source file: mills2.txt Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 18:29:29 +0200 Subject: Re: Comments on the importance of tuning in New Scientist. From: mr88cet@texas.net (Gary Morrison) >>certainly are plenty of definite-pitched, and at least >>much-more-definite-pitched, instruments out there. >>Guitars and pianos are extremely common examples of these, >Being a guitarist I must strongly object. No, the guitar >(at least classical) is NOT a definite-pitched instrument The guitar fits in the category I described here as "much-more-definite-pitched". The piano is a definite-pitched instrument. I have played classical guitar as well as bassoon, saxophone, and viola in the past, so I certainly do understand what you're saying. Classical guitarists especially are easily annoyed by the general public's misconception that guitarists can't vary the pitch, especially downward. Still, on a guitar the struggle is much more to make the pitch DEVIATE from the ideal to which it's tuned, whereas on a woodwind, brass, or orchestral string instrument, the struggle is to make the pitch MATCH the ideal. (Yes, I do realize that I'm oversimplifying there, but only slightly.) Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Sat, 14 Jun 1997 18:31 +0200 Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA23106; Sat, 14 Jun 1997 18:31:35 +0200 Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 18:31:35 +0200 Received: from ella.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA23147 Received: (qmail 23928 invoked from network); 14 Jun 1997 16:29:45 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ella.mills.edu) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 14 Jun 1997 16:29:45 -0000 Message-Id: Errors-To: madole@mills.edu Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu