Being of a technical nature myself, I love this section of the forum, and spend sometimes hours wading through current and past posts, and find your experiences and explanations totally fascinating.
I've never tuned a piano in my life, or done any regulation, but would love to one day - preferably on an old 'banger'.

Now to cut to the chase.
It would be much appreciated if you expert tuners here could provide some assistance.

Is it possible to give an appreciation of a given tuner just by listening to their tuning method? For example, from a recording could one say with a certain measure of confidence if the tuner was excellent, good, average or bad?
My piano - a European upright - which is 18 months old was tuned last week for the third time by the same tuner. This took 34mins.

I'm generally quite happy with the results, which one might say is the most important factor. However there's more to it than this, which will be revealed in due course.......
To your expert ears, could this tuning be improved? The following is a quick musical check directly following the tuning: HERE

Now, you may be asking, and rightly so, "Is there a point to all this?"
There is, which I will enlarge upon after having received any feed-back on your observations.

34 minutes is extremely fast for a standard tuning. Even a piano that is very close in tune, I'll spend an hour on in most cases.

That's my first comment, before I listen to the file.

Thanks Randy.

Did you obtain your tuner's permission to record and post his work?

RPD, are you suggesting this should be removed for any reason?

Your subject asks about evaluating the tuning "method", which leads me to think of the process by which the piano is tuned. You then present an audio file, which is the result, and the way that all tunings are judged.

I'm curious, though, why you would go to all this trouble to take your issue to a worldwide forum, especially when your own recording methods may cloud the original result. Have you talked to your tuner about what you hear? Do you plan to take our comments and send them to him or her?

--Cy--

I listened to the second clip, and the tuning sounds fine -- the mike is kind of far away.

Yes, like RPD I'm a little disturbed that you would record the tuner's work session and post it; I certainly hope you have their permission (and I didn't listen to it). I share a lot of my tuning methods, but certainly at a time and place of my own choosing. How would you feel about a recording of your own work being published on the Internet?

"Praise in public; criticize in private."

--Cy-

Regardless of the method - as a novice tuner myself, it is my observation that experienced tuners develop and use quite varied methods of their own making based on the establishied sound fundamentals over the years of experience.

It seems the key is that the piano performs and sounds to the player's/owner's satisfaction.

Aside from how the instrument was recorded on the tunes you played, etc, the piano sounds just fine to me.


So... do you find playing the piano satisfying after this tuning?

Glen

If your eventually going to reveal the tuners name or allow the public to easily deduce who it is you should ask for their permission first. I won't cite laws, rules or ethics, but it would be appropriate to get their permission out of courtesy at the least.

I thought that this posting might have a bizarre revelation in the end, something to the effect that you trained a chimp to do it. I'll leave this to others to comment on if they dare. (This is not a veiled criticism of the tuning, as I did not listen to it yet)

I only listened to the checks. Any tuning can be improved. The unisons seem OK, but the test for those is in another week. There seems something off, just a little, in the temperament. Is it equal? The bass is offensive to me, but it could be the strings themselves. Sometimes the bass can only be made less bad, and it cannot be blamed on the tuning. The stretch in the treble seemed Ok, but could not tell because there were no high treble checks.

It is not possible to indentify who you are here tweedpipe even though I have knowledge of that. By extension it is also not possible to indentify your tuner or whether or not both of you are even on this continent.

The tuning is done using fourths and fifths from what I could hear. I would agree with Randy, less than one hour is not usually a good thorough tuning; however none of us could know how badly out of tune the instrument was previous to commencing the work provided.

With the compression of sound files used here it is difficult to judge the quality of the tuning but it is acceptable.

I deliberately posted the above before reading what others had posted so that I would not feel influenced.

Since the OP paid for the tuning, it seems that he has certain rights to recordings of it. I have never heard of a tuner getting royalties or anything from recordings that are sold of performances of a tuning. But I suppose that there are morals involved if this is a set up.

Holy smoke, that's me!!

Just kidding. It sounds to me like the tuner is just doing a little touch up. You said he's tuned it three times. What was the time interval between the tunings? 6 months, 3 months, two weeks, 3 days, etc.?

The third tuning on an 18 month old piano... that is a tuning every 6 months... and being a newish piano I would suspect it needs more than a touch-up tuning.
However the recordings are not good enough that I can perform an extensive analysis ... I suspect that there is a 100 Hz cut and also the compression algorithms will suppress the higher frequencies.

Given that happiness is a well tuned piano - I suspect that you should start looking for a tuner who can spend a bit more time making it perfect...

Why would one need that? Does every recording on YouTube has the permission of the tuner?

I thank you for your feedback, and some interesting points have been raised.

It would appear that you are able to make a reasonable judgement on the musical over-check only. For this reason the other fairly long compressed recording which would probably discourage audition anyway, appears unnecessary and has been removed.
There was never an intention to reveal the tuners name, I can see no point to that.
Perhaps this tuning was considered a little touch up, but to my ears it was really necessary, as being quite out of tune. The time interval between the tunings were 5 months, 5 months, and 8 months.

Now to the point. This tuner is a pleasant person.
I had given instruction before the visit that I wanted a tuning, any necessary checks/adjustments recommended by the manufacturer, and also to rectify a noisy sustain pedal, therefore to reserve adequate time during the visit to complete these tasks. This was understood.
On completion of the tuning I was told that due to the newness of the piano, the checks I asked for were unnecessary and not required for at least 10 years.
I replied that was not my understanding, especially as I could see some slight misalignment of hammers against the rest.
A cursory visual check was performed which took approx a minute and a half! Neither the fall-board nor the narrow panel just above the keys were removed, and was again told adjustment was unnecessary.
The sustain pedal was looked at next and to my surprise treated with a quick blast of WD40 at pivot points - the choice of lube concerned me, but at least it rectified the squeak.

My dilemma is the following. I thought the tuning was good - and you generally have done too, which reassures me somewhat. However I'm feeling reluctant to have this person back for future visits, due to the other points indicated.
Your thoughts please.

If you question the service you received, I am sure there are other good technicians/tuners from which to choose the next time.


Glen

Tweedpipe:

You are the only one that needs to be satisfied with the service. You shouldn't need our consensus. Maybe you feel loyalty to your tuner. That is admirable and important, but is he being loyal to you? Is he taking your concerns seriously? You make the call.

I didn't hear the recordings, so I can't comment on that. There are some technicians who can tune amazingly fast yet very well. The time it takes is not necessarily an indicator of how well it was done. The concert tuning I did last Saturday only took 35 minutes and I got a thank you card in the mail from the pianist. "Super job!" he said. It is all about circumstances and technique.

However, I think you have the right instinct about a guy "unwilling to lift a finger" (as I wrote recently on another thread)to render normal and expected service requirements. The pedal squeak may well return. WD-40 is generally not recommended for use anywhere in a piano. It amounted to a quick, cheap fix so he could move on. One question I have is whether you paid for the service or whether it was part of the almighty "free tunings" that come with the piano from the dealer. It it was one of those "free" tunings, you may be able to understand the lack of motivation even though it was not proper.

If you paid for it, it sounds like to me to be an unfortunate example of how I have observed these past 40 years how so many tuners operate. There are far too many tuners who purposefully neglect ordinary service requirements. I have been told many times in the past by other tuners, "You don't do that for that kind of piano. Tell 'em if they want the piano to play that good, they should get a grand." (Believe me, the same people would neglect a grand too). Pretty much the same was being said recently about what some tuners perceive to be a piano not worthy of normal, routine service. I read some of the most ridiculous hypothetical scenarios I could imagine. Unfortunately, there are tuners who will do that. I do suggest looking for someone who will treat you and the piano you have with the respect it deserves.

Bill, yes I paid for this tuning, the previous one's were complimentary. Needless to say the cost of this visit was far less than I was expecting, but I didn't exactly find that reassuring, as I'd put faith in having a fully qualified technician satisfy the needs of my piano. Sad eh?

Many thanks to you all for your input. Much appreciated. Not forgetting RPD for the comprehensive reply........

On the other hand, it's more than just a little creepy that you recorded this tuner at work, and then posted that recording. Did he or she know that you were doing this? Give consent to be recorded and have it posted on the internet? I would say that you have every right to record yourself playing the piano that this tuner tuned, but not to record someone else at work even if you are paying them. If this was a video recording then there would likely be no disagreement on this point, so why is an audio recording any different? You own the end result of his/her work, and that's it.

My two cents.

Unsettling! I didn't listen to the recording by choice.

Simply decide for yourself if you want the guy's services.

I'm gonna' start singing show tunes at the top of my lungs while I tune. If folks are gonna' record me, they should have something entertaining to listen to rather than ding, ding, ding.

I had a guy pull out a video recorder while I was tuning his piano once. He was filming me from over my shoulder before I noticed. It was a bit startling when I turned and saw him "filming". I didn't say anything and he said "do you mind if I record?" I figured it was his house and his piano but I wasn't comfortable so he turned it off. I heard him replaying it so I know he had a few minutes recorded. The guy turned out to be....let's just say missing a few screws upstairs. He caused myself and a dealership a great deal of aggravation over the next few months. It still gives me an uneasy feeling that he has footage of me working. I often wonder if I'll show up on YouTube. I'm not saying this is the same situation. I just thought it was something worth sharing.

A few homes I have been in have video surveillance recorded on a hard drive with cameras here and there. I never really thought about it, but I guess if we are in a customers home in a situation like this, they have a right to record us or any of their visitors. Sort of 1984ish.

Do I detect a little jab there?? Oh well, if so, I'll take it.

The reason I asked you if you obtained his/her permission before recording the tuner at work, was based on simple, professional ethics. (yes, some homes have video surveillance, but it would still be poor form to record, and then use that recording/video to question another person's methods or quality of work on an international public forum-all without his knowledge). Its a matter of intent. I'm not prepared to call your methods "creepy" but face it, the tuner is entirely unaware of this post, presumably. That's troubling to me.

Although you may (read may) have the legal right to record somebody in various situations, you will quickly find that in any professional setting a recording device will be viewed in a variety of ways. For example, meet a celebrity (tuners do all the time) and thrust a video into their face backstage, or start snapping camera shots of these folks without their permission, and see how long your presence is tolerated. Next time you visit your dentist, video tape the session. Best of luck.

Yes, you have the legal right to photograph Sean Penn if your job requires it...but get too close, and, well, you remember!

Its just not good manners to secretly record, and then post, a tuner at work. Not, that is, unless you obtained his/her permission.

Did you?

...another short point. We are touring musicians part of the year, most years. All musical contracts stipulate that "no unauthorized recordings shall be made" etc etc.

I wonder, under common law, if there is "implied consent" to capturing film or sound files of the tuner's (or dance instructor, or physician's) methods, just because that job or service call occurs in-home.

I really wonder.

My bet; it approaches a sticky legal issue...just my bet.

I don't feel threatened by recording. Listening to a tuner has virtually nothing to do with actually doing the work. I have plenty of people who sit back and try to study my work but I naturally move so fast they give up. I don't see the problem. I've tuned on stages during intermiession with a 1000 people watching. What's a recording??

The tuner should make keep some good poses... ~ha

Gotta work on my tuner-face :-)

After re-reading the original post, I do not see where it says that the tuner's checks is what was recorded. I thought that it was the owner that recorded himself. If there was a hidden recording device, then it is creepy.

Tuning on a stage is one thing. Putting a recording on the Internet for all time is something else (did your stage tuning make it to the concert DVD? :-). Yes, the original post had a recording of the tuner at work. I didn't listen to the whole thing.

Then, the poster asked for feedback from professional tuners, without indicating what the problem was. The premise was creepy.

I'm surprised in general how many people come to this international forum with issues that should be one-on-one between the customer and the person who did the work. Talk to your own tuner first, please! I often follow up with new customers to solicit feedback. I don't bite! :-) I want to know what you think about my work.

--Cy--

I once arrived at a home in our area, and the client was a delightfull Japanese woman. She politely asked me in very broken English if she could film me with her computer!...She walked around behind me as I worked, and then I heard her talking with somebody via computer...she pointed the screen at me, and a very friendly person from Japan started speaking with me, as translator! It was a gas to communicate this way with my customer-using an international computer connection to translate our pricing, what the piano needed etc etc.

But...she asked me politely. And, her intent was never in question. There was no sneaky recording tactics...and as a result, we all understood exactly what was happening.

In reflecting on this post, I'm really of the opinion that, although the OP's intentions may have been well meaning, its wrong to misrepresent. If I go to somebody's house, I am not automatically similarily consenting to filming, or any other use of my "image" or "likeness" for any unintended purposes.

We must ask ourselves this question: If the OP was selling, or profiting, by this act, would that change the nature of this question in any way? IF so, I think we have our answer. The publication of our image, work, or likeness should be accompanied by our consent. Not, as is the case here, collected as "evidence" and placed before the masses.

My tuning fee does not include my consent to do whatever you wish with my likeness, work product, or image. You own the piano, not my publishing rights.

Just my 2 Cents...fwiw.

But, this conversation is VERY interesting and I thank the OP for bringing us the opportunity to consider it. No harm was done, I am sure, to anybody's reputation in this go-around.

RPD

Well, look at this from another angle.

If I have my house painted and someone asks who did it, should I say "Sorry, I do not have permission from the painter." Or if I am not sure if the job was done correctly, is there a problem with taking pictures of my house with the paint job I paid for and asking other professional painters what they think of it?

But if I take pictures of the person while painting the house without their knowledge or consent, that is a different story.

So my question is whether the recording is of the tuner playing or the owner playing. If it is the tuner, it should be removed from the internet. The tuner was paid to tune, not perform.

I think you've hit on it Jeff. The tuning, of course, is the client's.

If the process being used to arrive at that tuning was taped secretly, my question to everybody is: Is the process we use proprietary information? Put another way- Could a case (legal or moral) be made for our work process itself as a personal business asset, if our process is collected without our consent?

Couldn't the WAY we work constitute proprietary information? Certainly, tuners and technicians since pianos were invented sometimes carefully guard their methods and means. (whether this is healthy is another topic!)

But, as I mentioned above (or meant to, if I didn't)...this is more just point-of- interest banter, rather than any significant issue I have with the OP. A close friend brought it to my attention off forum that I might be looking at this too legalistically...and he's probably right.

FWIW, I'm not offended by anybody here, or any opinions...and hope my words don't offend...they're not meant to. Clearly, this topic offers more than one way to reasonably look at the situation.

RPD

Here’s something that actually happened to me over thirty years ago:

A woman had me tune her piano. The next day she called and said that her father used to tune pianos and wanted her to have me tune her piano so that her father could decide if I knew what I was doing. He decided that I did know what I was doing and wanted me to call him. I did and I received a bit of mentoring and bought some used tools.

It would have been a different story if her father was secretly hiding in a closet listening to me tune.

But I am not worried about anyone figuring out just how I make my tunings sound like they do. They can't see inside my mouth and figure out how I hold my tongue.

Not really without having a wide margin of error.

Tuners use different methods to get to their intended results and may base their criticism on their own preferences. This would be unfair because they could be all valid methods to achieve a good tuning.

The "in tuneness" of the piano before the tech started, plays a big part in the time needed, this is missing and can only be assumed. The time aspect should have been left out for this reason; some tuners can accomplish in under an hour what others take twice as long to do. General tunings of this sort are charged by the job, not the time, so this should not be an issue unless your dealing with a time constraint of your own and the tuning takes too long.

The end result of the tuning (recording)would be the only thing necessary in your case Tweedpipe. Even that has its limitations since it is hard to properly record a piano for this purpose.

Also remember that tuners have different tastes and even top level ones can disagree amongst each other as to the appropriateness of styles and methods and even end results.

There is no way for any of us to know how many strings give false beats or were out of tune because of poor unison tuning. Only the tuner knows this. Same goes for the scaling of the piano and how well it lends itself to a more pleasant sounding tuning. Issues of stability like loose tuning pins cannot be judged by a listener/critic.

The only way to fairly assess a tuning is comparatively to another tuning on the same piano, and even then, bias of taste and different levels of competence would play a small part.

This is why organizations and training schools use a "master" tuning for comparison on tests. They also use several judges to collaboratively reach consensus (both the master tuning and the test)and a set of defined boundaries.

'Exactly. It seemed like an example of using the technology without thinking things through carefully, and the premise smacked of slightly shady ethics.

Of course you realize that someone is gonna' x-ray your head now while you tune to find out your secret.

I'm still not worried. It doesn't work unless certain teeth are missing. (DAMHIK)

But that brings up RPD's point. A tuning method could be proprietary, like a manufacturing process. It is up to the one with the secret to keep it, not everyone else in the world to not look or listen. But if a law is violated in order to obtain the secret, that’s another story. In my case I just need to keep my mouth shut.-- DON’T SAY IT --

This is why I like the tuner I've had so far. Despite my piano being "junk" to most people he gives it the attention and respect it deserves for still being usable after 100 years.

RDP: without even scrolling through the posts, why would he need a permission to play his piano, and record it? This is not copyright...

[added 03.35 GMT +3:00]: and reading through the replies to the original post, I'm even more amazed.

I do not understand your concerns at all. Why, if somebody hires me to tune their piano, would they have to ask for my permission to play, and record, their piano? That sounds ridiculous to me. Copyright in absurdum.

[added 03.35 GMT +3:45]: eh...? this is you (original poster) playing the piano, or your tuner? I naturally thought you were recording yourself. If you recorded your tuner, however, you should a) tell him that you intend to go public, b) ask for his permission.

The moment he packs up and leaves your piano, you shouldn't have to ask anybody for any kind of permission to record you own piano playing.

/pati

Patrick, the original poster recorded his tuners "tuning" process, then posted it asking for a critique.

You know what friends? I'm afraid this sort of thing probably goes on a lot these days. There are a lot of sneaky people in the world and technology in the wrong hands can be very dangerous. It does give me the creeps.