close enough>??

[SUSAN P SWEARINGEN]

Hello,

Could those of you that tune unisons as you go explain your procedure?  I
use a Verituner and use the following method.

1.  Strip mute tenor and treble areas
2.  Tune temperament area and also notes down to the tenor/bass break
(middle strings only)
3. Tune octaves up to C88 (middle strings only)
4. Pull out the strip mutes and tune unisons from C88 down to the tenor/bass
break (tuned aurally)
5. Tune down from the tenor bass break down to A0, tuning unisons as I go.

I will always do a quick pitch correction if the piano is off more than
about 4 cents.  If the piano is 4 cents or better (almost never on the
pianos I tune), then I will go right to fine tuning as described in the
steps above.

The problem I've encountered is by the time I get to step 5, the middle and
upper registers usually settle by .5 to 1 cent. Of course   I suppose to get
best accuracy using this method, I should perform step 5 aurally instead of
using the ETD.  Would tuning unisons as I go take care of the above problem?
For people that tune unisons as they go, what exact procedure are you using?

Thanks,

Corte Swearingen

----- Original Message -----
From: "David M. Porritt" <dm.porritt@verizon.net>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 8:40 AM
Subject: Re: close enough>??


> Ed:
>
> You have proved in the past that you are a brave man!  I think your
> procedures and analysis is correct here.  The brave part is declaring
> on this list that the piano doesn't have to be within 0.002 cents
> before you start to get good results.  Personally, I think one of the
> big differences is that you tune the unisons as you go.  I have
> always believed that strip muting the whole piano requires that it be
> much closer than if you do the unisons as you go.  I don't know all
> of the science involved in this phenomenon, and I don't have time to
> explain my conjecture, but I'm convinced that stripping the whole
> piano requires starting with a more in-tune piano.
>
> dave
>
> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
>
> On 1/21/2003 at 10:03 AM A440A@aol.com wrote:
>
> >Greetings,
> >   I have been reading the discussions on speed, tuning accuracy,
> etd vs.
> >aural, etc..  So, this a.m.  I thought I would try a controlled
> test. The
> >piano is a Yamaha C3, one year old.  It is in a large instrument
> rehearsal
> >hall at the university.  I had tuned it 11/22/02 to ET at 440.
> >   This morning I checked it and found it sounded reasonably in tune
> with
> >itself insofar as unisons and single octaves were concerned.  The
> Double
> >and
> >Triple octaves were dead sounding and checking against the SAT, it
> was
> >flat.
> >The flatness was:
> >A0 at -3 cents
> >A2 at -4
> >C3  -10 cents
> >C4 = -8
> >C5= -7
> >C6= -10
> > C7= -12
> >C8= -14
> >
> >    I decided to do a straight, one-pass, totally machine, damn the
> >torpedoes, SAT pitch raise.  I began on A0 and went to the top of
> the
> >piano,
> >changing the pitch correction figures at each A and D as I went.  By
> the
> >time
> >I reached the 5th octave, the C was -9 cents, due to the pulling
> done
> >below.
> >S0, I was using a 2.2 cent overpull at this point and was leaving
> clean
> >unisons as I went.  The entire process took 54 minutes.
> >   I finished just as an accompanist and two string players walked
> in, so
> >asked them to play it and listen.  Around here, everybody knows that
> they
> >can
> >be honest with me, and they also know that there is no telling what
> sort
> >of
> >temperament I might be throwing at them, so there is no fear or
> loathing
> >involved in letting ol' Ed know that this or that tuning doesn't
> work for
> >them.  Their response was:
> >"It sounds beautiful!"  I asked them to check the double and triple
> >octaves.
> >Their response was, " They are so clean and even!"
> >   As the music, cases, and rosin bags were being opened, I zeroed
> the
> >machine and went back to check my results.  Every single A was
> within one
> >cent of where it was supposed to be, all the C's were too, except a
> slight
> >sharpening in the last two octaves,(resulting, I surmise, from there
> being
> >no
> >further strings above them to take advantage of the overpull
> results).
> >   So, this raises the question of always needing two passes.  Is a
> one
> >cent
> >variation worth the extra time? I believe it is not, in this venue,
> where
> >the
> >pitch will change that much from day to day, depending on the
> lights,
> >presence of the orchestra, HVAC fluctuations,etc. Had I been in a
> >recording
> >studio,  I would have done a rough pass first, but more for
> insurance than
> >anything else.
> >    In so much of the debate over relative values of machines vs.
> ears,
> >we
> >overlook the practical considerations.  I would like to see a
> comparison
> >of
> >results that pits two tuners against one another in a more real
> world
> >setting. Something like, two pianos that are 8 cents flat, with
> maybe a
> >cleaning crew in the hallway, and with a 1 hour deadline, etc.  Oh
> yea,
> >it
> >would also be good for these two tuners to have already tuned two or
> three
> >pianos in the hours previous to the test, so fatigue factors get to
> be
> >introduced, also.
> >    It is one thing to compare tuning procedures in museum or test
> lab
> >settings, but in the real world of getting the job done for money,
> I
> >wouldn't begin to favor a strictly aural approach.  Perhaps on a
> really
> >poor
> >scale, the results would be closer, but on a good piano, in good
> >condition, I
> >submit that the use of a machine allows far better results with far
> less
> >stress.
> >Regards,
> >Ed Foote RPT
> >( At the St. Louis regional conference several years ago, I had to
> tune
> >the
> >piano in 65 minutes.  It was 20 cents flat, there was a change of
> >temperament
> >to be done, and the window washers were outside the big plate glass
> >windows
> >with a large hose squirting on them as I worked.  The feedback I got
> that
> >day
> >in the temperament class was that the piano sounded really, really
> >good....)
> >_______________________________________________
> >pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
>
>
> _____________________________
> David M. Porritt
> dporritt@mail.smu.edu
> Meadows School of the Arts
> Southern Methodist University
> Dallas, TX 75275
> _____________________________
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives