SNIP > We don't need to discuss how many tunings we have all performed to justify > our knowledge. > > Regards > Brian Neither do we need to discuss how many theories and calculations we can/have/should be doing. You've got the math worked out Brian, that's clear. But before you continue shouting out against those who don't do mathematical calculations every time they tune a third/fourth/fifth or whatever, consider that there are many ways to achieve fine tunings. I assure you, whatever chasm there is between you and David A. in communication, and in your chosen thought processes when tuning, when you listen to one of his tunings (I have) you'll simply have to accept that his methodology works. David is an excellent technician and an excellent tuner, and however he thinks about how he does what he does is largely irrelevant. Fantastic tunings can be obtained by technicians with a dizzying range of theoretical knowledge. You like the numbers, others may not, but the results speak. As author Piers Anthony once said to a class of english students (paraphrasing here) "I no more need to know the names of all the parts of speech to use them properly than I need to know the names of all the parts of the human body to use them properly." And yes, we can break this analogy down, but the sentiment is interesting food for thought. So, ease up on the ranting and ponder that it really might not be so linear (the tuning process, that is). William R. Monroe
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC