuning would be $140, whereas a 100c pitchraise and tuning
would
>be $280.
>     Now *that* I have a problem with, and if the rumors are correct, so do
some
>of his clients.  I'm not sure what the reasoning is.  Perhaps that he is
>recouping some of the income that would have been his had the customer paid
for
>regular tunings over the years, or maybe to punish the client for
neglecting the
>piano for so long.
>
>Regards,
>Clyde
>
>Wimblees@AOL.COM wrote:
>
>> To go one step further in this, for those who think doing it slowly will
keep
>> a string from breaking, I have this observation. A string is going to
break
>> at a certain tension, whether the string reaches that tension in small
>> increment of 15 or 20 cents at a time, or all 100 cents in one swell
foop, as
>> Jim suggests. It's kind like the weakest link in a chain theory.
>>
>> On another part of this pitch raise thingee. There are some tuners who
charge
>> extra depending on low the piano is. ($10 extra for a piano that is 10
cents
>> low, $20 for a piano that is 20 cents low, etc.)  I think that is
cheating
>> the customer. If the pitch is raised in one swell foop, there should be
no
>> need to charge extra. It doesn't take any more energy, nor time, to pull
a
>> string up 10 cents as it does to pull up a string 100 cents. In fact, it
is
>> probably harder to do 10 cents that to do 100 cents, since you have to
have
>> more control for 10 cents than for 100 cents. I charge a set fee for a
pitch
>> raise and a tuning, whether that pitch raise is 25 cents or 250 cents.
>>
>> Willem
>
>
>