Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum CIRCULAR HARMONIC SYSTEM - CHAS

For some time here you have constantly been witnessed beating other members over the head with your way to do it……



For the last 100 years or so the market has demanded ET. This is not likely to change anytime soon.



Not on this forum..One of the first rules of the PW forums is the one about self promotion, and the fact that this is not permitted.



And they have worked against you.

When I wrote my last post here, I wanted not to stand on one of two opposite sides in this argue, but I wanted to say that Bill*s words made me think in a phylosophical way.What I can see here are two sides having their own arguments pro et contra, and I am sure that both sides are very respectable, and have some clever things to say. Men*s knowledge has always been improoved with the new discoveries in science, and it is fair to give each new idea the opportunity to proove itself. I personally always use ET, but that is because no one ever has shown me some other ways to tune, in the way that would please my subjective taste. I do not manage to follow all the things you are talking about here in all scientific details, but maybe that I am witnessing here the creation of a very important moment in piano tuning. I have more to say, but I am little afraid not to make the arguing even bigger than it already is. I wish you all the best.

Yes, Dan, there is an inherent (and hilarious) problem with stating “There is one and only one way of looking at things, and that is that there are always many ways of looking at things!”

Bojan:

One of my reservations with tuning non-ET is that artistry is for the artists, not the technicians. Imagine manufacturing artist supplies and deliberately making the paints so that the color and texture is not consistent, the brushes have a mind of their own and the canvases are not really flat. The supplies might make the paintings look better, but that is not the manufacturer’s job; that is the artist’s job. There is a Piano Technician’s Guild for tuners not a Piano Artist’s Guild.

Good posting Bojan,

You are welcome to write anything you would like to here on this forum......

For me there is no argument in all of this. There is nothing wrong with new ideas except when they are promoted in a way that dismisses another idea as wrong and an ill-conceived concept.

To achieve a new tuning procedure and then promote this procedure by belittling and diminishing previous works by others is not the way to go in my opinion. This is the constant theme in Bremmer’s postings.............

Yes Bremmer's arguments are circular, this is a common theme too...

Dan:

Here's a "Far Side" thought: Imagine what Bill would say if his new vehicle and it's gadgets behaved artistically!

I agree with you on that Alfredo. Of course hurling insults is a traditional way to settle tuning arguments, so we are following a respectable tradition. Perhaps the argument should be decided the old-fashioned way by a duel (or a war).


Kees

My comments are not so much about the virtues of one tuning over another as they are about the outrageous way some tunings are being advertised. The best term I can think of is propaganda. I mentioned how I see things are being distorted. Each can make up their own mind.

Jeff, Dan - please respect this thread, and its original poster Alfredo.

Bill's post was directly related to Alfredos thoughts on ET/quasi-ET/Victorian Wells. Shortly after that Alfredo posted this:



Now, can the two of you open a new thread named "general muttering", post your grudge posts there, and let us others keep on topic?

Which range, Alfredo? I might have troubles at the tenor/bass break, and the high octaves bring challenges into the game, but I DO leave C3-C5 with progressive M3's and M6's when I tune ET. At least 9 times out of 10 (the 10th one for the benefit of a doubt )

When I tune EBVT (in its original form, or in EBVT III - the EBVT II is considered obsolete by Bill, and this has been repeatedly stated in this forum) I get 3rds and 6ths that in no way progress, because they shouldn't. Ascending 3rds or 6ths played on a piano tuned in any EBVT leaves a painstakingly clear result: The beat rates far from progress, on the contrary they are all over the place. Deliberately, not by accident.

Yes, but stepping out of theory for a while, how many tuners do you think tune an ET that follows the 12th root of two, and then go for pure octaves? I personally haven't heard any such tunings in real life. Everybody stretches octaves to some extent, including the temperament octave (consciously or not). So you might refer to this theoretically to strengthen your case, but it doesn't resemble real life.


Let me then just remind you, Alfredo, that any tuning worth *literally* listening to, is a mix of temperament theory and tuning practice.

[...]

[...]



This is what I get, Alfredo:

1) attempt at ET + randomness = quasi-ET. This is normally labeled ET by the tuners trying to achieve it, regardless of the level of success.

2) attempt at EBVT + randomness might be very similar to a quasi-ET, yes . But as long as ET tuners don't hesitate to label their work as ET, EBVT tuners shouldn't really be scrutinized in their efforts tuning EBVT.

Again, just my thoughts. And - as always - they're open for discussion

BTW, i like your FCDT theory. But that would mean that we'd have to leave the label 'ET' reserved for the angels and their trinity master tuner, and that all us earthly tuners would have to label our work FCDT.

Might be a good idea for you to re-read Bremmer's posting. I am quite sure, if read correctly, one would find much more content in there than what you have claimed.

Thanks, I've done that. I don't know, Dan, I really don't. But I'd be careful to state that someone reading a post 'correctly' probably would find much more content than I did. It sounds would-be wise, and might turn out to be a very biased assumption.

Hello.

Patrick, you write:

...“Which range, Alfredo? I might have troubles at the tenor/bass break, and the high octaves bring challenges into the game, but I DO leave C3-C5 with progressive M3's and M6's when I tune ET. At least 9 times out of 10 (the 10th one for the benefit of a doubt)”...

That is good, Patrick, though C3-C5 is two out of how many octaves? I think I was then asking if we were fearing only a theoretical forecast, referring to an impracticable ET theory. Then, “enhancement” for cadences and “energy” for harmonic progressions may be a cliché.

...“When I tune EBVT (in its original form, or in EBVT III - the EBVT II is considered obsolete by Bill, and this has been repeatedly stated in this forum) I get 3rds and 6ths that in no way progress, because they shouldn't.”...

I liked them to be progressive and it made sense, it was an ordered beat-pressure that could give unique meaning to each chromatic interval. It could enable me to relate proportional beats to euphonicity, and to enjoy beats rhythm. For many years 3rds, 6ths, octaves, 10ths, 12ths, 15ths, 17ths have been a cross to bear. At one stage I tried inverting the 5ths beat rate progression so to be able to stretch my first octave. That was one key.

...“Ascending 3rds or 6ths played on a piano tuned in any EBVT leaves a painstakingly clear result: The beat rates far from progress, on the contrary they are all over the place. Deliberately, not by accident.”...

As long as you like it, that is fair enough. Even if it was to make a virtue of necessity, it could still make sense.

You say:...“but stepping out of theory for a while, how many tuners do you think tune an ET that follows the 12th root of two, and then go for pure octaves? I personally haven't heard any such tunings in real life. Everybody stretches octaves to some extent, including the temperament octave (consciously or not). So you might refer to this theoretically to strengthen your case, but it doesn't resemble real life.”...

I was replying to you saying “...ET can be tuned with wider and narrower temperament octaves, and with different stretches, but there is one thing that remains the same: ascending chromatic M3's and M6's have a progressive beat rate. They do not have that at all in EBVT III. how could the EBVT III ever develop into being a modern ET, when it goes against the very nature of ET itself?”...”...

You confirm that your lament can not be referred to 12th root of two, and that is not so frequent that you find, nor tune yourself progressive 3rds and 6ths all along. Then your lament sounds to me like a cliché.

We all know, we have never tuned 12th root of two, maybe it's time we referred to Modern ET models then, we may share a practicable theory and update our ET standard references. We may finally know for sure what we are talking about.

...”Let me then just remind you, Alfredo, that any tuning worth *literally* listening to, is a mix of temperament theory and tuning practice.”...

I shall rephrase what I meant to say then: if, at the same time, we go in and out theoretical and practical issues, it gets more difficult to fix our points. So, it was referred to our discussion's modality.

Conceptually, I can share what you say, although some tuners I've met could do quite well with no theory at all.

Regards, a.c.

CHAS Tuning MP3 - Amatorial recording on a Steinway S (5’ 1”, 155 cm)
http://www.box.net/shared/od0d7506cv

CHAS THEORY - RESEARCH REPORT BY G.R.I.M. (Department of Mathematics, University of Palermo, Italy):
http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Quaderno19_Capurso_09_engl.pdf

Patrick, you say:

...”1) attempt at ET + randomness = quasi-ET. This is normally labeled ET by the tuners trying to achieve it, regardless of the level of success.”...

OK. Though I would still precise which modern ET, since now we could.

...”2) attempt at EBVT + randomness might be very similar to a quasi-ET, yes.”...

Good you could acknowledge this. One more little step and, trusting the author, we can add:

3) attempt at EBVT ± randomness is very similar to a modern quasi-ET.

… “But as long as ET tuners don't hesitate to label their work as ET, EBVT tuners shouldn't really be scrutinized in their efforts tuning EBVT.”...

I'm not sure I can get what you mean. Would you rephrase it for me?

… “BTW, i like your FCDT theory. But that would mean that we'd have to leave the label 'ET' reserved for the angels and their trinity master tuner, and that all us earthly tuners would have to label our work FCDT.”...

I do not think so, that sounds a bit tortuous. Today many of us, being on earth, tune (modern) ET. Yet, we'll always be free to do what ever we like on the basis of our sincere intention. More than the label, it is what we do in concrete.

If we go for ET (Chas) we can share a reliable reference for voices and ensemble/orchestra instruments too. With FCDT's (Few Cents Deviated Temperament) we cannot.

BTW, how do you like Kees's first FCDT? Or is it EBVT IV?

Regards, a.c.

Most piano technicians and music educators believe this; it sounds logical but professional string players and vocalists will tell you it is not true. There is a constant struggle with a piano tuned in ET whereas a piano tuned in a WT or mild meantone offers far more harmonious and agreeable intonation.

True, but if you are trained from early age on to play with ET there is a learning curve.

I've had the following complaints when accompanying in MT or a strong WT:

"Now I have to change my positions (slide trombone)". "Now I have to change my frets (gamba)". (Why do you think those frets are movable?) "My open strings are out of tune (violin)." "I have to change my finger positions (after getting the violinist to tune the open strings to the keyboard)."

The recordings of the Bach cantatas by Harnoncourt from the '60-ies and 70-ies use ET. They tried WT but the instrumentalists couldn't (or refused to) do it. Standards for early music are much higher now and learning to play in WT and MT is now a must among early music players.

Generally I find ET raised musicians can adapt quickly to WT if they are willing to try, but often they are obstinate and refuse to even consider it, make me feel like I've just made an indecent proposal, etc.

Kees

Alfredo, could you expand on what you're listening for when you tune chromatic intervals? Is there a given set of partials that you listen to?

Thanks.