Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum Denver PTG Convention Review

I hear you, but the jury is still out on whether "writing" with an ETD gives a better novel.

I had a long talk with a representative from CyberTuner who was bashing TuneLab saying their machine was superior to all the others. After I drilled him on some specific points (How does the overpull account for some notes rising instead of falling, inconsistencies in measurements, etc) he offered that it was "good enough". I countered with all ETD's produce good enough results in the majority of cases. (Well scaled pianos played by hobbyists)

I think most would agree that the aural element is needed to produce fine tunings for high level artists, and I would add, good tunings on bad instruments.

The issue I see is that the "hobbyist" market is shrinking while the professional market is staying the same. There isn't the room there was before for residential tuners with large families and a stay at home partner, to make a living anymore. (But that seems the case for many professions.)

I maintain that the aural skill is just an extra tool that can help the technician provide better service.

I do however agree that the PTG cannot put this off much longer. Heck, I might even try for the eRPT. But something tells me it would be a lot harder than the aRPT.

Eventually though, I would like to be certified in aural and electronic tuning, as well as recognized for my skills in internet marketing. Uprights also provide their own special challenges. And then there's the other category that accounts for the miscellaneous skills we need to have.

So, one day, I hope to proudly display the aeiouRPT after my name. Wish me luck! ;-)

Nope, think you are wrong on that one too... Of course if you only reference old technology, it is easy to come to that conclusion. The platforms are not the same in what data is collected, and then how that data is manipulated to then drive the tuning interface. Of course, I understand most users simply turn on the machine and tune without learning about ways to improve the results. Similar I guess to so many aural techs that are happy to get "close enough" with whatever tuning approach they learned...

Ron Koval

Deleted, it does not add to the discussion.

Wow! I'm a little late chiming in here, but this is a topic close to my heart!

The PTG is an evolving organization. It is not really that old - less than 60, and has gone through a number of significant changes over the decades.

There is currently some big changes that are bubbling beneath the surface. With the Denver convention a major turnover in the Board of Directors has happened. One of the new Board members recently reached out to me in support of granting Associate members voting rights - and that in fact the PTG bylaws have been in conflict with the PTG Charter. This is going to be a process. The Bylaws of PTG are way more complicated and detailed than they should be. My understanding is the new Board will be working on a major overhaul which could very well end up with Associate members having full voting rights. That is, if the membership expresses that desire.

Chuck, I can totally understand your frustration. But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. There is an "old boys network" in the PTG that is passing away from the leadership.

This is a good time to really communicate with the new Board and make the case for a PTG that is more inclusive, and open to the full contribution of all members. There are so many Associate members that have so much to offer. It is becoming more and more clear that we need a change. Several years ago when I came on as Institute Director of the PTG Conference, I was told by the Board to not talk about Associate rights and that some thought I was "dangerous" to the organization. It sounds laughable, but its true. Now, several years later, a board member has reached out in full support of Associate rights.

Once the RPT status and member rights have been separated, there will be all sorts of possibilities that will open up. The RPT-E is just one great idea. I would also like to see the guild open up testing to non-members as well. I would also like to see continuing education and participation in professional development be required for annual renewal of the RPT. Most RPTs take the test and then disappear: we don't see them at meetings or conventions. On the other hand, some of the most loyal members of my chapter have been Associate members. A real credential would mean proving that you are continuing to develop your craft.

In regards to Aural tuning vs Electronic tuning - I really see both sides. My aural tuning skills are invaluable to me. But over the past couple of years I have come to see the value of an ETD. In regards to the RPT tuning exam a good philosophical question is this: Who would you rather have tune your piano? An RPT who passes the exam at 80% with unisons that are barely within the one cent tolerance OR an Associate member who could pass the exam at 95% with unisons well within tolerance but with an ETD?

That's why I said "ETD's" and not "ETD tuner's". A test on a spinet would separate those two out, again IMHO.

Ryan, interesting developments...

I have been uncomfortable for the longest time with the way that the PTG/RPT is used to offer an economic advantage to tested, paying members.(when so few of working technicians in the country are members.) I joined because I valued the community of sharing and education that seemed to be a central part of the organization. I listened and learned and taught and wrote and helped as I was able.

All too often I came face to face with the sense of entitlement and superiority that seemed to come to some of those that earned the RPT, (Not many, but enough) that I decided I could no longer support the organization with my dues.

Ron Koval

Any organization can only do so much at one time. The issue of full rights for all members can quickly spread what energy and focus an organization is capable of employing so broadly that the whole enterprise collapses.

I long ago tried to get a full rights category for rebuilders. It was shot down. I still think this is the only avenue to membership rights that merit change. Letting anyone who joins under the current associate category have full voting rights does not offer any advantages in my opinion.

One of the reasons I don't want full rights for those who must use an ETD is some of the makers of current ETD's do not divulge the measurement technology used and even won't disclose how they derive the spec for accuracy. You are just supposed to trust the maker. BULLSHIT I say!

Ed: +1

Some points:

How are the rebuilders' skills to be assessed? The RPT exam is designed to be as objective as possible. I guess the first step is to decide that's what we want to do.

I think an eRPT test could be devised that really tests the tuner's understanding of how the machine works and how it can be tweaked. I don't think a tuner should be able to tune a piano with an ETD and pass, just because the ETD approximated a stretch curve that matched the piano well enough. I think a poorly scaled piano or a specific stretch like pure 19ths, would challenge the ETD tuner.

Aural tuners would also be challenged by this.

Seeing temperament tuning by ear is the only criteria for the exam, and it has created some controversy, I imagine that is because of the hearing handicap of some tuners. By handicap I mean an ear that maybe has not been developed because the tuner hasn't spent enough focused time tuning by ear. Would the PTG accept a tuner using a hearing aid, like the band pass filter I developed? I wonder. It's not plug and play. You still need to understand tuning theory and tests/checks and be able to hear small differences in beat speeds.

I think a stronger pull for joining PTG is a instinctive urge to be part of an association or group. Technicians tend to be lone wolves. For that reason, I am very impressed that PTG has managed to get so many techs together in one place as they have, and no fist fights. ;-)

Truly, the feeling from the convention was that I would like to be part of more events like this. But then again, my roommate encouraged me to get out and participate, like when I went to the barbershop choir concert. These are hidden gems of the convention. There were other events that I neglected to attend, like the Nights of the Round Tables. Round tables were set up on different topics: tuning, rebuilding, etc, and people just sat down and started talking. Next year I hope they do that again. I'll try to be more involved.

I'm not sure that tuning is the basis for all listening in piano work. . I have known many people skilled at tone regulation who don't tune at all. They only exist in larger cities or factories. Fred and later, Joe at Steinways and Jeff here in London. One that I know developed severe hearing problems but could still tone regulate a piano, in fact, I preferred his work to when he could hear better. It was a bit brighter. I was once obliged to refine the tone regulation of a piano during a pink noise test by the sound techs. I found it easier. The louder notes stuck out above the noise and the softer notes became inaudible. An electronic tone regulation aid, if you will. It's amazing what we discover when we have to.

I taught one student. I happened to be doing some tone regulating on the first day she came to me so we started there. She struggled with tuning but, when she left me some nine months later, she became the most trusted tone regulator at the large rebuilding shop where she took a job even though tuning was still a struggle for her.
A rebuild specialist can always employ a tuner just as a tuner can always employ a rebuilder.

This opportunity to specialise produces the most amazing results. The "jack of all trades...... " adage takes on a reality when the opportunity to spend a whole week maintaining and refining the tuning and to a lesser extent the tone and action regulation of just one piano and constantly listening to it being exceptionally well played produces surprising results, side effects and realisations. Especially with the build up of experience from many different weeks of this. some aspects of tuning that are currently obsessed over become meaningless.

Past a certain point, it really doesn't matter whether a piano is tuned by ear or electronically. Particularly since so many tuners are now emulating the electronic model oblivious of the musical effect to all practical purposes.

There was another thread, concurrent to thus one where an RPT wouldn't or couldn't do the simplest action and tone regulation on a Kawai upright in order to even up the relative volume of some of the notes. Now, this is basic. only minimal tuning skills are required. Other skills are needed. It is far more important to have skill in the allied arts. My examination to become an RTT, in those days (early'70's) included just an oral question about shaping hammers. I don't think the examination is much more thorough than that now, as far as satisfying that Kawai owner is concerned. . The emphasis on tuning is out of proportion to the real world at any level of work.

I think we all know that this obsession with tuning over the other skills is way out of proportion. As I recall, it used to be that, before the preponderance of electronic aids, it was inconsequential how the results were acheived, as long as the results were acheived. It would still be possible to fail if the electronics and basic partial behaviour were not understood. Maybe Mark is right. Include tuning through the break and into the bass of a spinet could be added. This would test the understanding of a purely electronic tuner. With some spinet lower half situations there simply is no answer save backtracking and fudging the best worst.

When I have the slightest pitch correction with time constraints, I turn to electronics, refining by ear later if I feel obsessive about it. An electronic tuning will always get me through a rehearsal with full orchestra with no adverse consequences. Especially one that is a copy of my own work anyway. . In fact it would be unwise to change it much once the musicians know where the piano stands, pitch wise. there comes a point where it can all get so pretentious if we're not careful. I can be the most obsessive of all, once I get the bit between my teeth. This tendency has to be curbed (no pun intended, honestly) when time is involved

Tone regulation skills among ordinary tuners were almost non existent when I first went to the USA. I was asked to tune a piano for a dealer in anticipation of employment who was amazed at the improvement I made by spending just a few minutes equalising the tone regulation. This was an experienced dealer. It was very easy for me to capture all the local business by simply doing a little tone regulation each time. Sometimes not doing much tuning, the previous tuners work being good enough, but doing other much more needed work instead, without changing the basic tonal character and feel of the piano too much at one go.

To me, it is readily apparent from the questions on this forum alone that the accompanying arts and skills are of equal importance. I don't think there will be any general world wide loss of aural tuning skills if electronics ware allowed at the basic level. There will always be those who need to be more advanced just as my car will perform for my needs by electronically aided adjustment, there will always be those who can get that bit more speed or gas mileage by listening to the engine.

If I were to recommend a tech in Chucks' area, (no disparagement to those in his area), I would recommend him over somebody who just happened to have developed the knack of putting a bunch of beat rates in some semblance of order by ear but poor allied skills.

Really complete thoughts here.. it is a complex, multifaceted thing. I always enjoy reading, RXD.

+1

Ed, the final arbitrator is the piano playing public. Nobody in their right mind should simply trust the letters RPT as an indication of high quality. I have come across some very unethical RPT's. The best teachers and musicians know who the good and bad tuners are by their reputation and work not by their guild status.

The best thing the guild can do is to continue to disseminate basic, high quality tuning, voicing, regulating, and rebuilding techniques and skills to all those who are interested. This, more than anything, has raised the standards.

The PTG's big mistake, in my opinion, was to go down the path of promoting the RPT brand. It is up to each one of us to promote our own brand. The guild is mostly valuable as a networking and educational support organization. When it tries to do more, it goes astray.

Ed - Here's the point in the arguement where you completely lose me. How does a manufacturer's decision whether or not to make public the formulas which he has built into his machine have anything to do with my ability as a tuner or my qualifications as a technician? As long as the tuner I use gives me a great tuning every time (as does my Verituner) I could care less about the mathematics used to bring about those results. I wouldn't understand the equations anyway!

I think Ryan hit the nail on the head when he stated, "The PTG's big mistake, in my opinion, was to go down the path of promoting the RPT brand. It is up to each one of us to promote our own brand." The practice of bestowing the RPT certification upon some technicians and not others may have made sense back in time when to give a highly competant tuning you had to know how to tune by ear. In 2016, however, a technician who is skilled with the tuning hammer can give a very, very good tuning without a shred of knowledge about the complexities of aural tuning. Thus you have an organization in which certain competent members are favored over other competent members.

If and when the PTG decides to put results achieved first and foremost, and methodology a distant second, I'll rejoin. By then, however, I'll probably be too old to care. Chuck Behm

Chuck,

They are getting even more had core as you speak. Have tuning fork, will travel, is the word. No electronics at all allowed for Part 1 of the tuning exam. Did you already resign? If not, I wanted to initiate a proposal to nominate you for a Member of Note award. The PTG awards are not limited to RPT's. One Associate has even earned the Golden Hammer, Fred Drasche from Steinway.

I am aware that you have been taunted by a certain guy from Nebraska. A guy who's shop is a mess. You have offered and given a great amount to PTG. You have given dignity to the vertical piano. A throwaway piano now a public treasure. Only you could or would do it!

I have often said that there is a certain segment of PTG membership for whom if we said, "You can be an RPT if you can tune just two octaves by ear or you can climb Mount Everest", most of them would choose the latter because they just can't do it.

I began working on that problem 12 years ago. I have seen dozens of people succeed. I don't believe anyone who says they "can't hear beats". Even a novice can. It is always a matter of what to do with them, not whether they can be heard or not. Discernibility is simply a matter of focus. I have the ultimate solution. No filters, no fancy gadgets, just plain aural tuning techniques that served 17th & 18th Century tuners just fine. All organic, all natural sounds that the piano produces and that anyone can learn to use.

I also want to challenge your statement that learning to tune aurally would be something you would never use. I don't dispute that the Verituner does a great job but if you learn just the very basics of aural tuning, your ears will be opened as to why it does. You will know the difference between just an OK tuning and a superb one and exactly why.

I suspect that the knowledge of aural tuning has gnawed at you for all these years and you have built up your defenses as to why you do not need to know it. It is time for you to meet the challenge and overcome it with dignity. You need not forsake your grandchildren to do it either. If there is one person whom I could reach, it would be you. It can be a fair trade for the learning of your many valuable techniques.

I have one apprentice who has done very well but still may have a lot to learn but I have another one coming who is totally new to the profession. One aspect of PTG is that we help each other. No money is ever part of the equation. The money comes from what we learn from each other later. I live about a 5 hour drive from you. I am willing to come to you and bring along an apprentice or two to learn what you know how to do.

Mark,
My proposal to evaluate the rebuilders skills would be to have the committee examine several examples of their work. The criteria would be written out and well defined.

I am putting results first by insisting that the intellectual and aural skills sufficient for RPT status to establish what an in tune state is for a piano must be tested.

Otherwise PTG has ceded control over the core professional skill of piano tuners to the makers of the robots.

The customer is NOT the final judge of when an in-tune state exists. That is why what we do is a profession. We certainly accommodate our customers needs-but the customer does not tell us how to determine an in-tune state.

If it is solely up to us to promote our own brand individually, the whole reason the founders formed PTG is nullified.

It's really hard to make a rational argument when one side of the debate is gripped by paranoia. Fear of computers, fear of technology, fear of robots, etc. - very hard to reason with someone obsessed by an irrational fear. Ed, you are an extremely knowledgeable technician, but I just don't share your apprehensions.

Bill - thank you so kindly for your generous offer to travel to Boone to help with my education in return for me giving your apprentises a hand with a technique or two. You of course are always welcome to stop by at any time - by yourself or with your student technicians. I highly doubt, however, that there is anything I can show a beginning technician that you yourself couldn't demonstrate more skillfully than myself.

As far as my learning your techniques for aural tuning, sure, I would be willing to spend an afternoon seeing if I could actually hear what I've never been able to before. I doubt that it would happen, but I've been wrong before. What you are mistaken about is that I have a gnawing anxiety about not conquering the mysteries of aural tuning. I don't. I decided long, long ago that I could do excellent work with a electronic tuner and skillful use of a tuning hammer, and that was that. I would prioritize my desire to learn aural tuning with learning a skill such as, oh, playing the oboe. My wife plays the oboe and my dad made oboe reeds, and I've always thought it would be neat to learn how to play. But as far as taking time to learning the fingerings and developing an ambrochure - I'm just not that into it.

As per my decision to quit the PTG, it boils down to a difference in philosophy. I believe (as I've stated a thousand times) that credentials should be given according to results obtained. The PTG big shots don't see it that way, and they are the ones calling the shots. All I can therefore do to feel right with the world is to quit the organization. I'll let my membership run out in December. I'm sure that there will be those who are tickled I'm gone, in that it was a thorn in their side to see a monthly column being published by a non-RPT. The only reason I stayed in this long was because of what you told me some time back about the board considering a more even-handed approach to ETD tuners. Apparently, that point of view never came to pass.

Thank you for all your kindnesses. I feel that i'm making "much ado about nothing," in going on about this.

I'll finish up one last article I've promised John Granholm (if the Journal will even want to run it), then I use my Facebook page to self-publish articles in the future. I enjoy writing and photography too much to quit cold turkey.

Again, best wishes all, and (hopefully) no hard feelings. Chuck Behm

I have been grappling with whether there is an ethical question involved. If a Registered Piano Technician uses the credential and now uses an electronic tuning device whenever he or she is tuning, it would seem that he or she is claiming credentials on the basis of a test that does not test the skills that he or she is using professionally. Is this ethical?

Chuck, you're great. Thanks for writing all you did, it was very much worth to read it. You have a kind and balanced perspective.



This really hit home, as this is the way much of the world works - power, old boys' clubs, appearance over truth. I believe the same thing: credentials should be given according to the results obtained.

Your decision makes perfect sense, but the organization will suffer a loss. Hopefully this may spur into action a more balanced perspective.

I don't see any ethical issue. If they passed the aural skills test and they want to use an ETD that is not deceiving anyone. PTG requiring proficient aural skills to be fully professional does not preclude using alternative methods as you see fit when tuning for the public. Otherwise new approaches would be sort of banned.