on 6/21/00 11:43 PM, Ron Nossaman at RNossaman@KSCABLE.com wrote: > Yea but... yea but... What the heck's the point of having a pitch standard > centered on "A" so we can have to learn to get around some lingering > fossilized "C"-centric pitch notation system eighty years after the fact? > It's no wonder there's confusion with note references in technical > correspondence with some following the ancestral plan, and some trying to > figure it out sensibly. If the pitch standard was centered on C, it would > be more logically acceptable, but as it is, it's nonsense. Sorry, but this > sort of arbitrary designation offends my sense of order and logic. I > consider it unnecessarily obfuscatory, counter productive, and "quaint" to > no productive purpose. Why can't we get used to a sensible and rational > system instead? Who knows, given time and therapy, we might just be able to > make the leap. > > Now I know why I'm an aural tuner. > > Ron N OK, I know better than to disagree with you about this. But how does one remember the system as it is? Just pretend Bösendorfers are common. :) The C-centric system works rather perfectly for the 97 note Bösendorfer keyboard, and it is the image in my head of a C0-C8 B'dorf' keyboard that lets me remember how the labeling system works. That and A-440 = A4. Kent
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC