Re: [Harp-L] tuner

["john" <jjthaden@xxxxxxxxx>]

Tim,  good points!  I still wonder about tuner accuracy.  Thanks. -John

======= At 2008-06-24, 10:05:20 you wrote: =======

>john thaden wrote:
>> Yes, the strobe types give you information on the pitch of higher 
>> harmonics (though I'm pretty sure many strobe scope users don't 
>> use that information), but are they really better at identifying 
>> the pitch of the fundamental?  Can someone with both types please 
>> put this to the test?
>
>My issue is not with the accuracy of the tuner, it's with the 
>convenience.  Many things these inexpensive tuners do as a "feature" 
>are inconvenient when you're tuning harmonicas.  Someone else noted 
>the relatively weak fundamental frequencies of a note sounded on a 
>harmonica, and this can often result in the tuner having trouble 
>identifying and locking in the intended note.  If the tuner doesn't 
>have the ability to dial the desired note, this can be a problem.  
>Sometimes when a reed needs to be moved a long way in pitch the tuner 
>will identify the closest note, not the desired note.  And I, for 
>one, use the frequencies of the harmonics.  I suspect the percentage 
>of people using this feature is higher among techs - to whom the 
>question was directed - than it might be among the general population 
>of people using tuners to tune harmonicas.  Tuners with automatic 
>note detection also have a delay in response that can be a problem.  
>My Korg OT-12 has a switchable "speed" setting for how fast it will 
>respond.  
>
>I certainly didn't mean it couldn't be done or even done well, I was 
>only saying that techs are probably not doing a lot of work with $30 
>tuners.  
>
>-tim
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Harp-L is sponsored by SPAH, http://www.spah.org
>Harp-L@xxxxxxxxxx
>http://harp-l.org/mailman/listinfo/harp-l

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
			

Best regards.				 
john
jjthaden@xxxxxxxxx
2008-06-24