Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum Perception of the PTG from non members

I agree with Jim, strongly, that the RPT tuning exam produces an unmusical tuning. From a scientific basis, I would even call it incorrect.

It is strict ET, true - to a certain standard. And it is a clean rubric to determine if a tuner can listen to beats and tune accurately using them. However, I don't believe it necessarily produces musical technicians who can tune well.

Personally, I had to change my style to execute the exam tuning. I used a completely different aural temperament and stretch technique, knowing what the exam was looking for. I would hope that I never have to do it again because it would negatively impact the sensibilities I have developed since the exam.

The logical - not feeling - basis to this is that these tunings are machine tunings, corrected by ear. The SAT and RCT use the 4th partial to align midrange frequencies and define ET by evenly progressing RBIs.

There are many different ways to define an ET, by which partials are favored and the stretch of the alignment. All of them can be 'correct' by a given standard, but I would argue none of them would consider the full picture of what being in-tune means.

This points up an area where we PTG members apparently have not communicated clearly enough about the exam. The "model" tuning that is done on the test piano is done by ear -- or primarily by ear with ear trumping ETD readings. Rather than being just an implementation of one person's opinion, it is a tuning that represents the consensus of several competent tuners that that particular piano is tuned the best that it can be. THEN . . .

That tuning is recorded on an ETD so that it can be reduplicated and so that deviation can be scored. AFTER THAT ...

The piano is de-tuned by a given amount that still leaves it stable -- at which time it is then made available to the examinee for the test.

I won't go through the steps of the actual testing procedure because I don't have them in my head, but then, after the examinee is finished it is scored primarily by reference to deviation from the "consensus tuning". It is possible to get up to 20 notes off by one cent (clearly audible) and still pass! But that's not all. It is recognized that there can be different approaches to being "in tune" and if the examinee can demonstrate that his/her tuning of a particular note is consistent with a reasonable whole it can still be scored as acceptable!

I'm not trying to take this thread off topic with this explanation. Rather I want to get pack to non-member perceptions with these specific questions:

1) Were you aware of the nature of the tuning exam as described above?
2) If you had a different understanding of the exam procedure, what was the source of that (mis-) information?
3) Have you looked into the examination procedure yourself -- or, for that matter, ever looked at the information available on the PTG website?

Please keep the questions and comments coming. I'm sure that no organization can be everything to everyone. But at least we can be clear in communicating what we want it to be about.

I don't think this is accurate - and points out the misconception held by many RPTs and associates. The exam is that - a specific published targeted tuning. For example, the top octave is to be a strict 2:1 octave match. This tuning has little to do with tuning a piano "the best that it can be."

Ron Koval

I'm not a CTE -- although I have participated in a CTE "training" session. But here's the quote from the official ptg.org website:

Tuning Exam

The RPT Tuning Exam tests your skills in tuning; your examiners will compare your tuning note by note to a "master tuning." In preparation for exam day, a committee of three or more RPTs, under the direction of a Certified Tuning Examiner (CTE), tunes a good quality grand piano at least 5'9" in length until all agree that the tuning is optimal. They then use an electronic tuning device to measure the tuning precisely, and make a record of each note and its pitch measurement on a specified partial. This record is the "master tuning" for this piano. Examiners will likewise measure your tuning of the same piano, and then, by means of a computer or handscoring program, pitch-correct and compare it to the master tuning. When the measurement of a given note of your tuning differs from the master tuning by more than the tolerance allowed after correction for overall pitch, the CTE will record the appropriate penalty points on the scoreform as indicated by the scoring program. Then, listening to intervals along with you as directed by the CTE, examiners will aurally verify some or all of these points and thus confirm the scoring. If examiners believe that a note in question cannot be improved, the CTE may cross off the penalty point for that note.

Note that the "master tuning" is an "optimal" tuning as determined by at least 3 RPTs. It is definitely not an implementation of any pre-digested formula for tuning any given note (other than a picky insistence on A-440 precision).

Also note that any discrepancy is evaluated with the examinee. There is no mysterious "well, we just didn't like that" kind of thing where the examinee doesn't know clearly what the discrepancy was. And, although it says that final determination is in the discretion of the examiners, the reality is that in the large majority of cases, the examinee also recognizes that the note could have been tuned better. In any event, final determination of whether a discrepancy from the "master tuning" is finally to be counted as a penalty is determined by consensus of real people using real ears and listening to the actual result -- not any pre-defined recipe or arbitrary machine output.

Question for CTE's: Have you ever had someone do a tuning that sounded pretty good, but did not meet the criteria for this recorded "master tuning?" Is it possible?

The criteria for the highest octave of the piano is now "clean sounding single octaves", as opposed to strict 2:1 octaves. That may sound like splitting hairs but one is defining the octave by sound and the other by a strict ratio.

I have a record of a master tuned Steinway B used for exams that has a cents offset of 34.6 cents at note B7 (the highest used for the exam). The sample Steinway D tuning that is included with Tunelab has a cents offset of 30.4 cents.

There seems to be a misconception about the tuning exam being a "flat" (as in straight line) tuning with very little stretch.

To say the tuning exam creates an "unmusical" tuning strikes me as hyperbole. That being said, since we are talking about PTG perceptions this is interesting information to hear.

Tunewerk: do you have real experience listening to a master tuning, or are you basing this on what you have heard about the tuning exam?

I do have real experience listening to master tunings.



I would hesitate to call the master tuning an optimal tuning, but it is an extremely precise, agreed upon version of ET, using several pairs of ears and a machine.

Every tuning is the implementation of some formula, whether using the large capacity of the human brain, or the limited sight of a machine equipped with bandpass filters, statistical performance data, and stretch algorithms.

The master tuning is a relatively conservative, machine based tuning. Corrections are defined as optimal within that framework. The examinee will agree with corrections because of the framework surrounding them.

Was tested in the new system some 20+yrs ago when they first started using the SAT measurements to score the test. The tolerances seemed to me to be wide enough to allow for any tuning style.

The test is mechanical in that they are not judging the beauty or artistry of the testing technician. This makes sense to me because it gives the testing committee much more than their personal preferences to judge by. I think the testing committee welcomed the work of Al Sanderson in this process. The whole piano is strip muted so that only one string per note is measured. And then only the Unisons in the middle two or three octaves are measured. There is one big stark reality at the beginning of the test. Your on your own to find A440.

Any experienced tech will pass the test. The question I have is: Is it worth $360.00???

Many moons ago I decided to take the PTG tests. The active chapter was a couple of hours drive away, so involvement there was expensive in that it gobbled up my work time.

I went to a few meetings, enjoyed them. Soon thereafter I asked to get some preliminary coaching from some of the leaders and respected techs in that chapter. I used up an entire day at two different times, but received no personal instruction, comment, or attention. On one of the occasions I was put on a Steinway (new on sales floor) that had tuning pins so tight that I was afraid that I would permanently twist the grain of the metal just to move the pins in the block. After wrestling with it for a while, the only comment I got from the tech was, "I think you could go ahead and take the test." This overall experience left me really chapped. (By the way, the instructional session of the evening was on one of those Steinways. The teacher was looking at his inch pounds in amazement. He should have used an automotive torque wrench on that one!)

Weeks later, by the time of the test I had a really bad "taste in my mouth" over the whole deal. On test day, a guy who was checking tuning forks told me that mine was off a little. I forget which direction it was allegedly off, but I decided to try to compensate on the setting of the A440 seventeenth check. That was a mistake. There was no second chance. I wasn't passed because of that. Looking back, I suppose that my bigger mistake was not saying anything about why I had set in deliberately “off,” but given the experiences that had come before I was just boiling by that point and was simply ready to walk. Tuning fork guy convinced me to go ahead and take the rest of the tuning test (even though you know you "won't pass because of the A440 portion").

From these experiences I did learn that I was wasting my time to think that I was going to get some help - at least at that time at that chapter. From the test itself, I learned that I should smooth my temperament some, even though it had been judged passable. My pin-setting and unison judgment was amazing to the examiners. It was as if they thought, “ He can’t set A440, but he can tune rock solid?! Huh?!”

Soooo...
Since PTG had not mattered at all in the many years I had already been working, and since I had invested very valuable time for what someone could have told me with far less expense and effort on my part, I went back home, learned some of Defebaugh and other temperament tricks to improve my temperament, and have not missed the PTG at all. I have considered going to a convention a time or two for the sake of instructional sessions, but the cost factor or timing seems to always get in the way.

Good overall organization. Baaad experience. No sympathy requested.

Thing is, no one encounters a piano in the field that just happens to be a good quality grand that has been detuned alternating flat and sharp.

A realistic test that techs face every day in the field would be a Whitney spinet that hasn't been tuned since 1978. It's 1 whole step flat, even more in the treble. You have two hours to put it in tune and at A440. That's the test techs face every day!

Regarding the tuning test: Another point to be made, that has already been made above is pitch. So what if the pitch of the piano does not match "precisely" or, close enough to A/440? The program can compensate for that and in my opinion, should. I bring that up because 99% of all tuners "float the pitch" throughout the year allowing for a more stable tuning. Therefore, floating pitch is not putting it exactly on A/440 anyway.... If the person can tune the rest of the piano and do a very good job passing the remainder of the exam, compensation then needs to be made for that one thing...pitch...

One thing that is clear to me is that different chapters of the Guild can have completely different personalities! I talked to one technicians who lived between two chapters. At first he went to the bigger one (probably around 50 members) and was surprised that nobody came and said hi to him, and he felt like he basically got the cold shoulder.

Then he went to another somewhat smaller (35 members) chapter that was a little further to drive and was surprised by the difference: a warm welcome and introduction to the group and much looked for support. Within a few years he was chapter President!

The PTG is a very complex organization with no shortage of big egos. There are also some amazing people who give a tremendous amount without seeking anything in return. There are plenty of eccentrics (like you would expect in this type of work) and there are also a good number of suits. It brings people together from the extreme left and right of politics, and folks of all types of religious persuasion.

Leadership can be very tough in an organization like this. We are all so independently minded - most of us are used to not having a boss or manager. So how do you please such a group? The fact is you don't!

Since this thread may be running itself out soon, I thought I'd take some time and go through the posts and create a synopsis of peoples comments.

Some of these are off the thread, and some come from individuals who contacted me privately.

1. PTG is a networking and support group, but their members are not necessarily better qualified than non-members.

2. The PTG may be one way to get start getting names of technicians in a new geographic area, but reputation is more important than membership

3. Some people drop out because they are not able to attend the chapter meetings which makes the dues not seem worth it.

4. Some resent the "us vs. them" mentality of some of the members.

5. Since many technicians are independent types who enjoy solitary work, PTG is not attractive since its main benefit is the socialization with other technicians at meetings and conferences.

6. Some of the political squabbles are a turn off.

7. The dues can be prohibitive for younger technicians.

8. Some resent the way that Associate members are sometimes talked down to.

9. Some resent that the PTG website only lists RPTs. Since Associates pay the same dues, they should be listed - even if they are on a different list than the associates.

10. Some resent that you have to pay dues in order to maintain RPT status. It is compared to a university requiring a yearly fee in order to maintain your degree.

11. Some experienced technicians don't want to have to prove themselves to the PTG by taking the exams.

12. (from a member) Some feel the council system of governance is inefficient and slow.

13. Some feel the PTG is too focused on promoting RPTs instead of promoting piano in the community.

14. Some enjoyed membership previously, but because of a life change they let their dues lapse. They resent having to retake all the tests again, and feel it is not worth it.

15. Some feel that PTG is an excellent organization to help train beginning techs and tuners.

16. Some feel that machine tuners are in general looked down upon by the PTG. Tuning a temperament by ear is an unreasonable requirement considering the accuracy of ETD's

17. Some have found PTG to be a very welcoming and warm organization, even to non-members

18. Some have experienced luke-warm reception from local chapters.

19. Some people just don’t like meetings!

20. Some feel that PTG turns a blind eye to unethical practices by some of the RPT technicians. Yet it claims to be upholding ethics.

21. Some resent that the organization advertises against non-RPTs by encouraging the public to only use RPT technicians.

22. Some applaud the guild for promoting basic ear tuning skills, others think it is unreasonable.

23. Some think that the guilds policy of grandfathering in technicians that became registered before the modern tuning exam is flawed.

24. The fact that recertification is not required is viewed by some as a serious problem, especially since older technicians can start having hearing problems that can interfere with accurate work.

25. Some argue that the guilds mission is too focused on itself and it should have some mention of keeping client’s best interest in mind.

26. Some see the guild as an excellent way to get in touch with mentors.

27. PTG has a lot to offer beginning and intermediate techs, but very little for high-level technicians.

Yes, yes Loren! Now that really tests your skills. Add in a couple strings that break and some sweat running down your face and you've got a real test.

Good summary Ryan. You asked, listened and we were heard. That's nice. It's always great to be heard. I don't know what you'll do, if anything, with the information but I think it was a profitable exercise.

Thank You

Very good list, Ryan!

Seriously! And add to that the necessary diplomatic and educational tools the tech has to have to explain the need for the pitch correction, why it requires an extra charge, and then have the skills to actually do it. THAT'S a test!

Yes Loren.

Piano with irregular pin tightness increased difficulty. I had experience an old Pear River, some pins raise 50 cents with moderate throw, some pins need to turn with the Fujan, with well coordinated back muscle, shoulder muscle and etc.

Exam is an interesting social phenomenon. Everyone knows exam has not guarantee on capability, everyone like to judge by certificates.

Sorry for distract this great thread.

I'm sorry, but the latter part is simply not true. The ETD is solely used for recording the pitches. Even though you might end up somewhere close to something that some ETD setting might produce, the master tuning cannot be called "machine based".

Regarding the master tuning as a ruler in the testing situation, it is not set in stone. I agree that arguing your own tuning against the master tuning in the presence of three authorities/examiners might be challenging, but it can be done - I know that from personal experience

The master tuning I was faced with was close to what I would tune for a close-mic recording session in the studio, except for the outer octaves which were narrower than I like. I still, however, tuned much like I preferred (which made me lose some points there) but the "deviation range" is quite forgiving up/down there, so it's really not a big problem

What I really try to say is that you can tune musically in the testing situation and pass.

Another situation techs run into: last night I had to tune for a Texas Tenors concert at a nearby college. Their sound check was to be over at 5:00 and doors would open at 7:00 for the 7:30 concert. I thought, no sweat, I have a good 2 hours to spend here to really make the piano sing. Unfortunately, schedules got behind and sound check didn't end until 5:55, so now I only had an hour. Couple that with the fact that A4 was hovering around 10 cents flat, and now I only had an hour to bring it to a solid 440, and that was while the lights were alternating between different colors and no light at all as the tech crew was going through the lighting sequence.

Really, what we deal with in the field regularly is a more rigorous and daunting test than any controlled environment test. And passing these field tests on a daily basis, with our clients acting as our examinees, are THE most important tests we take.

*edited for a few pre-caffeine typos.*