Ron, I think you first need to tune whatever Steinway to the data that was published. Only in the wound strings could there be octaves that clearly don't sound "right". Do that, and we'll talk further. I do have some ideas on how you might manipulate a Verituner calculated tuning. But let's take one thing at a time. Please be sure you have the right partial selection!
That data was very carefully, painstakingly conceived. I use it to tune any Steinway (excluding the wound strings which I tune aurally). The data for GP's piano was also, in the same manner, very carefully and painstakingly recorded, note by note. To have it summarily dismissed as "not matching" your findings is a bit condescending, frankly. So, just leave open the possibility that there is something you do not yet fully grasp.
It was interesting to me that a fine technician, Nick Mauel, a strictly aural tuner so easily and quickly understood the entire concept so apparently flawlessly. Yet, the electronic data seekers are still shaking their heads without a clue. I still recall that at that Chicago PTG meeting in September 1999, I tuned a Steinway with stored data from another piano (but which would have been quite similar to the data recently published on here). I tried to offer you that data at that time but you insisted upon reading it from the piano.
I remember you shaking your head in disbelief. Whatever data you copied did not seem to match anything that you knew of as I recall and that was the end of it. I fed into what one person had often said, that I was the only person who knew how to do what I do. Admittedly, I bristled at such comments. That person and I have long since reconciled.
Please try the data that was clearly displayed for all to see on here and just determine for yourself if the result is in any way viable. I can tell you this: I use it to tune any and every Steinway, including two concert halls that I regularly service (and get PAID for!). Artist upon artist, including some of the very most sensitive such as George Winston have performed entire concerts using that same data. The examples on my website of an artist in Janesville, WI performing popular music also use that very same data.
http://www.billbremmer.com/ebvt/ So, it is not to be summarily dismissed as "wrong"! That tuning was done early in the day and the inevitable hot lights probably did cause some deterioration. As I mentioned, I have used the very same data for George Winston and the Beethoven Triple Concerto (both of which I attended) and received praise from both artists. Countless other concerts, including a solo Rachmaninoff recital, the Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto #1, any number of musical theater and pop music shows, you name it, have all survived that exact same data (except that the wound strings of which there are only an octave or so in the lowest Bass were always tuned aurally).
So, if that data worked for all those events, why could it not work for you at least on some kind of clinical trial? I do not rule out improvement, believe me, I don't. I think the Verituner may have the answer to what I am looking for but until I find it, I am not buying it. I know that it is a very versatile and advanced device. The moment I know that it will do for me what I really want, I will retire my SAT III.
I want to replace some of these examples with something better, to be sure, when I can but the piano was tuned using that data, that is a fact.
If you want to try something, tune a Steinway according to that data and then use the published offsets for the EBVT III and calculate a Verituner program with 4:2 octaves (if that can be done). See how closely from F3 to F4 the results match the Verituner program when you adjust the pitch of A3 (as tuned from the data at A3: 0.0 read on its 4th partial) to what the Verituner says it should be.
I know already that if I use the FAC program on my SAT III, the F3-F4 octave will be stretched from a perfect 4:2 octave to a 4:2 octave plus 1 cent. That would skew everything and it is not what I intend. I would have to use the Double Octave Beat (DOB) function of the SAT III to reduce the size of the octave for it to be right. But then, for every note outside of the temperament octave, I would have to change the DOB for each and every note for it to work right. That would be too cumbersome, so I do something else which is far simpler.
There would be far easier avenues to explore and endless opportunities to mock and ridicule what I do. The 1/9 comma meantone that I believe I gave you the data for will work perfectly with any ETD calculated program, regardless of how much or little stretch you may apply. You could try the well temperament that Tooner said maybe he would try (some day) based solely on the principal that the tempered 4ths & 5ths are all tempered alike (if that is indeed the case). The Thomas Young WT has that and so does the Vallotti. Is an IRREGULAR WT to be shunned, feared, despised and rejected just because of that word alone?
Not in my experience. Equal beating beats equal interval size every time. Aural tuners easily find that out. Electronic tuners can never figure it out (but I know there has to be a way).
Del.icio.us
|Contact |
Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter | Press Room |
Previous Topic
Index
