Hello joe
I am a current CTE, and have attempted much input on this thread.
Regarding master tunings.
The master tuning is aural. An examination team may "pretune" the instrument
With a machine to make sure it is at pitch, stable, close, and ready to begin
A master tuning. But then the master tunings is begun from scratch aurally.
The master tuning can take many many hours as the team negotiates making that piano
The best it can be.
To be clear to those that are assuming a tuning program is used for a master tuning.
It is not used to create the tuning, only to record the aural tuning. It is also used to monitor
General drift of the piano, if it moves too far because of humidity or temperature changes the master tuning must be re started.
Another comment made suggested a candidate might check a note with a machine to "prove"
It is "bang on" The whole section was already read with a machine, offsets for any drift were applied so that all the notes are evaluated most fairly, relative to each other. And the machine has ear marked it as wrong already. It may still pass aural tests in the blind aural verification, and not be a deduction though.
It was an education the first time I participated in taking a good machine pre tuning from
Scratch to a master tuning aurally with a good team. The variations made from the pre tuning were Significant and seemed to follow a pattern with intermittent regular jumps. ; if graphed looking like waves( little anomalies,but a clear pattern)...to the back of the piano with the numbers, and indeed the Jumps were exactly at the changes of string sizes. Smoothing out the aural progressions to Compensate for inharmonisity was following the stringing scale. This makes so much sense. They preserve a string size then, oops, better change now, the inhamicity is starting to get a little too wild now, ah its better......a few notes latter.....oops I guess we better change string size again.
What really struck me the first time was how quite large these variations can be, and how much smoother it made the aural progressions. I really started to tweak my Tunelab tunings more. The few samples we take on these programs creates a generalized stretch, but has no idea where the dozen or do string size changes take place, and can not compensate for the waves of varying scaling inharmoniisity .
For any of us that may be tempted to think we, or our machines are "perfect" , or "good enough", or think that our ears are "superior" , may I encourage us all to adopt the attitude of
A musician and artist that is always striving for more. In that interest here are some questions
We should have answers for, and principles we should be in touch with. I am always asking
These questions, and find myself monitoring their answers. If you don't know the answers, start measuring.
1) how close are those unisons. How good is good, can they be tighter.
.9 cents is just not good enough, can I achieve zero......or not.
Measure the 3 stringsbe in touch with how you are negotiating the three strings aurally.
2) how much drift is taking place and in what sections. Don' t assume where you
Put it is where is stays. Even on a machine pitch raise....yes it gets it very close, but
Just an extra cent drift in the low tenor, but not in the bass leaves one aurally with some
Funky 5ths in the left hand. Drift is there even if microscopic, identify it, know it.
3) how much inharmonisity are we negotiating. I like measuring a few samples, and there is
A relationship between the amount of inharmonisity and how much I have to tweak a machine
Tuning, expecially in the low tenor area.
4) how is stability. Test it from time to time. Measure, really hit it, and measure again. Is
It truely rock solid or did it drop half a cent. Half a cent is 100% on the exam, but I have been motived by witnessing some candidates tunings that just can not be moved even a tenth of a cent. I can do better.
5) how much am I stretching the top, and why am I making the choices I am. I have found I really have gravitated to liking 12ths up top. What does more or less do to the music's "bite" I try some variation up there, and there are choices to make.
Musicians practice. After decades of professional performance they still do private practice monitoring their sound, articulation, pitch, and perception. We should take personnel time to
Monitor what we are doing, know where we are, and set our targets a little beyond what we are already doing.
I hear the objections already; This is a business, we want efficiency, etc. etc.
Yes, yes and yes. I also need to make a living, and yes a 20 cent pitch raise on an old
Rusty spinet does gets a "commercial" tuning, and that is good, and their are other priorities.
BUT. We need to push the boundaries where we can, and where appropriate, to become
The best we can be. So often a concert call, music school, choir, music teacher, is the top
Of a pyramid of dozens of other clients. 12 premier venues/clients, means hundreds and hundreds of spin off Clients that are regulars. We need to be able to produce tunings that
Satisfy the most demanding clients and venues to broadcast standards, or we don't get those
Hundreds of spin off clients from the references, and reputations that comes from being "the guy" (or gal)
It is common to coach a "machine" tuner towards the exam, and find they have never really
Measured their own unison strings to see just how tight they are achieving or not. Why is that?
It is common to coach people that have never at any time tested and measured numerically their own stability? Why is that? Is is because as human beings we are tempted towards the easy path, and take comfort in knowing it is "perfect", or it is enough. It is also in human nature to push our boundaries, thus people push themselves in sports, wringing, composition, research,
Investing time and energy for personnel growth and/or society's benefit without remuneration.
The professional artists we serve have spent tens of thousands of hours of personnel time over
A lifetime, without remuneration, practicing to push their boundaries. The top people we serve
Are programed this way, to look for more, seek out their personnel limits,push them back and monitor the progress.
I am tempted to become comfortable also, butThere is more.
Balance between efficiency, and growth, staying in touch with limits, and choosing,
Not being stuck because we can't.
Perfection in this world is an illusion, with a microscope we see the rough edges.
It's when we admit something is not perfect, and we don't take it personally, but just seek ways
To Deal with the imperfect, that we find ourselves playing with those limits, and pushing them back.
There has been a great deal of personnel feelings expressed on this thread. It is not personal at all. Some that do not agree with me, have expressed themselves very well, and give food for thought. Thank you. Their are choices to be made and efficiencies to be had. Never less, their is value in taking the time to find limits and negotiate them. So many good aural tuners, become hybrid tuners, have made the negotiation with the numbers and analysis, and allowed themselves to the transformed into some of the worlds greatest tuners.
Embrace it all. There Is value there.
Looks like that has become my theme statement.....
Cheers
Dave Renaud.
Sent from my iPad
On 2012-05-13, at 11:44 AM, "Joseph Garrett" <joegarrett at earthlink.net> wrote:
> It just struck me, how odd it is, that no "current" CTEs or Examination
> Committee people have chimed in. I'll assume that's why the "powers that
> be" are out of touch with the masses.
> Joe
>
>
> Joe Garrett, R.P.T.
> Captain of the Tool Police
> Squares R I
>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC