Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum Introductory understanding of EBVT ?

1. Yes
2. well, no - the problem with most of the aural directions is that they rely on beatspeeds - which you are aware get skewed by inharmonicity...
3. No - the whole point is that it is NOT equal temperament. Surprising really, how little you need to move away from ET to bring some key color, yet not offend most modern ears. The key is the direction away from ET - accidental, as is most often, or purposefull, using the historical traditions.

Ron Koval
chicagland

Patrick, a demand for respect should be accompanied by some kind of measurable substance to deserve it or a practical end result that shows that it has been earned. Its quite out on a limb to expect anyone to respect something that is based on "taste", and that is what the likes and dislikes of temperaments are about....widely varying tastes.

My 6 year old grandchild was colouring in a book the other day and demanded some blank white paper to draw her own drawings on instead; she said that colouring in the book was too easy. I would have respected her request had her colouring been confined inside the lines, but they were all over the page. Most all technicians would disagree with you about ET being easier to tune than EBVT. I tuned EBVT just recently with an ETD and then by ear and it is easier to tune than ET....period. Common sense thinking of comparing properly proportioned progressive beat rates vs tuning equal beating intervals bears this out. Please explain why you find the opposite true (hopefully with some tangible evidence to support it.)

As for the practical application of EBVT and why some people prefer it and others don'... I don't beleive it strays far from the analogy of a car that only has a working 2nd and 3rd gear. Great for slalom racing through pylons or navigating a short oval track, but something you need to work around for just about any other kind of driving.

The practical application of ET removes offensiveness at the slight expense of colour. The other temperaments including EBVT can gain some colour, but with a proporional loss of freedom in playing in all keys or introducing unwanted dissonance . For EBVT to gain universal acceptance in the public, somehow the public needs to be convinced that freedom to express music in ALL keys with the least offensiveness is less important than the more colourful expression of some music played in specific keys. I doubt this will fly mainstream on home based piano tunings for piano technicians and will probably remain in the confines of some performance halls or exhibitions on alternative temperaments.

1. OK, agreed.

2. Well, EBVT specifies certain beatspeeds, too. But it is often said, and I tend to agree, that ET is the hardest to tune. I have looked over and tried many sequences and have decided that there cannot be clear aural directions for ET. There are always adjustments and compromises, especially on poorly scaled pianos. It is not only beatspeeds that get skewed by iH, but the relationship between different beatspeeds. I would say that “clear aural instructions” (that work exactly as advertised!) cannot include the relationships between beatspeeds other than some of them being equal and some of them being beatless. The rest turn out however they turn out.

3. We both agree that it is not ET. And I would guess that the reason some people like it is that its direction from ET is traditional. I am sure others like it because it is not ET regardless of the direction. I cannot quite believe the whole traditional key color thing. Musicians tend to play in just intonation whenever possible.

Here's something I noticed yesterday in a very old hymnal that I use for sight reading. There were a number of pages in a row where the key signature of the hymn on the right side was 1 semitone higher than the one on the left. It was very uplifting. There were too many like that for me to think it was a coincidence. Even though the left page always had flats and the right always sharps, I think the intent was for an ET tuning.

Oh, and I am very glad we can keep this civil!

Civil discussion is something I really value!!

There's a lot going on... Temperament/stretch - and now the addition of vocal music!

Vocal music brings a whole 'nuther discussion to the table - that is, ranges of voices. It is one reason to nullify chosing a stronger alternate temperament for home use - because the key is often based on the range of the singer - same goes for broadway tunes. What I use for uprights and smaller grands is about 1/2 the strength of the EBVT - grands get a max offset from my version of ET of only 1 cent... (plenty of exceptions to both rules) It seemed that the "key color" concept lasted into the 20th century in many composer's choices. (again, piano repetoire) Agreed that some keys were probably chosen because they "fell under the fingers" better.

Again, I'm coming from the "Grand Obsession" idea that very small differences are appreciated and noticed by a few owners. I'd agree that most can't tell any difference at all!

So- I tune both, many times according to personal whim. I do have a few clients that notice and want non-ET. (usually by asking for what I did last time) Most are happy if the unisons are clean and octaves not too busy, and the top sparkles...

Oh, and they do prefer if all the notes work!! ;-)

Ron Koval
chicagoland

Oh, yeah. I forgot that some people consider vocalist to be musicians, too.

Have a great holiday weekend!

Jeff, I might have read too much into what you wrote - if that's the case, then it's my bad.

Yes, EBVT III turns closer to ET at the outer ends of the piano. But then again, ET often turns closer to UT at those ends too! In the extremes, it's just what brings out the best resonance - personally I couldn't care less if it works out mathematically

In no way would I ask you to tune anything you don't like. I'd just thought you'd verify EBVT III being easy in that way. I suggested that the setting of the temperament might be surprisingly hard. It is to me, so it might be only me having problems tuning a decent EBVT


Emmery: you don't think the work that has been posted by me would show a sincerity that is worth respecting?



Emmery, I really don't care what other techs say. If the majority finds EBVT easier to tune than ET, fine. I have, throughout this and other dialogues here, only said that I (as in me personally) find EBVT III harder to tune in a way that respects that temperament.

I would be most careful to tell which one is generally easier or harder, because I simply don't know. I am only talking out of my own experience.

The only reason I can think of right now is that the symmetry of ET makes it's easier for me to approach it from an analytical viewpoint. Tuning EBVT III, I tend to listen for harmony. That makes it much harder - again, for me.


I don't agree on either "offensiveness" or "slight expense". It removes key color totally, turning the tunings it into something very similar to grayscale. Which has a certain beauty to it that I like, too. That said, I really like the key color palette of EBVT.



Emmery,

the public doesn't have to sign any UT declarations at all. I don't think they could care less - as long as they are moved by the music coming out of the piano, be it whatever logic behind the tuning. This is often neglected in this forum. We tune for the pianos to be played, not to be calculated.

Thanks for bringing in this color analogy, Patrick.
My musical perception is again different from yours. I hear (see) a full palette of colours in the tunings i do, making those colours shine through clarity and purity and i feel comfortable (harmonically and melodically) while performing with these colors.

I am missing this clarity and purity in unequal temperaments and the colors are all getting mixed up together for me. Mixing all coulours of a palette together yields a brownish coulor, which is my perception on unequal temperaments.


Bernhard Stopper

Andy, you may have wanted to talk more about EBVT, here you may get a chance.

Originally Posted By: alfredo capurso
[...] What can the reason or the pleasure be in going from a lambish key to a wolfish one? [...]

You reply:..."EBVT III is much, much, much more subtle than what you are trying to imply here."...

I was simply referring to what is well known, EBVT favors some key-signatures to the detriment of other remote (?) ones.

Originally Posted By: alfredo capurso
[...] How is it possible to refer to "colour" as to the feeling we get from a chord that could sound better in tune? [...]

You reply:..."My experience playing it on my own piano, and listening to the recordings of Grandpianoman, Patrick Wingren, and others who posted recordings, is that EBVT III is perfectly in tune. I've tried to describe it to people by calling it "magnified clarity" or "magnified purity."...

So, you hear EBVT perfectly in tune. Nevertheless, the author fights against the idea of perfection, although only down to the point where EBVT imperfections (few cents deviations from machine ET?) make it perfect.

Originally Posted By: LisztAddict
I am not a pro tuner, but I hope it's okay for me to make one post in here. I use Tunelab and today I got an EBVT file from Kees for my piano. When I loaded the file up and looked at the tuning curve, it's no longer a curve. I said to myself "wow, that looks interesting". Not sure what to expect but I gave it a try. Some notes stay the same as before, a few I had to pull up or drop down a bit. I think the most I had to change with any one note was just about 3 cents. The end result really amazed me. I could not believe that only changing a few notes just a tiny bit could make such a big difference. Anyway, I am very happy with whatever math Kees did to the tuning file I sent him.

Your comment:..."LisztAddict is a very experienced and sensitive pianist. He liked it! That should tell you something about EBVT III."

Perhaps, being a pro-tuner, I should tell you something about EBVT. I like EBVT in that it sounds like a modern quasi-ET. It is a little bit messy in the temperament, just a little bit though, just a few cents. Up and down the temperament it seems to go for Chas geometry, which somehow reestablishes the modern quasi-ET form. This makes it almost undistinguishable from a modern ET, unless you are a skilled tuner or a demanding "ear", and makes it better than many historical ET attempts, which may result in being further away from a pleasant tuning.

This can explain your enthusiasm, but does not explain how Bill Bremmer's taste for imperfections can ever be shared as universal perfection. Instead, I could share the meaning of a practicable and satisfactory tuning, if that was the case, both for "on the way" customers and "on the way" tuners.

Not much different from what I wrote to Bill - (October 26, 2009):

http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/1291964/2.html

"Bill,

Thanks for your reply. I can understand and share your claims and I would like to shortly explain you why.

Whatever tuning may result from an attempt to get 12th root of two ET, it will be an accidental tuning. This is simply because this ET’s constant, the zero-beating octave, can not be put into practice. In other words, the tuner is left without practical indications about the final tuning form.

Although today he/she knows he/she has to stretch octaves, aiming for progressive RBI, he/she does not know about both the amount of progressive stretch and the actual SBI’s progression. So, he/she will not be able to find the long-desired ET form, but only because this ET’s reference point, i.e. its zero-beating constant, is useless.

Consequently, the first result can only be an hybrid tuning, an incoherent and messy tuning in between what could be ET and an actual UT, each tuning being different from the previous and the next. And I say incoherent because the keys “colour” will end up being just casual, and messy because beats will not correspond to any order. Sadly enough, he/she will repeat that this is due to iH. Happly enough, even without a feasible and reliable model, he/she will be able to get by.

Referring to what you state I think that, having beared stretching in mind, you have been able to refine an UT model that can be put into practice. For what I understand, it also pleases your ear and satisfyes your hurge for the colours you like. Not being an accidantal UT nor a fake ET, EBVT can be repeated and demonstrates itself to be iHproof. If this is the case, your tuning expresses a quality model, nothing to compare with any impracticable model. This can well explain your efforts and your customers gratitude.

You say:…“For me, the ultimate success will be when pianos used for recordings available to the general market use either my ideas or ideas similar to them. For me to revert to ET would be a step backwards.”…

Well, you would like to share your preferences in terms of UTs and I wish you too the best. What I can not understand though is why you seem to believe that 12th root of two ET can not be improved, so excluding any updated ET model from your interests. In my opinion, this presumptive rejection only may hamper modern ET understanding and push you back in time."


Regards, a.c.
.

No Alfredo, the author (Bill) doesn't fight the idea of perfection, because he doesn't see the mathematically evenly distributed intervals of ET as being perfect. Neither do I - personally I see ET as one of the extremes, with the syntonic tunings (that is, make a certain number of keys sound the same, closer to just, and let the rest of the keys deal with the leftovers) at the other end.

The well-tempered idea is, in that sense, more perfect than ET



Alfredo, I see what you are saying and I like your thinking here.

Bernhard,

I like that we have different perceptions, and I wish you all the best in exploring your idea of an ideal tuning - honestly The piano needs all of us, doing what we think, feel and hope is right!

That said, my own preference is of course towards the difference between keys. the width of the ET intervals gives it a characteristic color, but that is then repeated 12 times - that is the idea of equal, right? That is what I mean by grayscale, maybe it could be explained in a better way (I'm still trying to define it for myself, too).

How about another analogy, borrowed from picture editing? let's say that C major in ET is full of colors (just to get away from the analogy between color TV and B/W).

Then, what you do for any other key is to adjust brightness and contrast only. While in EBVT you change the RGB values. I think that might work as an analogy?

If you can subscribe to this description, then I can understand why you get an uneasy or "brown" feeling from EBVT. To me EBVT is still very structured though, and far from a mish mash.


ET is an atonal tuning, and I personally prefer a tonal tuning.

Originally Posted By: alfredo capurso
[@andy] You reply:..."My experience playing it on my own piano, and listening to the recordings of Grandpianoman, Patrick Wingren, and others who posted recordings, is that EBVT III is perfectly in tune.

(my reply) So, you hear EBVT perfectly in tune. Nevertheless, the author fights against the idea of perfection, although only down to the point where EBVT imperfections (few cents deviations from machine ET?) make it perfect."

Patrick, you write:..."No Alfredo, the author (Bill) doesn't fight the idea of perfection, because he doesn't see the mathematically evenly distributed intervals of ET as being perfect. Neither do I - personally I see ET as one of the extremes, with the syntonic tunings (that is, make a certain number of keys sound the same, closer to just, and let the rest of the keys deal with the leftovers) at the other end."...

For what I understand, Bill does not know and does not even care about modern ET's, so I would not expect Bill to find any perfection in that sense. Bill fights against the perfection (read exatitude) of numbers, when maths can represent modern ET's and natural harmony, though Bill needs ETD's numbers (and maths) for describing EBVT.

..."The well-tempered idea is, in that sense, more perfect than ET."...

In my opinion, the well-tempered idea was perfect (read improving) in its historical context, as for the rest I can only refer perfection to nature.

..."ET is an atonal tuning, and I personally prefer a tonal tuning."

ET - the ET I can talk about - is (finally) a "dewolfed" tuning. It's like a place where you hear no shouts, no howls, no fighting, it is the only setting where I can deeply enjoy harmony. But I shall respect your preferences, especially if you give yourself (due, being you a lecturer and a tuner) a chance to distinguish the historical ET tuning from modern, advanced ET's.

Regards, a.c.

Dear Alfredo,

Forgive me if I commented inappropriately in the "Historical ET and Modern ETs" thread. I thought EBVT III was a UT, and offered my comments there for that reason.

I am not quite sure how to respond to your posts. I am not a tuner/tech, but I am a close listener and music appreciator. What caused me to reply to your posts was this notion that EBVT is somehow wolfish. Perhaps it is? I don't know about EBVT. But I have been playing EBVT III in a number of keys for about a half a year now, and I have not ever heard it howl, not even once.

Just today, I played Bach's WTC Bk. 1, Prelude 22 (five flats), Prelude 24 (two sharps), Chopin's Trois Nouvelle Etudes, No.2 (four flats), and Rachmaninoff's Prelude Op. 23, No. 6 (three flats), and all sounded just as sweet and clear as could be. In fact, I was quite happy to discover something of a gentle pipe organ effect in the last chord of the Rach. prelude. The effect was quite moving.

I hope you can accept my "man on the street report," because I cannot be more technical than that. Simply put: No bleats. No howls.

Again, if I have missed your point, forgive me. It would not be the first time someone on PW missed another's point! I have heard recordings of pianos played in other UT's and found them to have quite a bit of energy and "spring" in them. But no wolfish howl, yet. If I do hear it, I will let you know right away, and I will not just be crying "wolf"!

Kindest regards,
--Andy Strong

Patrick,

I suppose that you can agree that musical intonation preference for melodic perception is proven to be more pythagorean like, especially for the major thirds. I think this is status quo of teaching at music universities, as a lecturer for composition you have probably knowledge about this.

What is the reason for this? In believe that our brain´s neural network has been highly optimized over evolution to reduce redundancy. If we assume that this neural network ignores the fifth partial for musical processing, we can have an explanation why we prefer melodically a more pythagorean third over a harmonically pure third in the musical perception.

In my tuning theory, another musical preception preference has an important role:
It has been found, that pure octaves don´t satisfy musical perception either.

If we look closer to the pythagorean major third with it´s ratio of 81/64*, we can split this ratio down to 3^4/2^6, that means musically four pure duodecimes (twelfths) upwards and six pure octaves downwards, which yields our pythagorean third.
*(we can leave inharmonicity by side at this moment, in real word piano tunings it´s just a problem of affine transforms.)

If we replace those six pure octaves (as they don´t satisfy melodical/musical perception) with octaves that satisfy this perception (in my tuning that means stretching every octave with a nineteenth of the pythagorean comma), the pythagorean thirds are getting transformed (or corrected) by six acoustic satisfying octaves. These thirds are then slightly greater than in standard ET, but not as extreme as in pythagorean tuning. They are more comfortable melodically than pure thirds and harmonically more comfortable than the pythagorean thirds, (even more comfortable than the thirds in the outer keys of unequal temperaments). Additionally, they have a distinctive musical size which can be explained by and are coherent with a redundancy-optimized neural network. This distinct size can also be trained way easier by soloists compared to up to twelve different sizes in unequal temperaments.

Not to speak about the effect of the specific symmetry in the ET form on pure duodecimes (twelfths), which makes the impression of dissapearing of the beats of the major thirds in chords.

So equal temperament in this special case (based on pure duodecimes aka StopperStimmung) is tonal for me while unequal temperaments (including EBVT´s and standard ET) are atonal.

And i prefer a tonal tuning. (How close we are with this statement :-) .

Let me also mention that my tuning was not developped through an abstract mathematical model. The math is just applied to try to explain what made me (and many many others) so inspired about the musicality of this tuning.


Bernhard Stopper

We certainly are. And our own conception of that leads us in different directions. Which to me is the beauty and strength of diversity!



Yes, and this I both appreciate and respect. It's quite similar to the theory of baroque counterpoint and four-part writing -
deducted from the work of Bach and his contemporaries.

I believe Alfredo's CHAS has been developed in that order, too - theory as a means to put down in words (numbers) a desired tuning developed through experienced aural tuning.

By the way - I had a chance to have a brief look at your software when I visited GPM some days ago. I like the simplicity of the interface, and guess that it would be really valuable to DIY tuners because of that - especially as it results in a pure 12th tuning, something that most people would be very happy about.

Jim Coleman's class at the PTG convention went in that direction, too... a 6:3 temperament octave, and pure 12th stretch. Sounded very similar to the sound clip on your site!

Hope everyone had a great weekend.

I am with Mr. Stopper on how a (nearly) pure twelfths tuning makes the colors in music more distinct. Not by making the different keys have different colors, but by the chord progressions and by chord inversions shining through with their own "color", or I guess I would call it "character", that can be muddied or "browned/faded" by a either a poor tuning or an UT tuning.

And speaking of melodic vs. harmonic thirds... I was listening to an electronic wall clock that rings the Big Ben sequence with a major third being played to count the hours. It was obviously in ET. And I got to wondering how the real Big Ben's bells are tuned. Does anyone happen to know?

No idea, but I will go to London on thursday so I will try to report back with an empirically researched educated guess

Oh, no reason to go to the trouble of making a special trip just for me!

Haha - well, Alfredo and Isaac are a little bit closer to England than I am, but I thought I would *stretch* a little

Originally Posted By: UnrightTooner
..."...major third...I got to wondering how the real Big Ben's bells are tuned."

Stretch'n trip, pretty wide, to my ear:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiKOhOzQyZg

a.c.
.

You can probably find articles on tuning carillon bells somewhere. I am not fond of the method that is supposed to be traditional. They did research on it when they increased the number of bells in the Campanile at Berkeley, and I do not care for the new bells.