Concert pitch and tuning

arthur · Post by **arthur** » 05 Aug 2005, 11:40

Can someone give me a definitive statement on what is expected for a piano to be tuned to concert pitch, I have seen many write ups which vary from A = 440 to 450 with no explanation of whether this is also to Equal Temperament Perfect Octave.

Is there an expert out there please?

Regards

Arthur

Post by **Barrie Heaton** » 05 Aug 2005, 11:52

Standard Concert pitch in the UK is A440 = C523.3 in the case of a piano, the A above Middle C is A440 and Middle A is tuned to A220
See
http://www.uk-piano.org/history/pitch.html
and
http://www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/index.html

Equal Temperament and all other temperaments use Concert pitch as a starting point that is all

Perfect Octaves are tuned by the ear and they naturally stretch from the theoretical pitch to the natural pitch of the string that you are tuning. However, when a machine is use to tune a string it has to calculate the stretch from the theoretical pitch to the natural pitch of the string

Now if we take our Middle “A” which has been tuned to the fork as an octave A220hz we than tune the octave to the Middle “A” now the theoretical Hz should be A440hz but on a small piano it could be A441 and the octave above that would be A880hz However, again because of the laws of physics we could be looking at A886hz But to the human ear the octaves sound pure but if you used a machine to measure the Hz you would see that the octaves are running sharp from theoretical Hz

If you have any more question or if it is not clear someone else will have to answer as I am caching a Plane to get some Sun and Sangria and no pianos

Barrie,

arthur · Post by **arthur** » 05 Aug 2005, 21:37

Thanks Brian,

I now understand why there may be a different frequency quoted. You mentioned about the diference between the human scale and machine, do you have any further info as I am using some laptop software to tune and cannot see what is wrong with using the theoretical frequencies? - or is it my ear that needs tuning?

Regards

Arthur

arthur · Post by **arthur** » 05 Aug 2005, 21:38

Sorry Barrie not Brian!

Post by **Melodytune** » 06 Aug 2005, 20:53

First of all I couldn't word it any better what Barrie has written here, only to add that some concert pianos may be tuned slightly sharp of concert pitch, this practise is done to allow for the instrument to drop in pitch slightly as the strings expand with the heat of the hall with a full ordiance and the lighting shining down on the piano.

I can and will explain further if need be but to try and answer your question, if you are trying to tune a piano to the software on your laptop a couple of things may be happening, first of all when tuning a string you need to take it slightly sharp of your reading then as you release the pressure off the tuning pin the pitch or frequency of that string will drop slightly. What is seen as mathmatically correct may not sound best musically and it requires a lot of experience to conbine both ear and electronic means of tuning to achieve a tuning that is acceptable musically and electronically.

Hope this helps somewhat to answer your query.

Regards
Chris.

arthur · Post by **arthur** » 09 Aug 2005, 07:14

Hi Chris,

Thanks for the reply.

Thanks for the reply.

I am new to the piano arena and come from an engineering/computer background I am servicing and tuning pianos with my software.
I still cannot get to grips with why it is said I cannot tune with my software equal to ear tuning. At the end of the day the string oscillates at a given frequency (and partials) so if you tuned it I could match it, therefore what is the difference? What is missing? I don't wish to take away the experience of the tuner but cannot identify this difference and this software would benefit many tuners who are going partially deaf and those embarking on this path who are totally deaf.

Regards

Arthur

Post by **Melodytune** » 09 Aug 2005, 10:59

Is it that when you see something from your software as visably correct but it doesn't sound right and vice versa, its fair to say that this "variation" will differ from one type of piano to another for instance an Steinway concert grand piano when tuned would both sound ok and the reading you get with your software would tally whereas some mini pianos where the stringing/scaling isn't so good you have to compromise in order to get the piano to sound aurally correct and that is your what you are aiming for.
Regards
Chris.

Geminoz · Post by **Geminoz** » 09 Aug 2005, 14:07

Hi..going to put my 2 cents worth in here even though I know nothing about the technicalities involved in tuning.
But I do know a good musical ear is invaluable.....we listen to music (whether playing or just enjoying listening) with our ears.
Our ears tell us when something doesn't sound right.
Computer software may tell you the tuning is right, but computers don't have ears, and the person you are tuning for won't be happy if it doesn't sound right to the human ear.
Computers are brilliant.....but they can only do so much....they're not human.

My piano tuner uses a some kind of guage, but then he also plays and listens to the notes. His ear making the final decision.

arthur · Post by **arthur** » 09 Aug 2005, 16:20

Hi Geminoz,

I don't wish to create an ear v computer argument but scientifically I can tune my piano to match any ear tuning and dare I say tested a piano after it had been ear tuned to find the treble was 15% out.

Is ear tuning and experience of the tuner a myth to retain this mystic of tuning when it is not now no longer applicable.

With regards to computers , yes they do as they are progranmmed but they do it consistantly and accuratly and we have moved on from the quill and ink and pony express to an invisable media, so why not tuning by computers.

I welcome an open discussion and logical reasoning as to why not electronic tuning.

Regards

Arthur

Post by **Gill the Piano** » 09 Aug 2005, 18:45

Electronic tuners are wonderfully accurate...for perfect pianos. But there aren't many of those around. Most pianos (at the realistically priced end of the market, anyway) and older pianos have odd beats on odd strings (some more than others

) and the human ear can hear these, recognise them, and discount them as irrelevant. The computer hears a beat which shouldn't be there...and will NOT let the tuner move on from that note until the beat is gone. Which it won't ever be, unless the note is restrung, and sometimes not even that will work. So that note is perceived by the machine as out of tune,even when it has been adapted so that the average human ear is reasonably happy with it.

arthur · Post by **arthur** » 10 Aug 2005, 08:52

Hi

I cannot speak for the other electronic tuning devices but the laptop software I am working on allows you to set the note to whatever frequency you wish with or with any beats, it displays the frequency peak and deviation (not sure how to attach a .psp picture to this reply - any advice?).

The beat you mention may be the identifiable difference between the ear and computer tuning, for if you play two notes together then the beat (or partials) may not be harmonious and would cause 'discordance?'. This would be detectable by the ear but the computer would indicate that the two frequencies are correct but not detect the discordance - interesting!

I have actually been working with the software company to identify and display these beats and this discordance.

So, it looks like the Tuner wins but the computer is a close second in that you can at least bring the tuning up to the correct frequency for every note but not account for disharmonious partials etc.

I am aiming to help the average person to tune their own piano with a tuning kit (software , hammer and wedge), it may not be to a professional pianist standard but acceptable to the average person and puts them in control of their piano tuning.

Regards

Arthur
pianolaco@talktalk.net

PianoGuy · Post by **PianoGuy** » 10 Aug 2005, 11:41

I can see what you're doing is commendable, but any tuner will tell you that it takes many years of practice to develop control of a tuning crank in order to achieve stable tuning. Hearing is but a part of the process.

I note from your earlier post that you are developing this software to "benefit many tuners who are going partially deaf and those embarking on this path who are totally deaf".

Well as one of the former who may well go that way, I welcome this attempt, but why in Heaven's mame would a deaf person wish to tune a piano anyway? Furthermore, who would employ him/her without some element of bizarre and ghoulish curiosity involved?

Puzzled,

PG

PianoGuy · Post by **PianoGuy** » 10 Aug 2005, 11:57

arthur wrote: The beat you mention may be the identifiable difference between the ear and computer tuning, for if you play two notes together then the beat (or partials) may not be harmonious and would cause 'discordance?'. This would be detectable by the ear but the computer would indicate that the two frequencies are correct but not detect the discordance - interesting!

Nah!......

the beat of which the lovely Gill speaks is often the result of the string vibrating at a different speed in its x-y plane than its a-b plane (when viewed fron above, along its x-section, naturally)

This is often the result of distortion of the string material as it emerges from the agraffe or top bridge, and some new pianos are not immune. Bechsteins of all vintages and new Faziolis can be shocking in this respect, but players of these instruments are often unaware of this phenomenon as a result of the skill of their human piano tuner......

arthur · Post by **arthur** » 10 Aug 2005, 13:59

Goulish - Interesting that it is 'goulish' to engage someone who is deaf and can tune but not someone who is blind. Why not give a deaf person the opportunity to earn a living , learn a new skill etc.

Years to learn to tune - It has taken me 1 week to learn how to tune with this software and control the tuning crank going slightly sharp etc. I am not convinced that this 'years of experience' is still applicable.

Nah - Thank you for your technical comments I will review that.

I think it is time to put this topic to rest, thank you all for your input, I appreciate I am up against an old school of experience.

Regards

Arthur

Geminoz · Post by **Geminoz** » 10 Aug 2005, 15:03

Me again

I would love to be able to tune my own piano...and if the software proved successful would probably give it a go.....but....I am a bit worried about the hammer and wedge bit

....could you please elaborate.
My ear has always been capable of tuning now...but I would be terrified that I would do some damage to the strings if I started tweaking or screwing or whatever is required.

My piano is old and has had a difficult time at some period in its life. It is getting a lot of tlc now, but it has some quirks when it comes to tuning.
As a point of interest...could your computer software detect a cracked sound board or other problems an old piano may have

Post by **Gill the Piano** » 10 Aug 2005, 18:54

...and I'm looking forward to the revenue from all those loverly broken strings; seven on the last 'it looks so easy I thought I'd do it myself; I was an engineer you know' victim that I was called out to!

The wedge just shuts up the strings (on the note you're tuning) that you don't want to listen to. Of course, on some pianos, that could be MOST of the notes...

!

PianoGuy · Post by **PianoGuy** » 10 Aug 2005, 22:52

arthur wrote:Goulish - Interesting that it is 'goulish' to engage someone who is deaf and can tune but not someone who is blind. Why not give a deaf person the opportunity to earn a living , learn a new skill etc.

You are missing the point. A deaf piano tuner is about as relevant as a blind colour consultant. A blind or visually impaired piano tuner is a sensible choice as his hearing is a more heightened sense than that of a sighted person. There are many on this forum who can testify to this.

A deaf piano tuner is a seriously humourous novelty concept.

Geminoz · Post by **Geminoz** » 11 Aug 2005, 05:18

Thanks for the info Gill. I will leave my piano tuning to the experts.

I have visions getting my fingers caught, strings snapping all over the place, probably injuring some part of my anatomy in the process.

If a computer wants to tune my piano...let it do the whole job.

Blind piano tuners are brilliant....we had a blind tuner when I was young.
But a deaf tuner....I don't think so.

Post by **Gill the Piano** » 11 Aug 2005, 18:58

Customers often say to me 'I bet you have to have excellent hearing to do this job.'
And I always reply 'What?'
Sometimes they ask me twice more before they twig...

Geminoz · Post by **Geminoz** » 12 Aug 2005, 13:00

Oh Gill you are baaaaaaaad

Post by **Gill the Piano** » 12 Aug 2005, 19:04

There are some things that just have to be done...I remember an Australian film featuring a tuner who just pretended to be blind; he was taken out to his car by the customer, felt the numberplate and then got in and drove off. I wish I could remember the title of it!

PianoGuy · Post by **PianoGuy** » 12 Aug 2005, 19:12

Find that film, Gill! Sounds unmissable!

PGx

tuna · Post by **tuna** » 13 Aug 2005, 00:43

[quote="arthur"]
I am aiming to help the average person to tune their own piano with a tuning kit (software , hammer and wedge), it may not be to a professional pianist standard but acceptable to the average person and puts them in control of their piano tuning.

By hammer, do you mean tuning lever? how about a screwdriver also, to remove celeste rail. (if fitted, naturally)

Post by **Gill the Piano** » 13 Aug 2005, 13:40

I always use a hacksaw to get those off...

Geminoz · Post by **Geminoz** » 13 Aug 2005, 14:03

Would love to see that film Gill...get your memory cells working.
Aussie sense of humour...you just gotta love it.

Post by **Melodytune** » 13 Aug 2005, 19:21

Your moderator is visually impared and has been tuning pianos very successfully for 15 years. Don't get me wrong I am not against piano tuners using any form of ETA for tuning pianos but you can't learn what it has taken us 3 years to learn in a week and thats the final answer.

BTW I didn't get e-mail notification that there were further replies to this thread or I would have replied earlier.

Post by **Melodytune** » 13 Aug 2005, 19:29

arthur wrote:Goulish - Interesting that it is 'goulish' to engage someone who is deaf and can tune but not someone who is blind.

I know of many blind tuners earning in excess of 20k for tuning pianos properly.

PianoGuy · Post by **PianoGuy** » 13 Aug 2005, 19:56

Melodytune wrote:
arthur wrote:Goulish - Interesting that it is 'goulish' to engage someone who is deaf and can tune but not someone who is blind.
I know of many blind tuners earning in excess of 20k for tuning pianos properly.

Bet their hearing's spot on though!

Post by **Melodytune** » 13 Aug 2005, 20:01

From those I know and who I trained with and taught in recent years; yes it is.

I was working with one guy this week, he's been at College for just 2 months and his hearing is developing very quickly I was impressed at his hearing and perception.

Mark Alexander · Post by **Mark Alexander** » 13 Aug 2005, 23:44

Arthur, Chris touched a little on lever technique for you but there is a very important part of the tuning technique that you need to know.

When you feel that the note is absolutely in tune you need to hit the key very heavily. Much more heavily than it would ever be played by a pianist.

If the string is in tune after hitting it very hard then it is in tune. If it goes out of tune after hitting it then I'm afraid that it was never in tune in the first place.

When you watch a professional tuner at work you will notice this very hard whack when he/she has tuned each string.

By the way Arthur I would be interested to know how long it takes you to tune a piano properly with your new computer software both for a normal fine tune and also a pitch raise of say a semitone.

Best wishes.

Mark.

Mike_Hendry · Post by **Mike_Hendry** » 14 Aug 2005, 02:11

Morning everyone,

been a while since I contributed but couldn't let this subject go by without comment.
All power to Arthur for wanting to make life easier for piano owners (and we tuners facing the prospect of a long retirement due to 'deafness' ... or more accurately, losing the ability to "discern" beats and inharmonics, which sadly faces us all).

Personally, I've always tuned by ear and have never had any negative view of the use of electronic tuning aids, IF in the hands of that particular user, it meant a piano was tuned well. Note, that I do not use the term "properly" as I have personaly witnessed tuners using the conventional "flatten the fifths, sharpen the fourths" method used by the majority, to one UK factory trained chap who just couldn't get IT that way, but tuned quite brilliantly using thirds and sixths (I joke not).

I am surprised however that there is further need for another tuning device or software on the market. At various times I have used the Conn Stroboscope (yes, I've been tuning THAT long

), the Hale sight-o-tuner and more recently the Yamaha CP-100. There is also on the market the Reyburn CyberTuner and various other assorted software. Bearing in mind I haven't used the Reyburn (though the wraps on it are quite impressive), nor the other software available, and taking into account the longevity of the Conn and the Hale, I continue to be impressed by the Yamaha. I have played a couple of pianos over the years tuned by amateurs (engineers coincidentally ...lol)and by following the Yamaha's instructions to the letter, achieved a most satisfactory result. If, in my dotage, I wanted/needed an ETA, the Yamaha would probably get my nod.

I will not comment, as this isn't the topic of conversation at the moment, on the modern predilection for OVER-stretching the treble and giving pianos a shrill, brittle sound as a result (not to mention the challenges it gives sopranos ...).

However, as in experienced tuner could confirm, the ear is only half the battle. The other half could more or less be divided amongst such various factors as setting the pin, concentration, stability of the Instrument's wrest-plank, soundboard, quality of instrument, quality of scaling design, and age of strings. ALL these things have input into the result, and unfortunately, a machine can compensate for some of the factors, but not all. Any tuner who has tried to make sense of the hideous harmonics working their way through the bass end of some of those older Chinese pianos will know what I'm talking about.

The point I'm trying to make here is that while Arthur may feel he has already mastered the knack of setting the pin for instance, and as an software-engineer be absolutely sure he can set his laptop to any tuning curve, scale, or whatever ... it takes experience to recognise the parameters which a 'tuner' (amateur or pro) faces when he faces with a particular instrument. I have no doubt that a patient amateur, applying the methodology of his chosen ETA will produce a satisfactory result on a piano reasonably close to pitch and that has a regular tuning history.
However, what does that amateur know about the pre-1914 German/UK/Australian u/p, that hasn't been tuned for 12 years and is 75 cents flat? Does he realise that he is wasting his breath trying to tune the piano properly the first time? Does he know the soundboard is compressing beneath the added tonnage he is applying and that the piano will probably drop 20 cents within 2 hours of him having done it? Does he know WHY this is so?
And the answer to all of those questions will be, sadly, no.

But ... he will be pretty disillusioned the next day, and mightily unhappy with his software too ... if he didn't break a dozen strings on his way through, just to add to his stress.

The Fact is, tuning a piano is an acquired skill, just like any other. It is not rocket science, and despite some of my colleagues' desire (throughout the world) for it to seem some 'black art', it is not. However, I have been tuning for 28 years now and along the way have had reason to try teaching tuning to various ones. It is, simply, not for everybody. For a starter, the concentration factor (regardless of ear or ETA) is immense and most find it very wearying. Physically too, it is draining ... but the tough bit is, it takes Time to accumulate the knowledge to identify the particular challenges each piano presents.
A week is just enough time to learn anything other than basic rudiments about ONE instrument, and makes one slightly less better informed than a professional who only tunes Yamaha's for a living.

When I started tuning a senior Tuner told me I couldn't call myself a Tuner until I had tuned 1,000 pianos. I started counting ... and over the many thousands since, have refined my technique many times, reaching the stage where I might tune a certain type of piano one way, and a different make or age of piano, quite differently ... but with the intent to produce the best possible result.

And that's why Arthur, to Tune a piano [u]Well[/u] is an Art.

sorry about the length everyone.

Have a lovely day in rainy old England.

cheers,

Mike H

PianoGuy · Post by **PianoGuy** » 14 Aug 2005, 10:16

A great post Mike!

Couldn't have put it better myself.... My cynical side always takes over!

During my career as a tuner, I have often encountered (usually retired) people with an engineering background and good intentions who have half-baked ideas about improving the construction of the piano or the method of tuning one.

I say half-baked, because in my experience, none of the wannabe tuners have bothered to study and more importantly *practice* conventional methods of tuning before embarking upon their own quest to improve matters. As you point out so eloquently, this takes *time*. It's also impossible to practice on a wide enough range of pianos before unleashing this lack of experience on an unsuspecting public.

Post by **Barrie Heaton** » 14 Aug 2005, 15:39

arthur wrote:Thanks Brian,

I now understand why there may be a different frequency quoted. You mentioned about the diference between the human scale and machine, do you have any further info as I am using some laptop software to tune and cannot see what is wrong with using the theoretical frequencies? - or is it my ear that needs tuning?

Regards

Arthur

First off all your machine will only be using the theoretical frequencies to count from or should be, all pianos are different I am assuming your machine asks you to tune 3 notes before you start (well the better ones do) form these 3 notes the machine calculates the stretch of that piano. Now you can buy pre calculated stretches for common makes however, most of the tuners who I know that use them, say you still have to tweak them to get the best result. There are lots of factors why this is so, one being the age of the piano. Take a Model D the speaking length of the string is not going to be the same on a new one as an 100 year old one, nor is the diameter of the string and you only need a very, very small change to affect the Hz across the whole compass.

ETD are great for tuning in big universities where you are tuning the same pianos over and over and where the background noise level is bad, most of the tuners who I know that have them, swear by them and some of them swear at them. As a teaching aid they are great especially if you are doing it by distant learning.

As to the augment which is better computer or ear in the US there has been many Tune offs between both the margin has been getting closer and closer and the last few it was in the ETD favour. However, as I understand on the last big one the unisons were tuned by ear not by the ETD they are done on stage and a concert is played on them and the audience votes on them. Now in the UK we had one unlike the ones done in the US they were not big grand’s but uprights Welmar and knights there were 5 tuners 2 with ETDs and the others did it by ear they all had to pitch the piano the pianos were then marked anonymously by 3 test examiners then by all who wish to test them all marks of both sets were added up wile it was agreed that the ETD tunings were good they came 4 and 5th in the test the pianos were drawn by lots and the ETD tuners got the 2 Welmar pianos I think it is harder to do a 15 cets pitch on a Knight that a Welmar but others may think different

Barrie
Now back, browner then when he went but now suffering the wrath of the neighbours because of my sons music

Post by **Melodytune** » 15 Aug 2005, 20:45

Excellent post Mike. Good to see you on here Mark also I agree about hitting the note hard to achieve a stable tuning but didn't want to throw too much information at once plus I was working at Hereford also.

I was also present at the ETD verses aural tuning test that Barrie mentioned. This changed my opinion of ETDs, and I can see now that they have a use particularly when you have to tune two pianos in accord with each other but can't reach both pianos at the same time.

classic-keyboard · Post by **classic-keyboard** » 25 Aug 2005, 20:43

...I'm coming late to this thing because I only just noticed it. I have a Peterson 490-ST 'Stretch' tuner, and a Conn ST-12, and I've used them (for example, to tune Rhodes pianos, all 90-something oscillators of a Conn theatre organ, etc.) with great success. When I started to get interested in pianos it was Barrie who (rightly) poo-pooed my opinion of the Peterson as where it's at in piano tuning and introduced me to the Reyburn Cybertuner. Speaking as an (ex) software engineer myself, and a musician, and a technician, the Reyburn product blows me away. I don't think (and nor does Reyburn) that you could use it to tune a piano if you were deaf or even tune a FINE piano at all. But, having watched the demo DVD I'm seriously impressed by the depth and breadth of that software and I can't see why anybody would want to re-invent that wheel. If you see what the cyber-ear and pianalyser parts actually do in that product then your eyes get opened to the true complexity of the subject.

Speaking as someone just trying to get started in tuning pianos I'm forming the impression that a good ETD is a great tool - IF - you first learn to tune without one. [...shutting up...]

PianoBoyMick · Post by **PianoBoyMick** » 25 Nov 2005, 00:18

This is the most interesting topic I've read in years, and I'm absolutely amazed how technical piano tuning is. As a lad, my Mum got my piano tuned by the nice piano tuner who lived a few miles away. Sounded good. I always watched him - fascinating. Once in a blue moon he missed a string and we had to call him back. He also charged Ł20 back in 1980.

When I left home as a young student I couldn't afford the tuner and got a keyboard (bad move, horrible, soul-less thing it was).

As soon as I got my first 'pad' I bought a Ł50 piano and a Ł20 tuning key. I made a few little dampers out of clothes pegs and shifted it in a transit van. Sounded allright to me and I got it very cheap I thought. Chopin might have turned in his grave, but I could tune my piano as well as I needed to. . My ear was the one I was pleasing. Yes, I could hear beats, and I learned to tune notes a little sharp and hit the key hard; but with a long evening and a few cups of coffee, it was one of the most satisfying things I did - to tune my own piano and play it. I did use a tuning fork as a pitch reference for my first note - but that was it.

Who does a professional piano tuner learn to please?
Now I'm not suggesting that anyone would be happy to walk on stage and play a piano that I had tuned...but it just helped to strengthen the bond between me and my piano. I understood it better, and I played it with more appreciation a a result. In fact it probably taught me to be more critical of my piano's tuning. (As far as I'm aware, they don't have a timer in them that sends them out of tune every six months. They need tuning when they're out of tune......)

I would like to encourage anyone thinking of trying to have a go - and if it sounds right - it probably is

And no-one can be as critical of your piano's tuning as you can. And nobody can tell you you're wrong - because you've tuned it the way you like it!

PianoGuy · Post by **PianoGuy** » 28 Nov 2005, 21:17

PianoBoyMick wrote:Once in a blue moon he missed a string and we had to call him back. He also charged Ł20 back in 1980.

Roger me sidewise with me extendable crank!!!!!

You were being charged like the Light Brigade at that kind of money! He must've worn Armani and drove a Bentley. And you occasionally had to call him back due to shoddy work? Think about this for a moment. If he tuned a comfortable six pianos a day at that rate, he'd have been turning over Ł30k a year. More than the price of a decent flat in Chiswick or Notting Hill, and well over the VAT threshold. I was charging a very respectable but reasonable Ł12 in the early '80s.

No wonder you tuned your own. You saved a fortune.

Post by **Barrie Heaton** » 28 Nov 2005, 22:16

PianoGuy wrote: I was charging a very respectable but reasonable Ł12 in the early '80s.

No wonder you tuned your own. You saved a fortune.

in 1986 I was charging Ł18.00 but I only did 5 at the most in a day but not every day.

It was harder then to stay out of VAT as they calculated it on the quarter not the year and as I remember it was only Ł20K

I now charge Ł38.00 but I will be putting may prices up next year.

Barrie,

PianoGuy · Post by **PianoGuy** » 29 Nov 2005, 08:08

In '86 I was charging Ł16.

Between 1980 and 1986 there was raging inflation remember. Ł20 was simply extortionate in 1980.

PianoBoyMick · Post by **PianoBoyMick** » 30 Nov 2005, 20:10

OK...apologies. Maybe I should have said 1980's.

I was born in 1972 so I was out by about 8 years! got my dates a bit muddled up...sorry.

UK Piano Page Piano Forum