Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers (it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

SEARCH
the Forums & Piano World

This custom search works much better than the built in one and allows searching older posts.
(ad 125) Sweetwater - Digital Keyboards & Other Gear
Digital Pianos at Sweetwater
(ad) Pearl River
Pearl River Pianos
(ad) Pianoteq
Latest Pianoteq add-on instrument: U4 upright piano
(ad) P B Guide
Acoustic & Digital Piano Guide
PianoSupplies.com (150)
Piano Accessories Music Related Gifts Piano Tuning Equipment Piano Moving Equipment
We now offer Gift Certificates in our online store!
(ad) Estonia Piano
Estonia Piano
Quick Links to Useful Stuff
Our Classified Ads
Find Piano Professionals-

*Piano Dealers - Piano Stores
*Piano Tuners
*Piano Teachers
*Piano Movers
*Piano Restorations
*Piano Manufacturers
*Organs

Quick Links:
*Advertise On Piano World
*Free Piano Newsletter
*Online Piano Recitals
*Piano Recitals Index
*Piano Accessories
* Buying a Piano
*Buying A Acoustic Piano
*Buying a Digital Piano
*Pianos for Sale
*Sell Your Piano
*How Old is My Piano?
*Piano Books
*Piano Art, Pictures, & Posters
*Directory/Site Map
*Contest
*Links
*Virtual Piano
*Music Word Search
*Piano Screen Saver
*Piano Videos
*Virtual Piano Chords
Page 5 of 9 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >
Topic Options
#1655708 - 04/06/11 12:58 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
Thomas Dowell Offline
Full Member

Registered: 11/18/09
Posts: 122
Loc: Twin Lakes, WI
Originally Posted By: pppat

@Kees: I might sound like a parrot by now, but the biggest concern right now (as I see it) is the notes below the temperament (below F3), crossing the break. Even more than anything else, that lack of width is where I hear the biggest difference when I compare your numbers to what I would tune aurally. What about concentrating on that area for now? I can easily adjust, say, the U3 for a comparison.


I've been studying the numbers that you gave to Mr. Moy (using the the corrected ones you posted), and can say that it seems his piano as well will be too narrow (or sharp) in the octaves below the temperament. The tuning doesn't consistently go below it's theoretical value consistently until about note 15, or B1, the same spot that showed the error I saw before. After this there is a smoother drop to the low bass, but doesn't catch up with the ET stretch until about note #7 (D#1), where it goes somewhat lower. The treble portion of your tuning looks good compared with a similar equal temperament tuning.

Hope this helps with your work!

Regards,
_________________________
Thomas Dowell, R.P.T.
Dowell Piano
www.dowellpiano.com

Top
(ad PTG 568) Grand Action Regulation in 37 Steps
Grand Action Regulation in 37 Steps
#1655713 - 04/06/11 01:03 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
Thomas Dowell Offline
Full Member

Registered: 11/18/09
Posts: 122
Loc: Twin Lakes, WI
I forgot to mention I'm using a Tunelab tuning of ET for his piano, with 6:3 bass octaves and 4:1 treble octaves as the settings, automatically adjusted.
_________________________
Thomas Dowell, R.P.T.
Dowell Piano
www.dowellpiano.com

Top
#1655726 - 04/06/11 01:29 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: Thomas Dowell]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1723
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Thomas, your reading of the numbers is consistent with Pat's aural check. I implemented Pat's suggestion. The new Chickering 1918 numbers are below. Let me know your thoughts.

Kees

A0 6 0.0 -25.15
A#0 6 0.0 -19.60
B0 6 0.0 -19.81
C1 6 0.0 -15.32
C#1 6 0.0 -16.04
D1 6 0.0 -14.55
D#1 6 0.0 -11.23
E1 6 0.0 -12.04
F1 6 0.0 -7.38
F#1 6 0.0 -9.07
G1 6 0.0 -6.31
G#1 6 0.0 -5.95
A1 6 0.0 -6.57
A#1 6 0.0 -2.63
B1 6 0.0 -4.08
C2 6 0.0 -0.81
C#2 6 0.0 -4.07
D2 6 0.0 -3.11
D#2 6 0.0 -2.02
E2 6 0.0 -3.86
F2 4 0.0 -3.64
F#2 4 0.0 -5.04
G2 4 0.0 -1.94
G#2 4 0.0 -3.45
A2 4 0.0 -3.88
A#2 4 0.0 -1.20
B2 4 0.0 -3.47
C3 4 0.0 0.15
C#3 4 0.0 -3.88
D3 4 0.0 -1.87
D#3 4 0.0 -0.87
E3 4 0.0 -2.41
F3 2 0.0 -0.96
F#3 2 0.0 -2.44
G3 2 0.0 0.58
G#3 2 0.0 -1.00
A3 2 0.0 -1.50
A#3 2 0.0 1.13
B3 2 0.0 -1.18
C4 2 0.0 2.40
C#4 2 0.0 -1.66
D4 2 0.0 0.34
D#4 2 0.0 1.32
E4 2 0.0 -0.22
F4 2 0.0 1.94
F#4 2 0.0 0.19
G4 2 0.0 3.04
G#4 2 0.0 2.17
A4 1 0.0 0.00
A#4 1 0.0 1.55
B4 1 0.0 -0.12
C5 1 0.0 3.95
C#5 1 0.0 2.19
D5 1 0.0 3.47
D#5 1 0.0 3.22
E5 1 0.0 2.50
F5 1 0.0 3.34
F#5 1 0.0 1.52
G5 1 0.0 4.90
G#5 1 0.0 2.17
A5 1 0.0 3.02
A#5 1 0.0 4.94
B5 1 0.0 3.13
C6 1 0.0 6.13
C#6 1 0.0 3.36
D6 1 0.0 5.94
D#6 1 0.0 6.16
E6 1 0.0 5.41
F6 1 0.0 7.50
F#6 1 0.0 6.05
G6 1 0.0 9.78
G#6 1 0.0 8.76
A6 1 0.0 9.56
A#6 1 0.0 10.59
B6 1 0.0 9.80
C7 1 0.0 12.69
C#7 1 0.0 11.36
D7 1 0.0 14.19
D#7 1 0.0 13.22
E7 1 0.0 13.84
F7 1 0.0 15.81
F#7 1 0.0 14.63
G7 1 0.0 18.49
G#7 1 0.0 16.45
A7 1 0.0 18.92
A#7 1 0.0 20.79
B7 1 0.0 20.37
C8 1 0.0 23.82

Top
#1655766 - 04/06/11 02:27 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
pppat Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/08
Posts: 1195
Loc: Jakobstad, Finland
Cool. Kees, where would the Chickering (or the U3) go if you implemented pure 3:1's below F3?
_________________________
Patrick Wingren, RPT

Senior Lecturer (jazz piano, composition, music theory, conducting) @ Novia University of Applied Sciences, Jakobstad, Finland
- - - -
Dedicated to learning the craft of tuning. Getting better.

Top
#1655769 - 04/06/11 02:39 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
pppat Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/08
Posts: 1195
Loc: Jakobstad, Finland
I'm catching a bad cold as I write, so I don't know in which shape I'll be tomorrow. Anyways, I could throw my Yamaha G2 into the game and maybe be able to work on this despite staying at home. Here are the TL IH constants:

C1 0.508
C2 0.170
C3 0.285
C4 0.367
C5 0.784
_________________________
Patrick Wingren, RPT

Senior Lecturer (jazz piano, composition, music theory, conducting) @ Novia University of Applied Sciences, Jakobstad, Finland
- - - -
Dedicated to learning the craft of tuning. Getting better.

Top
#1655869 - 04/06/11 05:18 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
Thomas Dowell Offline
Full Member

Registered: 11/18/09
Posts: 122
Loc: Twin Lakes, WI
I looked at your new tuning for the Chickering. The tuning now follows a fairly normal tuning curve. I manually adjusted the ET tuning to average out the EBVT tuning. I had adjusted from a 6:3/4:1 Tunelab automatic tuning, by lowering the extreme bass, raising the tenor area below the temperament, raising the treble area above the temperament, and basically left the extreme treble stretch alone. I also pitch adjusted the EBVT tuning to match the overall pitch of an ET Tuning, as EBVT averages a little above ET pitch, (offsets are about .5 cents sharp of ET). I'll list the tunings below.

Chickering 1918 Piano:

ET-Averaging the EBVT Curve

IHCon C1 0.555
IHCon C2 0.287
IHCon C3 0.331
IHCon C4 0.385
IHCon C5 0.684
IHCon C6 1.521
A0 6 -24.20 0.00
A#0 6 -22.08 0.00
B0 6 -20.12 0.00
C1 6 -18.31 0.00
C#1 6 -16.62 0.00
D1 6 -15.06 0.00
D#1 6 -13.61 0.00
E1 6 -12.27 0.00
F1 6 -11.02 0.00
F#1 6 -9.87 0.00
G1 6 -8.79 0.00
G#1 6 -7.80 0.00
A1 6 -6.87 0.00
A#1 6 -6.00 0.00
B1 6 -5.20 0.00
C2 6 -4.44 0.00
C#2 6 -3.74 0.00
D2 6 -3.08 0.00
D#2 6 -2.46 0.00
E2 6 -1.87 0.00
F2 4 -5.79 0.00
F#2 4 -5.18 0.00
G2 4 -4.61 0.00
G#2 4 -4.06 0.00
A2 4 -3.55 0.00
A#2 4 -3.06 0.00
B2 4 -2.59 0.00
C3 4 -2.15 0.00
C#3 4 -1.72 0.00
D3 4 -1.31 0.00
D#3 4 -0.91 0.00
E3 4 -0.52 0.00
F3 2 -2.89 0.00
F#3 2 -2.55 0.00
G3 2 -2.23 0.00
G#3 2 -1.92 0.00
A3 2 -1.62 0.00
A#3 2 -1.34 0.00
B3 2 -1.06 0.00
C4 2 -0.78 0.00
C#4 2 -0.51 0.00
D4 2 -0.24 0.00
D#4 2 0.02 0.00
E4 2 0.29 0.00
F4 2 0.56 0.00
F#4 2 0.82 0.00
G4 2 1.10 0.00
G#4 2 1.38 0.00
A4 1 0.00 0.00
A#4 1 0.19 0.00
B4 1 0.39 0.00
C5 1 0.58 0.00
C#5 1 0.78 0.00
D5 1 0.98 0.00
D#5 1 1.19 0.00
E5 1 1.41 0.00
F5 1 1.63 0.00
F#5 1 1.86 0.00
G5 1 2.10 0.00
G#5 1 2.35 0.00
A5 1 2.62 0.00
A#5 1 2.90 0.00
B5 1 3.19 0.00
C6 1 3.50 0.00
C#6 1 3.83 0.00
D6 1 4.18 0.00
D#6 1 4.55 0.00
E6 1 4.95 0.00
F6 1 5.37 0.00
F#6 1 5.83 0.00
G6 1 6.31 0.00
G#6 1 6.83 0.00
A6 1 7.39 0.00
A#6 1 7.98 0.00
B6 1 8.62 0.00
C7 1 9.31 0.00
C#7 1 10.04 0.00
D7 1 10.83 0.00
D#7 1 11.68 0.00
E7 1 12.60 0.00
F7 1 13.58 0.00
F#7 1 14.64 0.00
G7 1 15.77 0.00
G#7 1 17.00 0.00
A7 1 18.31 0.00
A#7 1 19.73 0.00
B7 1 21.25 0.00
C8 1 22.89 0.00

Kees Pitch Adjusted EBVT (This may not be exactly even in pitch with the ET, as it was corrected using the standard tuning, but it is certainly within about .25-.5 cents of ideal.)
A0 6 0 -25.86
A#0 6 0 -20.31
B0 6 0 -20.52
C1 6 0 -16.03
C#1 6 0 -16.75
D1 6 0 -15.26
D#1 6 0 -11.94
E1 6 0 -12.75
F1 6 0 -8.09
F#1 6 0 -9.78
G1 6 0 -7.02
G#1 6 0 -6.66
A1 6 0 -7.28
A#1 6 0 -3.34
B1 6 0 -4.79
C2 6 0 -1.52
C#2 6 0 -4.78
D2 6 0 -3.82
D#2 6 0 -2.73
E2 6 0 -4.57
F2 4 0 -4.35
F#2 4 0 -5.75
G2 4 0 -2.65
G#2 4 0 -4.16
A2 4 0 -4.59
A#2 4 0 -1.91
B2 4 0 -4.18
C3 4 0 -0.56
C#3 4 0 -4.59
D3 4 0 -2.58
D#3 4 0 -1.58
E3 4 0 -3.12
F3 2 0 -1.67
F#3 2 0 -3.15
G3 2 0 -0.13
G#3 2 0 -1.71
A3 2 0 -2.21
A#3 2 0 0.42
B3 2 0 -1.89
C4 2 0 1.69
C#4 2 0 -2.37
D4 2 0 -0.37
D#4 2 0 0.61
E4 2 0 -0.93
F4 2 0 1.23
F#4 2 0 -0.52
G4 2 0 2.33
G#4 2 0 1.46
A4 1 0 -0.71
A#4 1 0 0.84
B4 1 0 -0.83
C5 1 0 3.24
C#5 1 0 1.48
D5 1 0 2.76
D#5 1 0 2.51
E5 1 0 1.79
F5 1 0 2.63
F#5 1 0 0.81
G5 1 0 4.19
G#5 1 0 1.46
A5 1 0 2.31
A#5 1 0 4.23
B5 1 0 2.42
C6 1 0 5.42
C#6 1 0 2.65
D6 1 0 5.23
D#6 1 0 5.45
E6 1 0 4.7
F6 1 0 6.79
F#6 1 0 5.34
G6 1 0 9.07
G#6 1 0 8.05
A6 1 0 8.85
A#6 1 0 9.88
B6 1 0 9.09
C7 1 0 11.98
C#7 1 0 10.65
D7 1 0 13.48
D#7 1 0 12.51
E7 1 0 13.13
F7 1 0 15.1
F#7 1 0 13.92
G7 1 0 17.78
G#7 1 0 15.74
A7 1 0 18.21
A#7 1 0 20.08
B7 1 0 19.66
C8 1 0 23.11

I'll try to post a graph comparing the two.
It isn't perfect, but I think I got it reasonably close to examine the overall stretch of the EBVT Tuning.
_________________________
Thomas Dowell, R.P.T.
Dowell Piano
www.dowellpiano.com

Top
#1655878 - 04/06/11 05:31 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: Thomas Dowell]
Thomas Dowell Offline
Full Member

Registered: 11/18/09
Posts: 122
Loc: Twin Lakes, WI
I've never uploaded to box.net, so let's see how this works...

EBVT Vs. ET Graph: http://www.box.net/shared/o616c0kkjk

Hopefully that works...
_________________________
Thomas Dowell, R.P.T.
Dowell Piano
www.dowellpiano.com

Top
#1655883 - 04/06/11 05:34 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1723
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted By: pppat
Cool. Kees, where would the Chickering (or the U3) go if you implemented pure 3:1's below F3?

That can be answered in tunelab. There would be less stretch than 6:3, and when extended all the way down the bass would become extremely sharp. 6:2 is an option, virtually indistinguishable from 6:3. But we are moving far away from Bill's recipe for the bass.

Related to this: F3F4 is a 4:2 octave, and you suggested to switch to 6:3 octaves from E3 and below. Would this not create an unpleasant discontinuity at E3?

Kees

Top
#1655890 - 04/06/11 05:40 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1723
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted By: pppat
I'm catching a bad cold as I write, so I don't know in which shape I'll be tomorrow. Anyways, I could throw my Yamaha G2 into the game and maybe be able to work on this despite staying at home. Here are the TL IH constants:

C1 0.508
C2 0.170
C3 0.285
C4 0.367
C5 0.784


Numbers below. Note I changed the partial to something more normal as we don't deal with tuning exam mode anymore.

Kees
IHCon C1 0.000
IHCon C2 0.000
IHCon C3 0.000
IHCon C4 0.000
IHCon C5 0.000
A0 6 0.0 -31.71
A#0 6 0.0 -21.74
B0 6 0.0 -18.87
C1 6 0.0 -12.90
C#1 6 0.0 -12.68
D1 6 0.0 -11.08
D#1 6 0.0 -8.07
E1 6 0.0 -9.08
F1 6 0.0 -5.13
F#1 6 0.0 -7.05
G1 6 0.0 -4.89
G#1 6 0.0 -4.96
A1 6 0.0 -6.04
A#1 6 0.0 -2.79
B1 6 0.0 -4.38
C2 6 0.0 -1.33
C#2 6 0.0 -4.27
D2 6 0.0 -3.34
D#2 6 0.0 -2.19
E2 6 0.0 -3.82
F2 4 0.0 -2.62
F#2 4 0.0 -3.94
G2 4 0.0 -1.09
G#2 4 0.0 -2.61
A2 4 0.0 -3.33
A#2 4 0.0 -0.92
B2 4 0.0 -2.98
C3 4 0.0 0.37
C#3 4 0.0 -3.56
D3 4 0.0 -1.76
D#3 4 0.0 -0.88
E3 4 0.0 -2.36
F3 2 0.0 -1.28
F#3 2 0.0 -2.56
G3 2 0.0 0.33
G#3 2 0.0 -1.13
A3 2 0.0 -1.79
A#3 2 0.0 0.69
B3 2 0.0 -1.32
C4 2 0.0 2.11
C#4 2 0.0 -1.74
D4 2 0.0 0.13
D#4 2 0.0 1.10
E4 2 0.0 -0.30
F4 2 0.0 1.67
F#4 2 0.0 0.23
G4 2 0.0 2.95
G#4 2 0.0 2.23
A4 1 0.0 0.00
A#4 1 0.0 1.47
B4 1 0.0 0.05
C5 1 0.0 3.85
C#5 1 0.0 2.41
D5 1 0.0 3.48
D#5 1 0.0 3.32
E5 1 0.0 2.65
F5 1 0.0 3.04
F#5 1 0.0 1.51
G5 1 0.0 4.77
G#5 1 0.0 2.23
A5 1 0.0 2.95
A#5 1 0.0 4.79
B5 1 0.0 3.22
C6 1 0.0 6.05
C#6 1 0.0 3.54
D6 1 0.0 5.99
D#6 1 0.0 6.26
E6 1 0.0 5.56
F6 1 0.0 7.49
F#6 1 0.0 6.27
G6 1 0.0 9.76
G#6 1 0.0 8.91
A6 1 0.0 9.53
A#6 1 0.0 10.48
B6 1 0.0 9.75
C7 1 0.0 12.17
C#7 1 0.0 11.02
D7 1 0.0 13.54
D#7 1 0.0 12.55
E7 1 0.0 12.96
F7 1 0.0 14.48
F#7 1 0.0 13.34
G7 1 0.0 16.83
G#7 1 0.0 14.76
A7 1 0.0 16.82
A#7 1 0.0 18.37
B7 1 0.0 17.75
C8 1 0.0 20.67

Top
#1655909 - 04/06/11 06:23 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
Thomas Dowell Offline
Full Member

Registered: 11/18/09
Posts: 122
Loc: Twin Lakes, WI
Your posting for the Yamaha G2 is very interesting. The treble stretch is very conservative, only +20.67 cents at C7, while the narrowest auto setting for Tunelab puts it at about 24.08. The bass has comparatively extreme stretch, wider than an 8:4 auto setting in Tune lab. In fact, the low bass is farther from theoretical pitch than the treble, which probably won't sound great, but I'm no expert on tuning G2's, and the scale may call for that. From personal experience, however, the overall stretch should be greater in the treble,(as that area has the highest inharmonicity of the piano) than the bass.

The iH reading for C1 seems to be a little out of kilter. @Patrick: Have you used these numbers to actually tune the piano, and if you have, is the stretch pleasing to your ears?

@kees: How are you calculating the Inharmonicity Data? Do you model your own, or do you stick with tune-lab's formula? (I know I've tried to do both, and can't figure either of them out!)

Hope this feedback helps a little.
_________________________
Thomas Dowell, R.P.T.
Dowell Piano
www.dowellpiano.com

Top
#1655914 - 04/06/11 06:31 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: Thomas Dowell]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1723
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted By: Tdowel

@kees: How are you calculating the Inharmonicity Data? Do you model your own, or do you stick with tune-lab's formula? (I know I've tried to do both, and can't figure either of them out!)

I use the tunelab model for both the partial calculation (i.e. how to translate a single ih number for a note into its partial locations) and for fitting the overall ih curve to selected notes. The former is documented in the tunlab manual, the latter was kindly provided to me by Robert Scott.

Kees


Edited by DoelKees (04/06/11 06:31 PM)

Top
#1656421 - 04/07/11 04:13 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: DoelKees]
pppat Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/08
Posts: 1195
Loc: Jakobstad, Finland
Originally Posted By: DoelKees
Originally Posted By: pppat
Cool. Kees, where would the Chickering (or the U3) go if you implemented pure 3:1's below F3?

That can be answered in tunelab. There would be less stretch than 6:3, and when extended all the way down the bass would become extremely sharp. 6:2 is an option, virtually indistinguishable from 6:3. But we are moving far away from Bill's recipe for the bass.


Yes, I thought so... I was just curious. 6:3 all the way down (tunelab standard) and stretching the last octave or so towards 12:6 might be an option that would harmonize quite well with Bill's idea.

Originally Posted By: DoelKees

Related to this: F3F4 is a 4:2 octave, and you suggested to switch to 6:3 octaves from E3 and below. Would this not create an unpleasant discontinuity at E3?
Kees


Maybe. And that might be why you called my F3 too low earlier - maybe I compensate for the stretch below? This is getting interesting... I have to check your new numbers aurally to get a better feeling for that transition.

Speaking of stretch - I did a touch-up on a Steinway D tuning today. It is not a rigorous EBVT III in the temperament zone, slightly milder. Anyways, the stretch might be of interest. Here are the numbers:



... and the IH constants (as recorded on TL):

C1 0.113
C2 0.039
C3 0.136
C4 0.337
C5 0.819

Note the stretch in the last octave. This is probably a combination of a large concert hall, a grand that can take that stretch, and clogged ears. I don't know in which proportions... grin
_________________________
Patrick Wingren, RPT

Senior Lecturer (jazz piano, composition, music theory, conducting) @ Novia University of Applied Sciences, Jakobstad, Finland
- - - -
Dedicated to learning the craft of tuning. Getting better.

Top
#1656434 - 04/07/11 04:36 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: Thomas Dowell]
pppat Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/08
Posts: 1195
Loc: Jakobstad, Finland
Originally Posted By: Tdowel

The iH reading for C1 seems to be a little out of kilter. @Patrick: Have you used these numbers to actually tune the piano, and if you have, is the stretch pleasing to your ears?


Thomas,

I haven't had a chance to do so yet, but I certainly will. The C1 looks funny, I agree, but I checked it several times and it indeed is the IH that TL reads. I think it has to do with the G2's, they are.. well, let's put it mildly, quite personal in the low bass. The Yamaha C2's are much more predictable.
_________________________
Patrick Wingren, RPT

Senior Lecturer (jazz piano, composition, music theory, conducting) @ Novia University of Applied Sciences, Jakobstad, Finland
- - - -
Dedicated to learning the craft of tuning. Getting better.

Top
#1656451 - 04/07/11 04:56 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
pppat Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/08
Posts: 1195
Loc: Jakobstad, Finland
Kees, Jim, Thomas: One more thing... I think it would be wise to go for just a TuneLab implementation right now. If it works, then we could take it further on to other software.

The reasons I vote for TuneLab is

1) that it seems to be quite simple to produce tuning files (.tun), as opposed to on the RCT where one tuning file contains several tunings. TL .tun files looks more or less like csv to me, so I figure it would be no big problem reading and writing such once we get the numbers right smile ,

2) you all others are quite familiar with TuneLab. I have some catching up to do, but that's no problem,

3) the price of the software,

4) Robert being a member of this forum and kindly answering our TL-related questions politely and with great patience smile

5) The Topic of this thread grin

6) That tune-lab has a function for manually adding IH constants, that will make it easy for us all to trade files, enter new files, and check, double-check and triple-check.

7) The possibility for interested collaborators to use TL in demo mode without feeling obliged to put own money into the project, only experience and skill.

What do you think?



Edited by pppat (04/07/11 04:59 PM)
_________________________
Patrick Wingren, RPT

Senior Lecturer (jazz piano, composition, music theory, conducting) @ Novia University of Applied Sciences, Jakobstad, Finland
- - - -
Dedicated to learning the craft of tuning. Getting better.

Top
#1656455 - 04/07/11 05:05 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
pppat Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/08
Posts: 1195
Loc: Jakobstad, Finland
Originally Posted By: pppat

Yes, I thought so... I was just curious. 6:3 all the way down (tunelab standard) and stretching the last octave or so towards 12:6 might be an option that would harmonize quite well with Bill's idea.


The more I think of this, the more logical it sounds. I think it would be possible for the code to have a parameter derived from the IH readings) that determines where to start moving from 6:3's to 12:6's. This is what Bill and I do on larger grands, and the larger the grand, the faster we start to go beyond 6:3. On really small instruments, that parameter could be even < A0.

Bill does it with a different approach than I do, but the end result is very similar.

@ Kees - how does this sound to you?


Edited by pppat (04/07/11 05:07 PM)
_________________________
Patrick Wingren, RPT

Senior Lecturer (jazz piano, composition, music theory, conducting) @ Novia University of Applied Sciences, Jakobstad, Finland
- - - -
Dedicated to learning the craft of tuning. Getting better.

Top
#1656456 - 04/07/11 05:11 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: Thomas Dowell]
pppat Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/08
Posts: 1195
Loc: Jakobstad, Finland
Originally Posted By: Tdowel
I've never uploaded to box.net, so let's see how this works...

EBVT Vs. ET Graph: http://www.box.net/shared/o616c0kkjk

Hopefully that works...


This is great, Thomas - very easy to read!
_________________________
Patrick Wingren, RPT

Senior Lecturer (jazz piano, composition, music theory, conducting) @ Novia University of Applied Sciences, Jakobstad, Finland
- - - -
Dedicated to learning the craft of tuning. Getting better.

Top
#1656647 - 04/08/11 01:27 AM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1723
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted By: pppat
Originally Posted By: pppat

Yes, I thought so... I was just curious. 6:3 all the way down (tunelab standard) and stretching the last octave or so towards 12:6 might be an option that would harmonize quite well with Bill's idea.


The more I think of this, the more logical it sounds. I think it would be possible for the code to have a parameter derived from the IH readings) that determines where to start moving from 6:3's to 12:6's. This is what Bill and I do on larger grands, and the larger the grand, the faster we start to go beyond 6:3. On really small instruments, that parameter could be even < A0.

Bill does it with a different approach than I do, but the end result is very similar.

@ Kees - how does this sound to you?

My only concern is that the bass tuning recipe from Bill uses 5ths and 4ths and 12ths and has the effect of equalizing the temperament somewhat towards equal. If you tune with octaves only the temperament will stay intact all the way down. I don't mind, but is this a concern?

Put differently is the recipe to tune below F3 specific for EBVT or is it just a general stretch scheme. If the latter, sure we can do that. Why 12:6? Isn't 8:4 or 10:5 more locical?

Last but not least: is there really a problem in the bass as computed by Bill's recipe that needs fixing? As mentioned before I have a switch for extra low bass stretch, which is off now. And a similar one for more high treble stretch.

Kees

Top
#1656721 - 04/08/11 07:14 AM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: DoelKees]
pppat Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/08
Posts: 1195
Loc: Jakobstad, Finland
Originally Posted By: DoelKees

My only concern is that the bass tuning recipe from Bill uses 5ths and 4ths and 12ths and has the effect of equalizing the temperament somewhat towards equal. If you tune with octaves only the temperament will stay intact all the way down. I don't mind, but is this a concern?


Your reasoning sounds logical. It will probably be consistent with the temperament idea to go back to the 4/5/8 balance beneath the tenor crossing.

Originally Posted By: DoelKees

Put differently is the recipe to tune below F3 specific for EBVT or is it just a general stretch scheme. If the latter, sure we can do that. Why 12:6? Isn't 8:4 or 10:5 more locical?


To me, it's two-folded. The first part of the high bass/low mid below, roughly the octave across the break, needs special care to keep the characteristics of the temperament. It is just as important as the octave directly above the temperament. Thus, what Bill kind of says is "apply stretch, but don't lose the uniqueness of the intervals". That is why I think equal-beating or 2:3 beating won't do it here - if applied strictly (without aural "nudges"), they even the temperament out far too early. And relationship beating is dangerous across the break.

But once we get past that area, I think you're right - it should probably go back to the balancing scheme (4/5/8)

I suggested 12:6 above, because to me it would have been more logical to use a much larger stretch to strive against, to get more of an exponential curve in the low bass. Just a thought, but we might put that thought on stand-by for now and see what happens with the 6:3 across the break, and 4/5/8 below.

Originally Posted By: DoelKees

Last but not least: is there really a problem in the bass as computed by Bill's recipe that needs fixing? As mentioned before I have a switch for extra low bass stretch, which is off now. And a similar one for more high treble stretch.
Kees


Those switches might very well do fine without other alterations. Let's aurally verify what happens across that treacherous tenor break once the 6:3's are implemented, and what that does for the low bass below.

I am, however, pretty sure that I'd ultimately like both switches on myself smile

This weekend I'll be away playing concerts, so the G2 and U3 will have to wait until monday. Might be favorable anyhow, because with clogged sinuses and locked ears, I'm not the best bet for aural nitpicking right now. Hopefully this cold will be gone in a few days.


Edited by pppat (04/08/11 07:18 AM)
_________________________
Patrick Wingren, RPT

Senior Lecturer (jazz piano, composition, music theory, conducting) @ Novia University of Applied Sciences, Jakobstad, Finland
- - - -
Dedicated to learning the craft of tuning. Getting better.

Top
#1656909 - 04/08/11 03:17 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1723
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Pat: I will send you tunelab files for the 4 pianos with the extra stretch options on next week. Traveling right now.

I agree with everything you wrote.

Kees

Top
#1656994 - 04/08/11 07:23 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
Thomas Dowell Offline
Full Member

Registered: 11/18/09
Posts: 122
Loc: Twin Lakes, WI
Okay, I've been working on this thread from a different viewpoint than Kees has, so bear with me if this starts to diverge from the main ideas being shared here. I think what I've found may aid in working out the goal of this thread, which is a tuning system similar in results to the one that Mr. Bremmer uses when tuning his EBVT III.

Just a disclaimer, I don’t have enough experience tuning a high quality EBVT to be able to compare the digital results being exchanged here to actual tuning.

I thought that this was interesting, I created an 88 note temperament offset, based simply on Tune-lab’s EBVT temperament file (pitch adjusted by subtracting .91 cents from each offset), and extended it beyond F3-A4 by simple averaging based loosely on Mr. Bremmer’s writing (aka, I winged it based on what I remembered). When I refer to a note, I am referring to its offset value. Thus, I calculated A#4’s offset by (A#3+D#4+F4)/3. After F5, I switched to mindless octaves, so F#5=(F#3+B3)/2. I used a stock 6:2/4:1 Tune-lab tuning as the ET basis.

Below is a link to the graph comparing this 88 note offset to Kees calculation, on the 1918 Chickering:

http://www.box.net/shared/f9ykj8czfa

Note the similarity, especially above note 49 (A4) between the two graphs.

I think that this may be something of interest to expand this idea. Perhaps an 88 note temperament file could be used to solve this problem.



Edited by Tdowel (04/09/11 01:30 AM)
Edit Reason: Mis-quoted myself
_________________________
Thomas Dowell, R.P.T.
Dowell Piano
www.dowellpiano.com

Top
#1657817 - 04/10/11 06:03 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
pppat Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/08
Posts: 1195
Loc: Jakobstad, Finland
Kees: Same thing here, just got back from concerts during the weekend. I will have a chance to work on the U3 with your new numbers tomorrow, though!

Thomas: Sounds interesting. I'll compare yours to what we got earlier.

All: I like this thread, its alive, active, and people are contributing. I really think this is going to get us a great end result.

Jim (and other skilled/interested programmers) - I've never worked with the win mobile operating system. What are the programs coded in?

We spoke briefly earlier about the possibility to have a web file making the temperament files, and if that's an option I could participate, I have a pretty solid knowledge of PHP. But the ideal would be a small win mobile program that could be installed side by side with TuneLab on the handheld, and process the files fast and without the need for a network connection.

Best of all would be to get this implemented as an extra function of TuneLab itself, so if this takes off and Robert feels up to it, this would definitely be something to experiment with.

Take care all, I'll be back with the U3 aural evaluation tomorrow.
_________________________
Patrick Wingren, RPT

Senior Lecturer (jazz piano, composition, music theory, conducting) @ Novia University of Applied Sciences, Jakobstad, Finland
- - - -
Dedicated to learning the craft of tuning. Getting better.

Top
#1657830 - 04/10/11 06:49 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1723
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Thomas:

I like your idea, so let me explain your idea in my own words to make sure we are on the same page.

My original motivation for implementing this was to see if aural tuning instructions could be accurately simulated. This seems to be the case.

Now we can consider if the same results can also be obtained on an ETD without the somewhat cumbersome and very specific aural tuning methods which were after all designed for humans.

Starting with the temperament octave, the numbers I get by simulating the beat matching aural recipe are in practice indistinguishable from just using the offsets, as computed by Robert Scott for the average piano, or even Bill's zero IH numbers. Or we could have 3 sets of precomputed fixed offsets for concert grand, upright, and spinet.

Now if my understanding is correct the temperament extension to the midrange is designed by Bill with the goal of smoothing the beating narrow fifths in the temperament octave which would beat twice as fat in the octave above F3-F4. This must mean that the temperament moves a bit towards ET when you go up. Going down all beat rates slow down so there is really no reason to worry about the narrow fifths and any stretch scheme would suffice.

So instead of my complicated aural simulation method we can just gradually reduce the offsets from ET when we move up from F4 (your scheme is such a method). So we can just take the ET tuning produced by any ETD and apply the offsets which are now not the same in each octave.

I think this is what you have in mind Thomas, correct?

I like this approach much better than my own for practical purposes. It applies not just to EBVT but to any well-temperament if you are worried about having rapidly beating fifths in the upper midrange. And you would still have all the functionality of tunelab in hand to craft your own tuning curve, which I currently have taken over completely.

A simple general method would be to multiply each of the 12 offsets of the temperament octave by a factor t which deceases exponentially, I guess by about a factor 2 per octave up to keep the "bad" fifths from becoming too much. It can just stay 1 below F3.

Once Pat is happy with the tunings I produce now I can compute these sliding offsets and see if this method gets close enough.

Kees

Top
#1657908 - 04/10/11 09:38 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1723
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Re: implementation issues.

A web based program that reads a tunelab file and returns your EBVT custom file would certainly be the easiest to implement, but I'm not sure we can assume every tuner will have internet access on location. I'm thinking of for example Jeff who tunes in rural areas it seems (looking for a smiley for "tongue in cheek).

Regarding talking Robert Scott into implementing this in tunelab, if I were him I would not be interested as this takes away a lot of the nice functionality in tunelab to customize your own stretch curve. However if Thomas' approach can be made to work, the only extension would be an optional 88 note temperament file which then can be stretched in a customized fashion with the usual tunelab method.

Finally, taking into account the small market, we should not exclude the current implementation which is that people send me an email I send them back the EBVT offsets I compute.

Kees

Top
#1657913 - 04/10/11 09:49 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: DoelKees]
Thomas Dowell Offline
Full Member

Registered: 11/18/09
Posts: 122
Loc: Twin Lakes, WI
Originally Posted By: DoelKees

I like this approach much better than my own for practical purposes. It applies not just to EBVT but to any well-temperament if you are worried about having rapidly beating fifths in the upper midrange. And you would still have all the functionality of tunelab in hand to craft your own tuning curve, which I currently have taken over completely.

A simple general method would be to multiply each of the 12 offsets of the temperament octave by a factor t which deceases exponentially, I guess by about a factor 2 per octave up to keep the "bad" fifths from becoming too much. It can just stay 1 below F3.

Kees


I think you understand my concept well, but my 88 note offset file is a little more complicated than simply multiplying the EBVT III offsets for each octave. While this produces different sized octaves, it does not take into account the offsets of the notes below you are tuning from. Octaves would be different sized, but not in the way that Patrick and Bill size them.

When I examined the offsets that you generated, I thought that when I would compare it to an ET tuning, the offsets would follow a smooth curve. To the contrary, the offsets followed a sinusoidal (roughly) pattern, which ended up close to ET by the exterior octaves, but not as close as I would have thought.

As you can see, I have roughly imitated your overall stretch and ET offsets with this method, and it follows that same sinusoidal pattern that your's does. Now we just need to see if it works on real pianos, and I'll have time to test this out on real pianos. I'm not an expert, but I should be able to tell if I am actually creating the temperament, mindless octaves, and compromises between the fourth and the fifth, as Bill Bremmer and Patrick Wingren are skilled at.

For those who want to try this, here is the EBVT III 88 note offset that I created. Simply save these numbers as a .tun file, and add your inharmonicity measurements to match the rest to the piano. The numbers will appear as custom offsets that will be added to the tuning curve. To save the tuning, save it as a new file to preserve the template.


A0 6 0 0.08
A#0 6 0 0.61
B0 6 0 -1.12
C1 6 0 1.38
C#1 6 0 -1.11
D1 6 0 0.95
D#1 6 0 -0.19
E1 6 0 -0.88
F1 6 0 0.78
F#1 6 0 -1.09
G1 6 0 1.77
G#1 6 0 -0.56
A1 6 0 -0.51
A#1 6 0 1.13
B1 6 0 -1.12
C2 6 0 1.39
C#2 6 0 -1.72
D2 6 0 0.77
D#2 6 0 0.25
E2 6 0 -1.15
F2 4 0 1.03
F#2 4 0 -1.08
G2 4 0 2.01
G#2 4 0 -1.17
A2 4 0 -0.6
A#2 4 0 0.98
B2 4 0 -1.09
C3 4 0 1.72
C#3 4 0 -1.15
D3 4 0 -0.12
D#3 4 0 0.78
E3 4 0 -1.17
F3 2 0 0.58
F#3 2 0 -1.08
G3 2 0 1.82
G#3 2 0 0.02
A3 2 0 -0.91
A#3 2 0 1.48
B3 2 0 -1.07
C4 2 0 2.2
C#4 2 0 -2.35
D4 2 0 -0.29
D#4 2 0 0.47
E4 2 0 -1.39
F4 2 0 0.58
F#4 2 0 -1.08
G4 2 0 1.82
G#4 2 0 0.02
A4 1 0 -0.91
A#4 1 0 0.9
B4 1 0 -1.2
C5 1 0 1.48
C#5 1 0 -1.37
D5 1 0 0.43
D#5 1 0 0.38
E5 1 0 -1.16
F5 1 0 0.89
F#5 1 0 -1.08
G5 1 0 2.01
G#5 1 0 -1.17
A5 1 0 -0.6
A#5 1 0 0.98
B5 1 0 -1.23
C6 1 0 1.39
C#6 1 0 -1.72
D6 1 0 0.77
D#6 1 0 0.25
E6 1 0 -1.15
F6 1 0 0.29
F#6 1 0 -0.54
G6 1 0 0.91
G#6 1 0 0.01
A6 1 0 -0.46
A#6 1 0 0.64
B6 1 0 -1.18
C7 1 0 0.86
C#7 1 0 -1.22
D7 1 0 1.22
D#7 1 0 -0.39
E7 1 0 -0.88
F7 1 0 0.93
F#7 1 0 -1.15
G7 1 0 1.7
G#7 1 0 -1.44
A7 1 0 0.08
A#7 1 0 0.61
B7 1 0 -1.19
C8 1 0 0.84


Below is a link to the excel worksheet that I used to establish these offsets.
http://www.box.net/shared/mkng4dfh3q

You could change the numbers in the leftmost column, as I manually entered those in. The rest of the numbers should fill in automatically.

The last three columns are, from left to right:
Calculated offsets
Manually typed offsets (for pasting into other programs)
An Error check (should read zero if the calculated offsets equal the ones you typed in)

On the far right, it shows what the offsets would be if you treated these numbers as different temperament numbers for each octave.

I slightly changed the formulas for the octaves directly above and below the temperament, so that they would favor (in theory), the Fifth and Octave over the Fourth.

Please feel free to critique this method, and offer any opinions you might have.

Regards,
_________________________
Thomas Dowell, R.P.T.
Dowell Piano
www.dowellpiano.com

Top
#1657916 - 04/10/11 09:51 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: DoelKees]
Thomas Dowell Offline
Full Member

Registered: 11/18/09
Posts: 122
Loc: Twin Lakes, WI
Would I be breaking any laws if I simply shared the EBVT.tun file I created in this forum?
_________________________
Thomas Dowell, R.P.T.
Dowell Piano
www.dowellpiano.com

Top
#1657927 - 04/10/11 10:13 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: Thomas Dowell]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1723
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted By: Tdowel
Would I be breaking any laws if I simply shared the EBVT.tun file I created in this forum?

No.
Originally Posted By: Tdowel

I think you understand my concept well, but my 88 note offset file is a little more complicated than simply multiplying the EBVT III offsets for each octave. While this produces different sized octaves, it does not take into account the offsets of the notes below you are tuning from. Octaves would be different sized, but not in the way that Patrick and Bill size them.

I stand corrected. I actually tried what I proposed and it didn't work and I realized what you just wrote is the reason.

Can you formulate your method to apply to any WT?

I would suggest, if Pat is willing to put in the effort, to try your method aurally. If it works as well as my "brute force" algorithm it is much more practical, as you can still control the stretch in tunelab according to taste. You can just produce an ET tunelab file with your preferred stretch and add the offsets. I like it!

Kees

Top
#1657932 - 04/10/11 10:21 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
Thomas Dowell Offline
Full Member

Registered: 11/18/09
Posts: 122
Loc: Twin Lakes, WI
Okay! Here it is:
http://www.box.net/shared/z0dj6l0a8e

Open this tuning in Tune-lab, sample your notes like normal, and hold tight, because you are ready to try the EBVT III experience! (It probably won't be as fun as I tried to make that statement, but it should work smile. I'm excited by all this!).

I'll report back tomorrow when I try this on real pianos. I may try to record it, but don't cross your fingers...
_________________________
Thomas Dowell, R.P.T.
Dowell Piano
www.dowellpiano.com

Top
#1657934 - 04/10/11 10:27 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: DoelKees]
Thomas Dowell Offline
Full Member

Registered: 11/18/09
Posts: 122
Loc: Twin Lakes, WI
Originally Posted By: DoelKees
[

Can you formulate your method to apply to any WT?


Kees


If you use my Excel worksheet, just change the UT offsets in the far left column (column "C"), the rest should happen automatically. Then manually copy the calculated numbers (column "H") into column "I". Column "J" should read zero if you copied everything correctly (this is a simple error check, some may read at worst, +/- .01, depending on how Excel rounded numbers).

I would imagine it would work properly on any temperament. [Edit: As long as the offsets are fairly close to ET. I somehow remember Bill Bremmer writing that his method works as long as nothing goes beyond 5 cents of ET]


Edited by Tdowel (04/10/11 10:29 PM)
Edit Reason: Forgot to add a disclaimer]
_________________________
Thomas Dowell, R.P.T.
Dowell Piano
www.dowellpiano.com

Top
#1658017 - 04/11/11 01:57 AM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: Thomas Dowell]
Grandpianoman Offline
2000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/12/05
Posts: 2345
Loc: Portland, Oregon
Hi Thomas,

This is great...anxious to give this a try on my friend's Young Chang 6ft grand....question...how do I get .tun file into my Iphone Tunelab?

Top
#1658071 - 04/11/11 06:05 AM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
pppat Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/08
Posts: 1195
Loc: Jakobstad, Finland
Things are happening here! smile I will tune both temperaments (Kees' and Thoma's) tonight (which should be your early afternoon) on two different U3's in the same room. This will be most interesting. I'll record it on video and post it in this forum.
_________________________
Patrick Wingren, RPT

Senior Lecturer (jazz piano, composition, music theory, conducting) @ Novia University of Applied Sciences, Jakobstad, Finland
- - - -
Dedicated to learning the craft of tuning. Getting better.

Top
Page 5 of 9 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

Moderator:  Piano World 
What's Hot!!
HOW TO POST PICTURES on the Piano Forums
-------------------
Sharing is Caring!
About the Buttons
-------------------
Forums Rules & Help
-------------------
ADVERTISE
on Piano World

The world's most popular piano web site.
-------------------
PIANO BOOKS
Interesting books about the piano, pianists, piano history, biographies, memoirs and more!
(ad) HAILUN Pianos
Hailun Pianos - Click for More
ad (Casio)
Celviano by Casio Rebate
Ad (Seiler/Knabe)
Seiler Pianos
Sheet Music
(PW is an affiliate)
Sheet Music Plus Featured Sale
(125ad) Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
(ad) Lindeblad Piano
Lindeblad Piano Restoration
New Topics - Multiple Forums
Digital piano key noise
by bigsmile
09/21/14 03:15 AM
Hans von Bulow's piano
by phantomFive
09/21/14 01:57 AM
Rubinstein teaching style
by phantomFive
09/21/14 01:52 AM
Question regarding "technique"
by Francisco Scalco
09/21/14 12:29 AM
How about this Knabe Studio Piano?
by Paul678
09/20/14 11:49 PM
Who's Online
57 registered (bennevis, AliAlkhiro, 36251, beeboss, AZ_Astro, aesop, 12 invisible), 896 Guests and 18 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
76260 Members
42 Forums
157662 Topics
2315773 Posts

Max Online: 15252 @ 03/21/10 11:39 PM
(ads by Google)

Visit our online store for gifts for music lovers

 
Help keep the forums up and running with a donation, any amount is appreciated!
Or by becoming a Subscribing member! Thank-you.
Donate   Subscribe
 
Our Piano Related Classified Ads
|
Dealers | Tuners | Lessons | Movers | Restorations | Pianos For Sale | Sell Your Piano |

Advertise on Piano World
| Subscribe | Piano World | PianoSupplies.com | Advertise on Piano World | Donate | Link to Us | Classifieds |
| |Contact | Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter | Press Room |


copyright 1997 - 2014 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission