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

Sorry, but that sounds really bad to me.

Nick: Sounds very good in the low range too!

This is an example of what's really nice about EBVT III. the Bb minor is really disturbing in a gloomy way, and then - you can hear it in the last cadenza you play - the transition to Db, which becomes much brighter than we are used to hearing it!

Glen: thanks! The music was just improvisation at that given time, moving through the keys, listening for colors. Interesting that a lot of people (including you) have liked that so much . But it must have to do with the fact that I really enjoyed playing it, like I said in an earlier thread right after the session - it felt somewhat like swapping a B/W pencil for a box of color crayons

Wow. Nothing like diplomacy.


I think the recording level is a little too high and causing some distortion.

Thanks for the feedback about the bass, which is what the funeral march is attempting to show off.

Perhaps Bill will scold me a bit here, but in the bass I gave priority to the fifths and let the octaves roll quite a bit.

Again, this was my interpretation of the EBVT III. I had an idea of what I could get away with in each particular register of the piano.

It's great to see such a spirited discussion here about EBVT III.

Nick, I enjoyed both your recordings..they sound very 'right' to my ear.

Hear is a change of pace...some Ampico rolls from the 1920's-1930's.

Again, my caveat is that the treble section, while holding better, is still not stable, and some unisons have drifted.

This is just a small representation of the wonderful 1920's and 1930's dance music that was performed on the reproducing player piano. My M&H grand was called an "RBB", the R stands for "Reproducing". Only the rich could afford a 7ft grand like this...the cost at that time in 1925 was $7,000+!! The normal folks would buy the uprights.

The Ampico, and some of the other player systems of that time, really could not replicate exactly what the pianist played, but it's close. The Ampico system to me, holds more of a unique place in the player piano history, than a perfect playback system. It has a playing style all it's own. Back in those days, Mason & Hamlin and Knabe would take their 8ft Concert Grands on tour. In the auditorium, they would have the pianist play first, unseen by the public, then at the appropriate time, they would have the Ampico play. The public was then asked to fill out a scorecard, saying when they thought it was the Ampico or the artist playing the piano. Suprisngly, according to accounts that I have read, a lot of people were fooled into thinking the pianist was playing, when it was the actually the Ampico.

EBVT III sounds great in this genre of music as well.

1. Ampico Roll, "The Night When Love Was Born" Fox Trot by Baer, played by Ernest Leith on the Ampico, in EBVT III http://www.box.net/shared/rigtupdkyp

2. Ampico Roll, "What Is This Thing Called Love" Fox Trot, from "Wake Up And Dream" by Cole Porter, played by Arden & Carroll (4 hand piano arrangement) in EBVT III http://www.box.net/shared/42h4dl61ua

3. Ampico Roll, "Down South" Fox Trot by Myddleton, played by Adam Carroll on the Ampico, in EBVT III http://www.box.net/shared/ehbpees7fs5.

4. Ampico Roll, "Outstanding Hits Of The Moment" Fox Trot and Waltz, played by Frank Milne on the Ampico,(listen to the harmoines/chords in the first selection "The Touch of your Lips") in EBVT III http://www.box.net/shared/ujpxgmosa7

5. Ampico Roll, "Titina" Fox Trot by Daniderff, played by Zez Confrey on the Ampico, in EBVT III http://www.box.net/shared/ujpxgmosa7

6. Ampico Roll, Fox Trot Medley,"No Regrets" by Ingraham, "Some Day We'll Meet Again" by Magidson-Conrad, "I Can't Escape From You" by Robin-Whiting, played by Frank Milne in EBVT III http://www.box.net/shared/v6nuk2oq1r

7. Ampico Roll, "A Song Of India" Fox Trot-Chanson Indoue, by Rimsky-Korsakoff, played by "The Original Piano Trio" (six hands piano arrangement) in EBVT III #202491F http://www.box.net/shared/l9b2jg99xl

8. Ampico Roll, "That Red Head Gal" Fox Trot, by Van-Shenk Stothart, played my Muriel Pollack on the Ampico in EBVT III #203771E http://www.box.net/shared/ympkvchxkk

9. Ampico Roll, "Say It With Music" from "Music Box Revue" by Irving Berlin, played by Herbert Clair in EBVT III http://www.box.net/shared/ff1d1eoczm


Here is "Reflets dans L'eau" on the LX. This was originally an Ampico roll. It's been scanned and then converted to play on the LX system.

"Reflets dans L'eau" by Debussy, played by Leo Ornstein, played on LX in EBVT III http://www.box.net/shared/pi155b7yq7

Hello everyone, thanks so much for all the discussion while I was out getting a few pianos tuned. Nick, you definitely have the right harmony, so go for the unisons. If you want to really record that funeral march, however, you can afford to play much softer. The softer you can play those strains, the more effective they will be.

Patrick, thanks for the You Tube video of the Schubert Impromptu. Yes, that artist does seem to have a better grasp of what is really in the music than any other commercial interpretation I have heard but it is still way off the mark from what I know it can have. Once you can get it "in your fingers" or in your "muscle memory" as I have heard it expressed, I believe the piece will speak to you in a phenomenal way. It just won't happen quite the same when the piano is in ET.

Nick, the Bass the way you tuned it sounded fantastic! That is what I would do too, so no problem there.

I have to run to a rehearsal. It's been a great day. I can't wait to hear GP's latest recordings!

I didn't realize that Jazz was your specialty but so much the better. It has often been said that only ET works for Jazz. The more examples there are of music that isn't supposed to work in anything but ET, the better. So, any examples you can give us of music that you really know well and how the way the piano is tuned helps enhance your playing will be quite welcome.

Ron, I don't know what else to say about the "numbers" issue beyond what I already said. If you couldn't get the finest aural ET to match an electronically generated program, how could you expect the same for any other temperament? If I use the FAC program, I do get some kind of barely satisfactory results in the temperament octave, yes but as you know, I don't care at all for what it does with the octaves, so I rarely use it.

I much prefer to start with my A3 at 0.0 read on the 4th partial. That way, I know where the rest of the notes will usually fall either by ear or direct interval. As I mentioned, I usually find that F3 at +1.0 creates the 6 beats per second I am looking for in the F3-A3 M3. Rarely, it could be another value but I would say that 95 out of 100 times, what I get sounds right to me. I couldn't approximate exactly 6 beats per second any better by ear. If an electronic calculation said +0.9 or +1.1, I would not hear that any differently.

Once the F3 is tuned at +1.0, I can leave the ETD set on F3 and tune C4 to that since they both share a coincident partial. When I go to C4 and read what I tuned, I would record the value at +2.0 even if the most careful reading of the pitch said +1.9 or +2.1. If I have any doubts about arbitrating either way, I listen to the interval created by the half or whole cent value I have chosen to verify if it still sounds aurally correct.

In that F3-C4 5th, I am looking for a beatless 5th. As we all know, there could be a difference in interpretation of what a beatless 5th would be depending on whether the 3:2 coincident partials or the 6:4 coincident partials are considered or whether it is a compromise between them (just like when tuning octaves). If I set C4 at +2.0 and the 5th sounds pure, that is good enough for me. I could even use the aural tests for the pure 5th, either one or both of them and it probably wouldn't change my decision, only confirm it.

If I tuned F3 at +1.0 as read on its 4th partial and I tune F4 at +1.0 as read on its 2nd partial, by definition, that creates a perfect 4:2 F3-F4 octave. If I play F3-C4 and C4-F4, I get pure sounding intervals every time and that is what I want up to that point. The rest of the decisions about the value for each note are made very much the same way. They would never exactly match an electronically generated program using the published offsets no more than the most perfectly executed ET (as in a master tuning) would. So, if you expect them to, you will be frustrated and confused by the numbers every time.

A more relevant trial would be to use the published offsets and then play the intervals so verify that certain pairs do in fact sound equal beating as they are specified in the aural tuning instructions. If they do, then the electronically generated program is just as valid as the electronically assisted and recorded program. What I don't think the Verituner can do is manipulate the octaves up and down from there the way any of us aural tuners do quite naturally but there is a way around that too. It's not as hard as you think it would be but you do have to listen to what you're doing as you make the changes. That is why I think I would need to meet with you to see how the Verituner works and how you can get it to do what you want it to do.

grandpianoman:

Thanks for posting those fox trots. The sound I hear there is one reason I asked earlier if they reminded you of an older sound. Don't worry, I'm not about to post another Chico Marx clip.

And "Reflets dans L'eau" sounds gorgeous. It's the tuning and it's your piano. My, my.

You're welcome Jake. Lol...Chico Marx was fun to watch!

The Ampico rolls were still working off my 4th tuning...I just tried to clean up the unisons between each piece. Thanks for the compliment on Reflets...it's a very magical piece to begin with, and in this EBVT III, it's even more so.

There are 2 links that do not work in my post above.

Here are the corrected links:

"Down South" http://www.box.net/shared/ehbpees7fs

"Titina" http://www.box.net/shared/9m5gq5tubj

Hello all, thanks for sharing all your try and samples.

What I hear in the first sample from Nick is mostly the "pure 5ths" resonance that is spread on a temperament that contains enough synchronism not to worry this one in CM and its minor relative, hence that huge resonance.

I will ask my friend that tune the "Serge Cordier" pure 5th but by memory that is what the resonance is.

The second sample sound not so good, to me, too much move in the basses.

Very interesting .

To me that way Bill and probably Pat are tuning the EBVT, they add a Chas like resonance to the temperament.

The way Nick does it is different.

Those are very interesting experiences.

About "pure 5th" (the first octave is 6:3) some like it, some find it too much present when music is played. It is a context question, I suppose, as it may be very pleasing , keeping the ear extended on the right and left when you are at the piano, the singing quality is noticed.

But it is a so strong effect that it may even be disturbing (particularly musicians with so called "perfect pitch" (I know Bill will say there is nothing as such, but it is in any case something that allow the ear to understand how the intervals behave, and know the notes names without a pitch reference - being able to tune a A around 440 +- 2 Hz without a fork, for instance)

Best regards to all.


PS Thanks Pat, for the Zimerman recording, I like it but find it a little too straight, for some reason (?).

I find that one (Schubert "moment musicaux) and the pianos is tuned in Chas, to me : Rosalyn Tureck - Schubert moment musicaux

Am I supposed to lie?

There is nothing wrong with the recording. The tuning is bad. There are wolf intervals. It sets my nerves on edge.

I suppose one can get used to anything, but I suggest that if you want a future tuning pianos, you do not get used to this.

Bill, thanks for your reply.

As you might recall, I tuned a harpsichord to EBVT III in December. It was probably not perfect, but it must have been close. I did receive very positive feedback about the closer keys (two flats to two sharps), which our family typically uses for chorals, but the occasional use of distant keys with their unusually wide M3s was met with less enthusiasm (myself included). My family has always abhorred two things on a keyboard instrument: over-tempered fifths (narrow) and over-tempered M3s (wide).

So, if you write:


(emphasis is my own)

Then I answer:

I'm not entirely comfortable with the idea that it's OK for B, F# and C# major to be really wide (to my ears: uncomfortably wide), but it's not OK for C major. Conversely, it's wonderful to have C major and its neighbors sound so pure, but the price this exacts on the distant keys causes me discomfort.

If I play, just for my own enjoyment, the beautiful english horn melody from the second movement of Dvorak's 9th symphony (from the New World), and I hear a very wide Db maj chord, that conflicts with the tranquility and simplicity of the melody. I know, the piece was not written for piano, but did Dvorak not choose this key for a reason - if nothing else, then the enharmonic relative minor to the first movement's e minor? [EDIT: sorry, that last bit was nonsense, I've struck it through.]



At the risk of appearing to you as yet another derisive critic (which is not my intention), my take is this:

Tuning is a compromise. Purer keys can only be achieved at the expense of other, harsher keys, and the resulting discomfort makes me shy away from those distant keys. My personal preference therefore tends towards an equal compromise between all keys. I would rather have this compromise done as best possible, than have some keys pure at the expense of others.

That's my preference, and NOT a criticism of what you do.

Bach, for example, in his booklet of chorals, often wrote one choral in two or even three key signatures, e.g. G and Ab major. When I played one of those Ab major chorals after tuning EBVT III, the harsh M3 really jumped out at me, and (sorry to say) I started shunning this key. I went back three times to the tuning procedure, trying to fine-tune some more comfort into Ab major, but inevitably, it came out this way.



For me, the modulation to a distant key is, in itself, already a novelty to my ear, and it does not need the additional "support" of a harsher M3. If Aunt Martha decides to play the last verse of the Christmas Carol a semitone higher, that in itself is enough change - to my mind. The new key doesn't have to be radically different. It's new, that's enough for me.



I had limited opportunity to download all the recordings, but I did listen closely to The Age of Innocence, because I still have the earlier versions for direct comparison. And I did post one or two problems (in all modesty), with accompanying questions, but have received no answers on those.



Again, Bill, as I've said before, I'm not trying to change anything you do. In the spirit of a forum (marketplace platform), I'm trying to give feedback on what I hear.

When you post about EBVT, apparently you desire feedback, and whenever this feedback is positive, you're happy. I just find it regrettable that as soon as the feedback is not-so-good, or questioning, you take this as a personal affront. Why, then, ask for feedback at all?

Or is it your intention that everyone should read the EBVT III posts, listen to the recordings, give only positive feedback, and if we happen to have a problem or question, NOT write anything?

This experiment was VERY interesting.

I have a Yamaha Disklvier DGT2IIXG. It has no wound strings, it's totally digital. Here is the spec on the Piano Tone:

"Digital stereo sampling (CFIIIS concert grand), 30 megabyte wave memory, 32-note stereo polyphonic, sustain pedal resonance effects, reverb (3 modes with depth control)

Superb Concert Grand Sound
The highest level of piano sound reproduction. Tones are stereo sampled throughout their full range of dynamics and tonal modulation from the CFIIIS concert grand, using 30 megabytes of memory for this piano sound alone – over ten times more powerful than a standard digital piano. Even recreating harmonic resonance on other strings that results from incremental use of the sustain pedal. Controllable reverb effects simulate acoustics of various playing environments."

If you would like to read more of the specs: http://www.yamaha.com/yamahavgn/CDA/ContentDetail/ModelSeriesDetail/0,6373,CNTID%253D1253%2526CNTYP%253DPRODUCT%2526VNM%253DLIVE%2526AFLG%253DY%2526DTYP%253DNOTSELECTED,00.html I could not find anthying in the Specs about the stretch, ET or something else.

Here are 3 selections from EBVT III, and the same 3 selections on the Yamaha. The one constant here is the playing of these pieces is exactly the same on both instruments, interpretation, etc. The AUX Out was used from the Yamaha into the digital recorder, so, no mics, and no digital reverb or Hall acoustics were added.

Even though this is not quite the same as re-tuning my M&H RBB, it does give a little insight into what we can expect from an ET tuning on an acoustic piano. This certainly shows the difference between EBVT III and ET. (if that is what Yamaha used) Any thoughts if this Yamaha is in ET? Never the less, I much prefer the EBVT III in every aspect of the music.

I am looking forward to hearing Patrick's test, and what Nick's further tunings produce.


1. Yamaha Disklavier DGT2IIXG version of "Clair de Lune" played by Bob Ralston http://www.box.net/shared/v2bq6141s6

2. Mason & Hamlin RBB/LX version of "Clair de Lune" played by Bob Ralston in EBVT III http://www.box.net/shared/cblh6breoe


1. Yamaha Diskavier DGT2IIXG version of "Schindler's List" played by Bob Ralston http://www.box.net/shared/qlu4fqsvxo

2. Mason & Hamlin RBB/LX version of "Schindler's List" played by Bob Ralston in EBVT III http://www.box.net/shared/m16a4e4yfh


1. Yamaha Disklavier DGT2IIXG version of "Il Postino" played by Brian Pezzone http://www.box.net/shared/0ahqknyuls

2. Mason & Hamlin RBB/LX version of "Il Postino" played by Brian Pezzone in EBVT III http://www.box.net/shared/s4jke70s5l

Oh - I thought this little gem of misinformation had been left behind by the tuning community a few decades ago! I believe just the opposite, if people aren't getting "as equal" of an ET out of aural methods that is available from the current machines, they are doing the tuning profession a dis-service... Here's a little quote from a tuning examiner earlier this century:

"He then used his verituner to complete the tuning. I'm sure that this happening is not unusual . What is different though is that the finished tuning was virtually identical to the master tuning. In fact it was closer than I had ever seen in his many years as an examiner. There was only a few tenths of a cent difference at B7."

This tuning was done by someone that had taken the time to set up a custom style to match the parameters of the tuning exam. The same system can be used to create whatever style of ET tuning stretch wanted...

Your point is well-taken on the way you spread the temperament out to the ends of the keyboard. That, I think is the real benefit of the EBVT tuning approach. Probably any mild unequal temperament (Moore/Bach-Lehman etc..) would sound similar if your direct-measurment double octave/ octave +fifth guidlines were followed. I'll do some experiments to check this out.

Ron Koval
chicagoland

Mark, it is fine with me to read your comments. I have so much mail and there are so many comments, I cannot manage sometimes to respond to each and every one. I expect that there would be some technicians who would say essentially what you have. That is the nature of unequal temperament. For ever interval that is narrowed, another is widened.

What I have a problem with is those who choose ridicule and mockery as their form of criticism. You have not done that, so I don't have a problem reading your comments.

All Well Temperaments follow a set of rules which I think you probably already understand. The narrower M3s belong among the simpler keys and the wider among the remote. The EBVT III is about as mild of a construction of WT as is possible, enough so, that their was the recent comment, "why bother"?

The EBVT III wasn't really designed for harpsichord but there is no reason it could not be used. However, what seems to be your sensitivity to M3s that are wider than ET would most certainly be found in the temperaments harpsichordists are typically known for using. I often read comments that say the Historical Temperaments are appropriate only for harpsichord and fortepiano. Typically, these are historically documented 17th and 18th Century WT, modified meantone and meantone temperaments such as 1/4 and 1/5 comma types.

Those temperaments which harpsichordists are known to use (at least from what I have often read and heard in performances) are far more unequal and would have characteristics far more upsetting to you than the EBVT III. I am more likely to hear from a harpsichordist that the EBVT III does not have enough of the key color that is expected from a historical temperament than I am to hear from a pianist that it has too much.

So, it seems to me, (also not trying to change your mind nor be offensive), that you are quite in the minority among harpsichordists. I know from reading the PTG College and University Technicians (CAUT) list that there are many universities whose only use of historical temperaments is with harpsichords and other early keyboards. That is where the use is considered necessary and appropriate.

You have the right to tune your harpsichord any way you want. If only ET seems satisfactory to you, than so be it but you clearly have the minority view on that.

I know the English Horn melody you speak of. I heard it in a symphony performance only recently and it is a favorite of mine, having known it virtually my whole life. To me, if the orchestral score were played in a piano reduction on a piano tuned in the EBVT III, the color of D-flat Major in that temperament would seem quite appropriate to me. The wider M3s are considered to be the melodic ones.

It seems to me than many people who have become involved in tuning stop listening to music and only listen to beat speeds. There may well be a few of those who upon listening to any of the posts there have been in the EBVT III cannot hear music, only beat speeds that irritate their sensitivity. To me, that is unfortunate because clearly, those who have enjoyed the posts have enjoyed the music as I have.

Ron, thanks and that is an interesting quote. I am completely out of time now until this evening. I can't even read and respond to all of my mail right now. What occurs to me is that, particularly in the Chicago area, the Verituner is quite often used for tuning exams. The Verituner is used to set up the preliminary tuning for the Master tuning but whatever it generates still has to be aurally verified and it is never left unaltered by the exam committee.

Bill, I just want to add that I found "The Age of Innocence"immensely enjoyable in ALL the tunings presented here. My feedback came from a direct comparison between the three. Like I wrote a few weeks back: when my wife and I did a blind test, I hardly managed to distinguish the Stopper tuning from the RCT.

So, just for the record, I do not find EBVT III to detract seriously from the general enjoyment of the song. It's just not my preferred tuning.

And yes, I realise that with my sensitivity to wide M3s, I may well be in the minority of harpsichord players. I've heard some Well Temperaments at at so-called historically informed performances, and frankly, they put my teeth on edge. I remember hearing melodies and passing bass lines, and thinking to myself: "That note is so far off, it seems to fall out of the melodic line altogether.

Perhaps it's just the paradigm that I grew up in... My first exposure to non-ET was only after school.

And now, I'll pipe down and leave this thread to the techs.

I think about this often. But unless a tuner tunes aurally until there is no more improvement, how can they ever know if they will be able to tune better than a machine and thereby do “the tuning profession a dis-service” by not striving for aural excellence?

Catch-22?!?

Yup, but in the real world the limiting factor is almost always my ability to manipulate the pin, which of course is the piano's fault.

This recent discussion has helped me to see one advantage to being an aural tuner. If I was not, I would be very cautious about trying anything different.

Having tuned pianos for over 25 years aurally, and having been a pianist even longer, I think I should know what sounds good and what doesn't.

My piano sounds absolutely fantastic! But I didn't have a machine tell me how to do it. I took new information but still let my ear decide beyond the temparament octave. I questioned again today that perhaps I expanded the bass a little much, but it is fine the way it is.

But hey, what do I know? I'm just a simple-minded only by ear tuner.

It has occured to me also that perhaps someone using and ETD does not realize the deviation that is possible without anything objectionable happening.

I am going to have to tune more pianos this new way, to hear how some 'lesser' pianos respond to it. But from what I have seen thus far I don't think you'd get a single complaint from a pianist and many people wondering how you got the piano to sound so good.