On 5/16/2012 10:28 AM, Bill Fritz wrote: > I think any style could work... > but the closer the style to what's attempted at the Master Tuning, the > better. By my criteria, I don't see where it matters at all. This isn't about replicating or "surpassing" an aural tuning or producing an ideal tuning, but rather about replicating the previous tuning by (as closely as possible) the same method on a given piano under different RH% conditions. That doesn't mean aurally tweaking an ETD tuning, or changing anything in the basic recipe between tunings. The tuning doesn't have to be optimized, WOW, or otherwise anything but as nearly as possible algorithmically repeatable without custom intervention between tunings. The ETD tunings, like the aural, just have to be as cleanly and precisely arrived at by as non-changing a criteria, as possible. There is no need or desire to directly compare the aural with the ETD. This isn't about tuning methods at all. It's about pianos. Ron N
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC