On 2013-01-29 21:04, unruh wrote:
On 2013-01-28, Jeroen Mostert<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2013-01-28 23:04, unruh wrote:
<snip>
And who "should you still like to able to tell that you didn't"? A piano
tuner is there to make the piano sound good, not to engage in
unwarrented mathematical games.
Well, then, why measure at all? As long as it sounds good.
And many great tuner do exactly that and have a very large disdain for
tuners that rely on instruments.
Surely to make it sound *as good as possible*, you need to be able to accurately
measure how close you got to your goal. If you are able to tune a piano to
But the goal is not "measureable" by a simple thing like a frequency
tuner.
This I don't get. If you want a note to have a base frequency that's as close to
440 Hz as possible, you're saying that's not measurable? Or you're saying that
that's a silly goal? I thought the whole idea of tuning was to make sure the
instrument produces notes with frequencies as close as possible to the
temperament you're using, but I could be mistaken.
I'm sure having more than one string complicates matters a bit, but even so it
seems an objective measure is possible. If the instrument has to play with
others I shouldn't think that 445 Hz is acceptable because you think it sounds
better.
--
J.
_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
