Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum My Piano in EBVT III

Frankly , I was disappointed, expecting something more coherent, more fun, more resonance.

Those recordings have been uploaded exactly for that purpose, so everyone can have an idea of how it tones and eventually comment. (thank you again) in fact it was so strange that at some moment I thought I will not comment, as probably some others will to not sound rude.

I simply state what that tuning provide to me in terms of musicality or listening pleasure. It is perfect, if some enjoy it, it does not worry me , why would it ?

But thats just me, and I am also listening with "perfect pitch" which does not help when it comes with uneven temperaments.

But for instance I appreciate those recordings in Well or Werckmeister III, etc : http://www.pianoteq.com/listen_historical .

They make sense to me, musically.

(I also appreciated what you did with that small spinet that the pianist recorded, and what PPat recording in EBVT)

My impression is really about disequilibrium in harmony - voila, sorry - but I agree with the way some ET are bland and not having enough harmony sometime, I listened to a perfetcly tuned Steinway recently, a concetr for CHopin anniversary was given in Poland, Chopin concertos, with orchestra.
Lot of stretch , so the piano pass above the orchestra, , crispness,) but little harmony. While listening I understood what I had find with Alfredo "Chas" approach, and it missed me in the listening.

Those sensations of lack of harmony may well be the origin of your quest for something different, and better.

Best wishes

You are apparently in the minority, Isaac. I heard a few moments of the Beethoven sonata in Werkmeister III and had to turn it off. It sounded terrible to me. What puzzles me is that you seem to like a recording that has a far more unequal temperament than the EBVT III, far worse unisons and octaves that scream. It is the way I tune for everybody and nobody yet has ever said what you did. Instead, I get phone calls, e-mails, thank you cards in the mail, cash gratuities and technicians on this list wanting to learn how to do it the way Jim Coleman, Sr. and Randy Potter have. I am not tuning for you, so it doesn't matter to me what you think and your opinion will not change my practices.

I am eager to hear how well Grandpianoman can restore the tuning using the data I gave him. That, after all, was the main purpose of the trip.

So first of all we are told that we should wait for Grandpianoman to post the recordings of the tunings ok?

Then these tunings are posted .People chime in and give their opinions. Then when an unfavourable opinion is posted that is not liked by the people involved in the tunings procedure they are jumped all over.

There is a reason that Isaac and Jeff are in the minority. Some of us realized this “set-up” and refuse to participate in yet another reason for you to continually promote yourself and your own work Bill.

If your ego will not allow you to take honest opinions of your work then you have not learned much about life or this business.

If you cannot take constructive criticism then perhaps stay out of camera range.

Why do you think some of us refuse to comment on this project?

It is quite apparent to me now that you are not interested in honest opinions Bill you are only interested in praise.

A shame that the tuning was partly lost.But I do like the Debussy and Scriabin recordings very much.

Bill, are you still tuning in the earlier EBVT's, too? For some pieces, I may like them more. Please don't take offense--I just wish there were more recordings using those, so we could compare them to the EBVT III.

Isaac makes an interesting point about a wide stretch being used so that a piano can ride on top of an orchestra. To get the treble high, the middle is stretched, too? It doesn't have to be, but often is? And EBVT wants, in part, to bring back more harmonious sounds, and thus uses a few pure 5ths in the middle?

But let's not get into an argument over one temperament being better than another.

Dan, I already know that you, Emmery, Jeff and Kamin are ET only people and what your opinion of anything but ET is, even if you never heard it. So, what is new? For 20 years I've been told by technicians that what I am doing is wrong and have been warned not to do it. So, what else is new? I don't care what your opinion is. If you don't like it, I don't care. I only care about what my customers think and about helping other technicians to learn how to tune ET, the EBVT III and octaves which is what I have been doing for many years. One more time: I don't care what you think. So, if you don't want to comment, don't comment! Don't comment on why you don't want to comment either because I DO NOT CARE WHAT YOU THINK!

For all of those who "realized" what the "set up" was, leave room for those who are actually interested. I already know what your opinion is, so you do not need to take the trouble to write it. Your opinion will not change my opinion nor will it change the opinions of those who pay for my services. Your opinion will not change in any way whatsoever how I choose to tune the piano. So, don't bother. You will be wasting your time and energy and accomplish nothing.

The tuning sounded decent. The piano sounded mechanical.

No one is trying to change anyone’s opinion of anything here that I can see. No one stated that you are wrong either.

The definition of a “forum” is for the free exchange of ideas, techniques and opinions.

If people cannot share their honest opinion without you becoming a child of 5 years of age then this forum ceases to function.

I have seen you claim to be a musician and artist.

A true artist will paint a picture, produce a canvas or write a song. A true artist will then present this to the public.

There will be supporters and detractors. A true artist will take this all in stride. After all it is art. Some will like and some will not. Get a hold of yourself Bremmer, grow up and act like a professional.

Thank you for your comments and questions, Jake.

The loss is actually quite minimal but that is why I am interested to learn how well GP can restore it and make use of the data for the future. Any studio recoding session would have a technician on standby to restore a tuning at the slight hint of deterioration.

I still use the original EBVT on occasion but not the EBVT II. The only difference between the original EBVT and the EBVT III is that F#3 and E4 are both sharpened slightly. (The EBVT II has only E4 sharpened). However, think about all of the intervals related to those two notes: The pure 5th, F#3-C#4 is now tempered. The pure 4th B3-E4 is also now tempered. The F#3-A#3 M3 and the E3-G#3 M3s are slower, less harsh but the D3-F#3 and C4-E4 M3s are faster. The original EBVT has more of an early 19th Century character than late 19th Century.

The way the octaves are tuned is not so mysterious but a smooth curve from a calculated ETD program won't do exactly the same thing. Think of it this way: What would an aural tuner do when tuning octaves from a temperament that was intended to be equal but for whatever reason, did not turn out as expected?

Let's say too that the tuner did not know any rapidly beating interval checks. The tuner would first tune an octave, then compare the corresponding 4th and 5th below the note being tuned (thinking of tuning upwards from the temperament octave). The tuner may try to improve slightly any tempered 5ths. The more a 5th is tempered, the wider the octave may be tuned to improve the 5th.

If the 5th was pure or nearly so in the temperament, then it would require little or no stretch in the octave to make the octave, 4th and 5th agree. The idea in the high 4th and 5th octaves is to have no objectionably beating 5ths. Therefore, when the note D5 is tuned, for example, G4 below it was already sharpened slightly to improve the C4-G4 5th and that made the G3-G4 octave certainly wider than the G#3-G#4 octave because the C#4-G#4 5th is pure. The D4-D5 octave must be made wider yet for both the C4-G4 and G4-D5 5ths which are contiguous to both sound good. The D3-D4 octave can't be very wide or the D3-D5 double octave would be overly wide.

When tuning by ear, it is all easily heard and done. But a calculated tuning would tend to stretch all notes in both directions upon a smooth curve.

Once the note F5 is reached, the double octave is compared with the octave and 5th below it. Both are made to be equal beating. Because the 5ths in the EBVT III are all tempered by differing amounts, this also means that all of these double octave and octave and 5th comparisons will vary in size (width) from one to the next. The difference in widths however is still always very slight and is generally not perceived in a musical context. Only careful interval checks would reveal them.

Once F6 is reached, the triple octave and double octave and 5th are compared analogously to the way the double octave and octave and 5th are from F5. Triple octaves and double octaves and 5ths are tuned as equal beating to the top.

This is a very good way to tune treble octaves in ET, by the way. By ear, you would do the very same thing but because all of the 5ths are tempered alike, there would be far more consistency from one octave to the next.

The Bass is handled very much the same as the treble, only a mirror image of it.

Now, all of this can be approximated with an ETD and I do it this way sometimes but it is never quite as good as the aural method. Enter the correction figures for the EBVT III (or EBVT) and tune according to the calculated program from C3 to F5. Now, play all of the 5ths chromatically starting from C4-G5. When you encounter a 5th that beats a little too strong for your taste, sharpen the upper note of that 5th in your ETD program by 1 cent. Tune to that and check to see if that made the improvement you wanted. Usually 1 cent will do it but a little more or less may be what works. You won't want to make a tempered 5th completely pure, just improve it. Sometimes, all I really have to do is fix D5. The rest are usually OK. Whatever you change, enter that change in the program.

When you get to F5, reset your partial selection to the 1st partial (F5 read on F5). Play F5 as it has already been tuned and stop the pattern. Now play F3 and A#3 and adjust the cents up and down until the pattern rolls or moves equally sharp for F3 and flat for A#3. Whatever the cents reading is, enter that an tune F5 to that.

You can continue the very same all the way to the top but I recommend that at F6, return to F3 and A#3 for the readings. What this does is tune those high treble notes to the actual inharmonicity from the temperament octave. It will give you a beautiful and very in tune sounding treble and high treble. It won't match the calculated stretch at all but it will tune the piano to itself and that is what makes it sound so good.

You'll find that with practice, it will not take very much time to find those values from F5 to C8, only a few extra minutes that will be well worth it.

For the Bass, the ETD will most likely already read on the 6th partial but if not, use the 6th partial for all notes from A0 to B2. Starting downward at B2, play alternately B4 and F#4. Find the point where the pattern shifts equally for both notes and enter that reading in the program and tune B2 to it. Continue that way to B1 and then go back to B4 and F#4 again and tune that way all the way to A0.

This method can be used for ET of course, any quasi ET or any Well Temperament or 18th Century or later temperament. For the very early temperaments, it is better to use only the double octave as beatless idea.

Here, for anyone interested is the temperament Peter Serkin likes. The figures in the Journal are not the offsets to use with and ETD calculated program. They were measurements of aural tuning. This temperament will work well with a calculated stretch because it is a meantone temperament. In meantone, all 5ths are tempered alike, so you don't have the problem there is with an irregular WT like the EBVT and EBVT III.

It is the Jean Baptiste Romieu 1/7 comma meantone with one modification, the E-B 5th is pure. That mitigates the harsh side of the temperament just enough for Serkin's liking. He is touring the country using it. The key of A-flat sparkles with energy. The minor keys with four or more flats are very dark and disturbing. Excellent for Rachmaninoff's and Fauré's darker pieces. All 17th and 18th Century music have the proper tonal character. Dissonant chords in Jazz are all the more incisive. Show tunes and standards are superbly singable.

Grandpianoman, you will want to try this some day! Just use the RCT or Tunelab default stretch.

C: +3.0
C#: -1.0
D: +1.0
D#: +6.0
E: -1.0
F:+4.0
F#: 0.0
G: +2.0
A: 0.0
A#: +5.0
B: +1.0

I have found this discussion interesting, and eagerly listen to any sample recordings.

However, I have a problem listening to and evaluating the tuning (temperament) if the unisons are out, and unless I am overlooking something I haven't heard a recording that is really good enough to be evaluated. Am I the only one? I realize that the tuning drifted before the recording could be made.

While we all know the importance of a good temperament, it is the unisons which are critical for fine tuning and some think they are the most difficult aspect as well.

I realize that the tuning drifted before the recording could be made. Hopefully next time it might be recorded after

I am in the process of re-tuning with Bill's figures as I type this...taking a break right now (this is not easy work, I am trying to make the unisons as clean as I can.....may hat's off the pro's out there who do this day in and day out.) Of course I am going string by string with my rubber mutes as opposed to strip muting, which takes me a bit longer.....I watched Bill use a muting stip, but did ask how to do it. I should have a few recordings posted later tonight.


Interesting phenomenon....I have both the RCT and the IPhone Tunelab ETD's going...I can see both as I tune...both ETD's have agreed on pretty much everything...except as I now tune the 6th octave and above, I am finding some notes that they do NOT agree on...RCT says it's flat, Tunelab, says it's sharp, or vice-versa.....interesting...the partial selection is correct...not sure why the discrepency...however, I taking the final word this time around from the RCT. Next time I tune, I will go with Tunelab's tuning.

Bill, thanks for the Serkin figures...have already written them down.

Stay tuned (pun intended)....more recordings on their way.......GP

I am listening to Toru Takemitsu recordings by Perter Serkin, and while I understand well his interest for other temperaments and contemporary music, I doubt that he will play for instance Takemitsu in any other temperament than ET.
Listen to that magnificent piece : "les yeux clos" : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3g_wsokvBg

I wrote to him to ask what music /instrument he may play when using a 1/7 comma meantone, as I am begin to believe that you are purposely sending misinformation on that subject.

Certainly when performing on Forte pianos, the original temperaments can be used.

I am also listening again to the recordings provided, just to understand which is the aspect that gives me that "unbalanced" sensation, coherence miss somewhere, may be only at the resonance (harmonic) level.

The one I really cant stand is Rhapsody in blue, it really hurt my brain.

The one I like best is Rhapsody in Blue. It sounds the way I intended it to sound and the way I like it to sound. When I was visiting with my colleague on Friday, a call came to him from a technician in another part of the country for information about how to tune the 1/7 Comma Meantone for Peter Serkin. Mr. Serkin does not perform on fortepianos. He is a Steinway artist.

Here is the text of his article from the February issue of the PTG Journal:

The Tuning of my Piano

By Peter Serkin

I had already been curious about the idea
of tuning keyboard instruments to historic
temperaments when I visited Tim Farley’s
shop and encountered some of these tunings
directly.
I remember playing the second subject
of the first movement of Beethoven’s Waldstein
Sonata, first as it appears in the exposition,
remarkably, in E Major, the major
mediant, itself a kind of bridge in a structural
bass-arpeggiation from the tonic through
the mediant to the dominant; then that
second group in the recapitulation where it
answers in the sub-mediant, A, upper neighbor
to the dominant, Major, then its modal
consequent beginning in A minor and back
to a G bass and cadence to C Major. In the
historic temperaments, one actually heard,
vividly, the innate differences in key colors
that exist among these tonalities, giving a
real aural sense to the harmonic structure of
the piece. One viscerally experienced the carried colorations
within each harmonic change.
I also played some of those passages from Beethoven
Concerti which feel somehow suspended by their remoteness
to their home-keys. In seventh-comma modified meantone
temperament, to which Tim Farley had tuned the pianos, all
the harmonic relationships become fully alive and meaningfully
colorful in a manner that, it seems, cannot be conveyed
in standard equal temperament. We can admire much in the
black-and-white lines and forms of great paintings, but how
much richer and more beautiful they are in full color, too!
In seventh comma there no longer seems to be a need to
overly fabricate a specialness to certain varied harmonies with
concocted voicings, slowing of tempo, or what-have-you; now
the pitches themselves manifest these colors and atmospheres
directly and convincingly. In Schubert, too, music reappearing
in various, often distantly related keys, arrived at through
extensive modulation, takes on new light and character in each
of its emanations, in seventh-comma.
I was fascinated by what I heard on that first visit, but it
was not until twenty years later that I started to use these tunings
myself. In this more recent encounter I was so persuaded
and intoxicated by it that I now try to have pianos, for every
concert where it might be effected, as well as on my instruments
at home, tuned to one-seventh syntonic comma modified
meantone temperament. Midway between one-quarter
(pure) meantone and one twelfth comma (equal) meantone,
one seventh comma seems to be a magical solution to accommodating all keys (more or less), albeit
with some wolf intervals, and at the same
time retaining an intrinsic variegated keycoloration.
No longer confined to only one key in
two modes, major and minor, which in standard
equal temperament are then transposed
eleven times, the older traditional tunings
open up the spectrum, giving distinct individual
character to each of twenty-four
keys. This difference is both subtle and
profound—subtle enough to sometimes use
this temperament without anyone noticing it,
other than to comment on the beautiful tone
of the piano; profound in emanating real differences
in keys and intervals while allowing
the instrument to resonate euphoniously.
I have used this tuning for all kinds of
music: Dowland, Byrd, Bull, Bach, Mozart,
Beethoven, Brahms, Schoenberg, Messiaen,
Takemitsu, Carter, Wuorinen and others.
There being no particular historical justification at all for using
this one temperament for so many periods of music, the
fact that it works so very satisfactorily for all this music attests,
I think, to its intrinsic viability as a general temperament for
keyboard instruments.
Peter Serkin
[This article is an excerpt from a letter in which Peter Serkin discusses
his use of one seventh comma meantone temperament. The complete
text of his letter can be read on ptg.org/journal-media.php.]

******************************************************************

Kamin: Note that Serkin says he plays music by Takemitsu among other modern composers. Obviously, his opinion about non-equal temperaments and the effects they have on music is far different from yours.

Bill, I listened to the Rhapsody in Blue since you suggested it was the best representation.

The tuning sounds pretty clean. Is it possible that what I thought were wild unisons are simply intervals I am not used to hearing at a particular beat rate? Are some 4ths or 5ths a bit on the wild side? I am hearing this mostly in the middle. The upper treble sounds fantastic, is it pretty well stretched?

Please forgive me for not having the time yet to decipher the variances, since I am an aural tuner it can require math I'm not used to using.

Another sense I get is that this recording sounds very 'vintage', as if it were performed back in Gershwin's time. Is that also the reasoning behind this type of tuning? As if it was what was being used at that time. Maybe not what you see today in terms of modern concert tuning, but what certain individuals are eager to discover. Just my thoughts.

Well some bass resonance are magnificent, but E major sound out of tune, the variations, to me does not add anything to the music.

More than that the tuning sound dull and lack "air" in the high medium, like with not enough opening of the octaves.

Clean, may be the term, but c5 is flat as ever. those F#4 sound harsh to me, that is not juicy, simply dull, to me.

Thanks for the letter from Peter Serkin, I wait to listen to that, I suppose that recordings will follow, but I believe that he may keep at last a consistent size for the octaves in hist tuning. something have to add resonance or the harmony is lowered.

Good to hear from you, Nick. Basically, you are right on all counts. First, let me talk about unisons. You remember I said I do not believe in anything but the most beatless unison possible. There are some people who do advocate some kind of manipulation of unisons and I believe it to be a quest for some kind of "color" when the very sterile sound of a perfected ET proves to be less than satisfying.

The way I temper the scale is very purposeful and deliberate. It follows the basic rules of Well Temperament where the slowest Major thirds (M3s) are among the keys with the fewest sharps or flats and the fastest M3s are among the keys with the most sharps or flats. That idea has been around since the time of J.S. Bach although it was not Bach who came up with it. He only used the idea and wrote music with it in mind.

I knew you would want to hear how I had tuned for Grandpianoman in Portland but I also had no expectation that you would like what you heard because from the recordings I have heard where you tuned, I heard what is considered to be standard practice today and the very finest example of it. What you do is what most piano technicians do or at least strive for. Any deviation from a perfectly equalized scale would upset the balance, so to speak.

A good technician who can really tune ET by ear with perfect unisons has trained the ear to perceive the very slightest imperfection in that model. It is work that is practiced daily, one piano after another. It is easy to understand how that particular model or style of tuning becomes what sounds "right" and how anything else is "wrong" or somehow inferior. A performing artist who has the luxury of always having a freshly tuned piano can also become accustomed to that sound and regard anything else as unacceptable. Recording engineers may also develop that kind of sensitivity.

That being understood, let us now imagine how other people may perceive the sound of a piano and music in general. Most people do not hear such perfection most of the time. Certainly, not all piano technicians can deliver it but even when they can, the piano owner can only enjoy that state of perfection for a very brief period of time. This means that most people, most of the time hear something other than that.

There was a time when I practiced what you do and believed only in a perfected ET as being the best a piano could sound. I could certainly do that today but what I found through experience and interaction with those for whom I tune pianos, those of all levels of experience from very limited to performing artists was that a Well Tempered sound has more appeal than the equally tempered sound. People simply prefer a distinction in harmony versus all harmony the same.

There is an infinite number of possibilities for Well Temperament as there are for any other variety. People, however do have their limits as to what sounds acceptable and what does not. The EBVT and EBVT III are both designed to remain within those limits but still provide the distinction from one key signature to the next that was known, accepted and used in the past. Those distinctions are an integral part of music and music composition history. They are also an integral part of keyboard tuning history.

Now, as to what you may have heard in either these recordings recently posted on here or those on my website, I have also heard what you hear. After tuning as perfectly as I could, unisons included, I have sat in the audience and listened as an artist performed. To get the well tempered sound, it is necessary to temper at least some of the 5ths more than they would be in ET. Nobody likes the sound of a tempered 5th. If we could tune all 5ths pure but also have all M3s beat gently, we would. Some tuners do stretch the temperament octave enough so that all 5ths sound virtually pure but of course, the consequence of that is that all M3s and M6s beat more rapidly and therefore sound more dissonant.

What I have heard when listening is that sometimes the sound of the tempered 5th sounds like an imperfect unison. I don't want my unisons to be anything but perfectly beatless because that would only upset what I do with temperament and octave stretch. Yet, when I know that my unisons have been as pristine as possible, I have heard from the piano what sounded to me like "dripping", "liquid" or "wet" unisons.

This is what happens with 5ths that are tempered more than they would be in ET. When I tune up and down from the central octave, I try to "hide" the sound of the tempered 5th as much as possible. It does not change the temperament any more than octave stretching in ET changes that temperament. What I can do, however is utilize the piano's own inharmonicity to "hide" the tempered 5ths and give the piano a clear and beautiful sound in the outer octaves the same way that any piano technician would when tuning ET. An electronically generated curve does not do that for me. It is an example of when I want something done right, I have to do it myself.

In next month's PTG Journal, there will be a new article I have written published about just the way I tune octaves. I thank Patrick from Finland for providing the impetus to write it. You can read it now, however here: http://www.billbremmer.com/articles/aural_octave_tuning.pdf

There has been much discussion about the effects of octave tuning. There is the Chas method which I have never really been sure of just what it means, there is the Stopper tuning which as I understand it, creates an ET within not an octave but an octave and 5th which is tuned as beatless. Either of these has 5ths which are barely tempered but as a consequence, M3s, M6s, M10s and M17s which all beat faster and are more dissonant as a result. Some people like that sound, others do not.

What I discovered long ago, in the early 1980's before I ever started tuning any unequal temperaments was that equal beating double octaves and octaves and 5ths produced the most beautiful sound possible. Neither the double octave (slightly wide) nor the octave and 5th (slightly narrow) are perfectly beatless but the amount of tempering in each is extremely small. Both intervals sound virtually pure. I can do this with either ET or either version of the EBVT or any 18th Century or later style of non-equal temperament.

This means that in the outer octaves, I can make the piano sound clear and bright regardless of which temperament I use. Anyone who tunes aurally that uses this method of octave tuning will produce a beautiful sounding piano even if the temperament is not as perfect as intended.

Your comment about the recording sounding "vintage" is interesting. Gershwin was an early 20th Century composer. He was heavily influenced by the Jazz and Blues of his time. Even though it is most often said that ET prevailed from the 20th Century onward, I know enough about tuning methods to believe that the late 19th Century style of Well Temperament (which the EBVT III is) would have persisted well into Gershwin's time. The playing that you hear was done by Gershwin himself, recorded on a paper roll as the very first digital technology. While that technology was imperfect and the information has been manipulated this way and that, I firmly believe that this is the sound that Gershwin himself enjoyed while he played.

The smoothed out harmony of a perfected ET would not have been what Gershwin knew and enjoyed. The modulations have purpose and distinction. Additionally, there is the sound of the small minor third present in many melodic lines. This mimics the "blue note" sound of a Jazz or Blues musician. They are meant to sound as they do in the recording. The unisons have not deteriorated badly enough to ruin it. It sounds basically the way it is meant to sound. Certainly, there would have been very few piano technicians in Gerswin's day that could have or would have tuned a perfected ET the way we know it today, 100 years later.

Nick, if these and any future recordings spike your interest, I would be happy to travel to your place of business and tune for you. I can do it all by ear if you wish. I provided Grandpianoman with a digital record so that he can replicate what I did at will but for you, I can leave my ETD at home and tune any piano aurally.

I do not understand that. If anyone could have tuned whatever you mean as "a perfected ET the way we know it today," everyone with enough talent to tune a piano at all could have.

What would be the difference? If the claim is that they did not want to tune that way, how would they have wanted to tune?

BDB, thanks for you comments and questions. I am glad you liked the way the tunings sounded. I guess any player piano would sound like a player piano at some point but I was truly amazed at how the original Ampico player system performed. The Modern, LX system would be expected to perform better but I was impressed with both.

I will answer your question that you quoted this way: People in all walks of life range from superior to inferior. The people in charge of major enterprises sometimes get fired or have to resign because of incompetence. Not everyone can perform as expected. Owen Jorgensen documented hundreds of pages of evidence that ET was not tuned as we know it today in earlier periods much to the dismay of people who had always believed that ET was the one and only way a keyboard instrument was ever tuned.

Recently, I went on you tube and found many examples of less than desirable piano tunings. I even caught one guy in the act of tuning reverse well.

Now, you may think in terms of what could possibly have been but so do I. What I truly believe is that technicians in Gershwin's time, those that were good enough for him to hire, still tuned with a 4ths & 5ths temperament sequence (the way that was documented at the Broadwood factory) that would have produced not ET as we know it today but a Victorian style temperament. What they would have done was close to ET, yes, (as is the EBVT III) but still retained the well tempered characteristics.

Gershwin was used to the distinctions of key color and worked with them as all composers had done previously.

Have you tried listening to old fixed-pitch instruments, like celestes or marimbas?

No and what would that have to do with this discussion?