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 8 of 9 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >
Topic Options
#1660874 - 04/15/11 07:19 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: Thomas Dowell

I'll try your approach for manually adjusting the curve the next chance I get. Your goal is to have wide 12ths in the last octave?


Yes, exactly. I think I can speak for both Bill and myself regarding this - we go for a balance between 4:1 and 3:1 up from F5, then stretch the tuning in the high treble.

I used TuneLab's nice feature of displaying an additional interval beneath the tuning curve. Here, 3:1's are drawn in blue. This is the graph for your numbers for the Y C2, applied to a TL curve with 8:4 bass / 3:1 treble:



... and here is what I ended up using in that session (8:4 bass / 8:1 treble):



When I checked the tuning the day before, where i used 8:4 bass and 8:2 treble, and of which Bill highly approved, you can see the same thing happening at about C7:

_________________________
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
(ad PTG 568) Grand Action Regulation in 37 Steps
Grand Action Regulation in 37 Steps
#1660885 - 04/15/11 07:48 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
Well, I didn't get to see all of your video, because for some reason my computer wouldn't download past you checking the double octaves around F5. Here are my thoughts from listening to your video:
I felt that notes A4 to D5, all were slightly flat of where I would think they would go, I agreed that D#5 was fine, and that E5 had to go up. The temperament sounded fine, and I agreed with your aural adjustments of the area below the temperament.

Here are my newest creations, first EBVTIII2.0(which I just realized did not upload correctly in a previous post), which corrects D5 to 2.1 cents above the curve, and the adjustments that caused in the rest of the tuning in the treble.

Then, what I call EBVTIII2,1, which tries a different formula for the area directly above the temperament, ignoring the fourth, and focusing only on the octave and fifth. I also realized that I had erroneously used a formula in the bass that tried to used mindless octaves with the 15th and 11th, not the 15th and 12th. This makes some subtle, but no doubt noticeable changes to the bass tuning below A2. I'll be able to try both of these .tun files on Monday, and will try to record the results.

Here they are:
EBVTIII2.0---> http://www.box.net/shared/4rvcyudz8k
EBVTIII2,1---> http://www.box.net/shared/r42pfseqaf

Try them if you want to, but beware they have no field testing to back them up yet.

Have fun!

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

Top
#1660889 - 04/15/11 07:50 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 just saw your latest post Patrick, Thank you for that information! I'll try that the next time I tune with these numbers.

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

Top
#1660911 - 04/15/11 08:45 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: Thomas Dowell

Then, what I call EBVTIII2,1, which tries a different formula for the area directly above the temperament, ignoring the fourth, and focusing only on the octave and fifth.


Cool, that might be the solution to get overall numbers that work in that area! As of now, it feels like the large stretch (8:4/8:2) took well care of it, but that less stretch introduced a bit of twangy fifths again.

What ever happened in the lucky combination of your numbers, the Yamaha C3's inharmonicity and the use of 8:4/8:2's is what we have to try to get happening consistently. Bill stating that it is just the way he intend the piano to sound is our guiding star here. I think this new approach of yours will be interesting to try out i that respect, as I have a feeling it will take care of the area just above the temperament rather nicely on smaller pianos too.
_________________________
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
#1660930 - 04/15/11 09:35 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1701
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Pat:

How come the bad octave D4D5 and/or 4th A4D4 will be fixed once the unisons come in, but a bad 5th G4D5 is not?

Second, at the break (say at C#3/D3) the IH jumps up from
0.24 (C#3) to 0.46 (D3) on my piano. An ih model curve that ignores this break will therefore underestimate the IH for the notes just above the break and hence placed them higher than they should (as it thinks the partials are lower than they are). So I think a split-scale model would fix that.

Can you try it with a split scale model on your next experiment? BTW I reverted back to a 4th/5th tuning for C3-E3, aiming for a 2:1 beat ratio instead of a 4:3. From B2 down to F2 I gradually fade out the contribution of the 4th.

Cheers,
Kees

Top
#1661012 - 04/16/11 01:08 AM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: Thomas Dowell]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1701
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted By: Thomas Dowell
Well, I didn't get to see all of your video, because for some reason my computer wouldn't download past you checking the double octaves around F5. Here are my thoughts from listening to your video:
I felt that notes A4 to D5, all were slightly flat of where I would think they would go, I agreed that D#5 was fine, and that E5 had to go up. The temperament sounded fine, and I agreed with your aural adjustments of the area below the temperament.

Here are my newest creations, first EBVTIII2.0(which I just realized did not upload correctly in a previous post), which corrects D5 to 2.1 cents above the curve, and the adjustments that caused in the rest of the tuning in the treble.

Then, what I call EBVTIII2,1, which tries a different formula for the area directly above the temperament, ignoring the fourth, and focusing only on the octave and fifth. I also realized that I had erroneously used a formula in the bass that tried to used mindless octaves with the 15th and 11th, not the 15th and 12th. This makes some subtle, but no doubt noticeable changes to the bass tuning below A2. I'll be able to try both of these .tun files on Monday, and will try to record the results.

Here they are:
EBVTIII2.0---> http://www.box.net/shared/4rvcyudz8k
EBVTIII2,1---> http://www.box.net/shared/r42pfseqaf

Try them if you want to, but beware they have no field testing to back them up yet.

Have fun!

Regards,

I must say I have some reservations about adjusting the parameters in a theoretically unmotivated way just to fit the aural tuning. We might as well just measure the offsets from an aural tuning and be done with.

I'm convinced that this approach (adjusting the parameters in a theoretically unmotivated way) will produce a superb EBVT tuning, but once we got it nailed down we won't know why it works, and it will probably work only for EBVT3. And I'm not convinced Bill will not come up with EBVT4 at some point, not to mention Neidhardt and Sorge.

My interest in this thread is more to see if complex aural tuning criteria can be simulated and translated into an ETD implementation.

Just my position on this,keeping an open mind as always smile

Kees

Top
#1661224 - 04/16/11 12:28 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 must say I have some reservations about adjusting the parameters in a theoretically unmotivated way just to fit the aural tuning. We might as well just measure the offsets from an aural tuning and be done with.

I'm convinced that this approach (adjusting the parameters in a theoretically unmotivated way) will produce a superb EBVT tuning, but once we got it nailed down we won't know why it works, and it will probably work only for EBVT3. And I'm not convinced Bill will not come up with EBVT4 at some point, not to mention Neidhardt and Sorge.

My interest in this thread is more to see if complex aural tuning criteria can be simulated and translated into an ETD implementation.

Just my position on this,keeping an open mind as always smile

Kees



Well, I wouldn't say my formula's are "theoretically unmotivated" grin . My latest custom offsets are based solidly on how I personally tune aurally, and my understanding of tuning math.

I've had more time to think about what is right and what is wrong with my approach. For example, I thought that I could simply use the UT offsets like I could actual frequencies, but am starting to understand that limitation.

For example, if note C4 is offset 3 cents flat, F4 is two cents sharp, and G4 has no offset, consider the possibilities of C5 (I just picked these numbers out of the air):

If C5 is tuned at -3 from the curve, this will result in an ET octave (slightly stretched).

If C5 is tune +2 cents, it will result in an ET fifth, about 2 cents narrow.

If C5 is tuned at 0 cents, it will result in an ET fourth, about 2 cents wide.

By averaging these numbers, I came to the compromise where everything is trying to equalize based on ET, not on pure intervals. This might explain why such a great amount of stretch is needed to make the intervals work well on actual pianos.

So, I needed to compromise based on pure intervals. Since
(C4*.333+(F4+2)*.333+(G4-2)*.333)is the same as (C4*.33+F4*.333+G4*.333), I realized that the fourth and the fifth cancel out each other. So, since the 5th is the most important interval, I used the formula, (for example, on C5) of (C4*.45+(F4+2)*.55). I used the 45%/55% numbers because they effectively raised the the notes from A4 to E5, to where I would expect them aurally on the pianos I've tuned, and based on listening to Patrick's tunings as well. They give nearly identical treatment to the ET octave, and pure 5th, but little more to the pure fifth. I am learning a great deal about how EBVT III should be tuned from this, as well as the how much beating can be tolerated in the 4ths and octaves. I am basing these numbers on

All of this does bring light and insight toward your approach, which produces similar results as mine. Our approaches yielded such similar results, that errors seen in my approach my point to ways to improve your formula's. For example, since my approach with a 6:3/4:1 tuning was nearly identical to yours, the fact that this tuning tended to leave notes a little flat, may point to an area to improve your formulas (or is that formualae? bah) I see your approach as the pinnacle, one that could be fully achieved by a product like Verituner, which samples enough information, that your formula's would create a very, very well tuned piano. Keep up the good work.

For now, I only have experience in Tunelab, and little bit with the SAT III. I wouldn't worry too much about errors around the break, as this is simply a weak spot with Tunelab, and probably any other ETD. They will all need some aural tweaking in that area. I always aurally check those octaves across the break when doing actual tuning, unless I'm in a big rush (tuning several practice room pianos in a short time...)

So, there's my "theoretical motivation" if you will.

Regards, as always with the deepest respect,



Edited by Thomas Dowell (04/16/11 12:30 PM)
_________________________
Thomas Dowell, R.P.T.
Dowell Piano
www.dowellpiano.com

Top
#1661240 - 04/16/11 12:54 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
Bill Bremmer RPT Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/21/02
Posts: 3191
Loc: Madison, WI USA
Kees,

From the very beginning of ETD development, people have been trying to replicate what aural tuners actually do and have had difficulty making sense of it. So, that would be nothing new. My tuning of the high treble and low bass of any piano is based upon the actual inharmonicity that a piano actually has. It is never pulled out of thin air.

If I want a rather conservative amount of stretch in the high treble (which is not often), I can simply compare double octaves and octave-fifths all the way to the top. If I want more stretch, I can use 6:1 octaves beginning on or about F6, 8:1 octaves beginning on or about C7 and pure triple octave-fifths (whatever ratio that is) from F7 to C8.

Whichever choice is made, there is a rational and justification for it, not just an arbitrary placement of those highest pitches. I use my ETD in the Direct Interval mode to find those values, so blame the piano's inharmonicity, not any sense of melodic value or anything else that could be considered illogical and without foundation.

I've said this before: There will be no EBVT IV! If I want a milder temperament, I can use the Ultra Mild Well Temperament which I designed about a year ago. I can also use the 1/9 Comma Meantone.

If I want an 18th Century style WT, I can use the same sequence that I use for the EBVT but begin with four equally beating intervals at 4 beats per second. It could be called the "EBWT-18", that is, an Equal Beating 18th Century [style] Well Temperament.

The same idea may be possible with four equally beating intervals at 5 beats per second but I have never tried that or pursued it. It might create an early 19th Century style WT but even if it did, it would not constitute another modification of the original EBVT. There is just something about 5 beats per second that I don't think would be very appealing.

Any further adjustments to the EBVT-III would only upset the harmonic balance, so it is literally not possible to create yet another version of it.
_________________________
Bill Bremmer RPT
Madison WI USA
www.billbremmer.com

Top
#1661339 - 04/16/11 03:42 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
And I have to be diplomatic, slightly lame but truthful and declare that I agree with all of you grin

Like I wrote earlier, I thing both paths are needed.

I tuned a Yamaha G2 today. I tried your 2.1, Thomas, but I didn't get decent tuning curves in TuneLab. I checked the start of the extension upwards, but at least with 8:4/3:1's (with a "lifted" high treble like I spoke in favor of yesterday), the 4ths seemed quite twangy early on.

Because I was under a time restraint and had scheduled for a hammer filing after the tuning, I jumped back to your "old" numbers, did aural adjusting, and recorded my changes. I think it would be a good task for me to keep on trying it on different instruments, get back with my findings, and let you guys look for a pattern.

The Yamaha G2 is no easy instrument to tune. It is quite different from a C2, it has more of a U3 feel to it (as in stretch tolerance). On both the U3 and the G2, you'd have to fight to keep a stretch with narrow 12ths (I don't know why, this is just something I notice from my aural tuning measurements).

Anyways, here is the tuning graph for the G2. Black dots are 8:4 bass, 3:1 treble, blues are 3:1 bass, 4:1 treble:




Here are the default TL/Tdowel numbers:

Template 1.4132205 14.1969 0.9341922 10.9095
IntervalSel 2 7
IHCon C1 0.481
IHCon C2 0.117
IHCon C3 0.277
IHCon C4 0.427
IHCon C5 0.984
IHCon C6 2.216
BasicOffset 0.00
A0 6 -22.5 0.08
A#0 6 -20.1 0.61
B0 6 -20.2 -1.12
C1 6 -16.1 1.38
C#1 6 -17.1 -1.11
D1 6 -13.7 0.95
D#1 6 -13.6 -0.19
E1 6 -13.2 -0.88
F1 6 -10.5 0.78
F#1 6 -11.4 -1.09
G1 6 -7.7 1.77
G#1 6 -9.2 -0.56
A1 6 -8.3 -0.51
A#1 6 -6.0 1.13
B1 6 -7.5 -1.12
C2 6 -4.4 1.39
C#2 6 -6.9 -1.72
D2 6 -3.8 0.77
D#2 6 -3.8 0.25
E2 6 -4.7 -1.15
F2 4 -4.4 1.03
F#2 4 -6.0 -1.08
G2 4 -2.4 2.01
G#2 4 -5.1 -1.17
A2 4 -4.1 -0.60
A#2 4 -2.1 0.98
B2 4 -3.7 -1.09
C3 4 -0.5 1.72
C#3 4 -3.0 -1.15
D3 4 -1.6 -0.12
D#3 4 -0.3 0.78
E3 4 -1.8 -1.17
F3 2 -1.9 0.58
F#3 2 -3.3 -1.08
G3 2 -0.1 1.82
G#3 2 -1.6 0.02
A3 2 -2.3 -0.91
A#3 2 0.3 1.48
B3 2 -2.0 -1.07
C4 2 1.6 2.20
C#4 2 -2.7 -2.35
D4 2 -0.4 -0.29
D#4 2 0.7 0.47
E4 2 -0.9 -1.39
F4 2 1.4 0.58
F#4 2 0.0 -1.08
G4 2 3.3 1.82
G#4 2 1.8 0.02
A4 1 -0.9 -0.91
A#4 1 1.1 0.90
B4 1 -0.7 -1.20
C5 1 2.2 1.48
C#5 1 -0.4 -1.37
D5 1 1.6 0.43
D#5 1 1.9 0.38
E5 1 0.6 -1.16
F5 1 3.0 0.89
F#5 1 1.4 -1.08
G5 1 4.8 2.01
G#5 1 2.0 -1.17
A5 1 3.0 -0.60
A#5 1 5.0 0.98
B5 1 3.3 -1.23
C6 1 6.4 1.39
C#6 1 3.8 -1.72
D6 1 6.9 0.77
D#6 1 7.0 0.25
E6 1 6.2 -1.15
F6 1 8.3 0.29
F#6 1 8.3 -0.54
G6 1 10.5 0.91
G#6 1 10.5 0.01
A6 1 10.9 -0.46
A#6 1 13.0 0.64
B6 1 12.2 -1.18
C7 1 15.4 0.86
C#7 1 14.6 -1.22
D7 1 18.3 1.22
D#7 1 18.1 -0.39
E7 1 19.1 -0.88
F7 1 22.5 0.93
F#7 1 22.2 -1.15
G7 1 26.9 1.70
G#7 1 25.7 -1.44
A7 1 29.4 0.08
A#7 1 32.2 0.61
B7 1 32.9 -1.19
C8 1 37.5 0.84

------------------------

... and here are my adjustments (marked in bold):

Template 1.4132205 14.1969 0.9341922 10.9095
IntervalSel 2 7
IHCon C1 0.481
IHCon C2 0.117
IHCon C3 0.277
IHCon C4 0.427
IHCon C5 0.984
IHCon C6 2.216
BasicOffset 8.76
A0 6 -22.5 0.08
A#0 6 -20.1 0.61
B0 6 -20.2 -1.12
C1 6 -16.1 1.38
C#1 6 -17.1 -1.11
D1 6 -13.7 0.95
D#1 6 -13.6 -0.19
E1 6 -13.2 -0.88
F1 6 -10.5 0.78
F#1 6 -11.4 -1.09
G1 6 -7.7 1.77
G#1 6 -9.2 -0.56
A1 6 -8.3 -0.51
A#1 6 -6.0 1.13
B1 6 -7.5 -1.12
C2 6 -4.4 1.39
C#2 6 -6.9 -1.72
D2 6 -3.8 0.77
D#2 6 -3.8 0.25
E2 6 -4.7 -1.15
F2 4 -4.4 1.03
F#2 4 -6.0 -1.08
G2 4 -2.4 2.01
G#2 4 -5.1 -1.17
A2 4 -4.1 -0.60
A#2 4 -2.1 0.98
B2 4 -3.9 -1.27
C3 4 -1.5 0.70
C#3 4 -3.0 -1.15
D3 4 -1.6 -0.12
D#3 4 -0.3 0.78
E3 4 -1.8 -1.17
F3 2 -1.9 0.58
F#3 2 -3.3 -1.08
G3 2 -0.1 1.82
G#3 2 -1.6 0.02
A3 2 -2.3 -0.91
A#3 2 0.3 1.48
B3 2 -2.0 -1.07
C4 2 1.6 2.20
C#4 2 -2.7 -2.35
D4 2 -0.4 -0.29
D#4 2 0.7 0.47
E4 2 -0.9 -1.39
F4 2 1.4 0.58
F#4 2 -0.7 -1.85
G4 2 3.3 1.82
G#4 2 1.8 0.02
A4 1 -0.9 -0.91
A#4 1 1.5 1.32
B4 1 0.6 0.12
C5 1 2.2 1.48
C#5 1 0.4 -0.57
D5 1 1.6 0.43
D#5 1 1.9 0.38
E5 1 2.1 0.35
F5 1 3.0 0.89
F#5 1 1.4 -1.08
G5 1 4.8 2.01
G#5 1 2.0 -1.17
A5 1 3.0 -0.60
A#5 1 5.0 0.98
B5 1 3.3 -1.23
C6 1 6.4 1.39
C#6 1 3.8 -1.72
D6 1 6.9 0.77
D#6 1 7.0 0.25
E6 1 6.2 -1.15
F6 1 8.3 0.29
F#6 1 8.3 -0.54
G6 1 10.5 0.91
G#6 1 10.5 0.01
A6 1 10.9 -0.46
A#6 1 13.0 0.64
B6 1 12.2 -1.18
C7 1 15.4 0.86
C#7 1 14.6 -1.22
D7 1 18.3 1.22
D#7 1 18.1 -0.39
E7 1 19.1 -0.88
F7 1 22.5 0.93
F#7 1 22.2 -1.15
G7 1 26.9 1.70
G#7 1 25.7 -1.44
A7 1 29.4 0.08
A#7 1 32.2 0.61
B7 1 32.9 -1.19
C8 1 37.5 0.84

-----------------------
_________________________
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
#1661344 - 04/16/11 03:46 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
@Thomas: Is it possible that

1) F#4 might be a bit sharp,
2) C#4 and E4 might be a bit flat?

Of course aural tuning is going to live its own life to some extent, but I'm trying to nail down consistent findings.
_________________________
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
#1661345 - 04/16/11 03:48 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: Thanks for the TL files. I could try both split-scale and "normal" mode with your numbers next thing.
_________________________
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
#1661401 - 04/16/11 05:24 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: Bill Bremmer RPT]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1701
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Bill: My point was just that I'd a like a stretch method that will work for any WT. Personally I use Neidhardt 2, Young 2, Bach-Lehman-reversed and Werckmeister 3 as well as my home grown ones.

Thomas, thanks for the clarification. I think if we get the weigths of various intervals the same my calculation and yours should be exactly identical if I computed with a zero inharmonicity piano. And if IH turns out not to matter in these offsets your calculation is much simpler and more transparant.
If we were to make a small bet I'd put my money on Thomas' method.

Kees

Top
#1661434 - 04/16/11 06:28 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
Patrick: The first thing I looked for, and was surprised to see was that no aural tweaking of D5 was needed, it seems. For this particular piano, was that he case?
_________________________
Thomas Dowell, R.P.T.
Dowell Piano
www.dowellpiano.com

Top
#1661603 - 04/17/11 12:26 AM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: Bill Bremmer RPT]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1701
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted By: Bill Bremmer RPT
If I want an 18th Century style WT, I can use the same sequence that I use for the EBVT but begin with four equally beating intervals at 4 beats per second. It could be called the "EBWT-18", that is, an Equal Beating 18th Century [style] Well Temperament.

I tried that today in practice and it sounds very nice indeed.
Theoretically it does not fit within any of the historical WT schemes as all the fifths are of different sizes, but it seems very close to the temperament that is used in the Thomas Church in Leipzig on the Bach organ. That temperament was designed using all historical information to be closest to what Bach probably used. It has only one Pythagorean third on C#, whereas EBWT-18 has 2, on G# and C#.

Very interesting!

Kees

Top
#1661806 - 04/17/11 01:53 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: Thomas Dowell
Patrick: The first thing I looked for, and was surprised to see was that no aural tweaking of D5 was needed, it seems. For this particular piano, was that he case?
Originally Posted By: Thomas Dowell
Patrick: The first thing I looked for, and was surprised to see was that no aural tweaking of D5 was needed, it seems. For this particular piano, was that he case?


Oddly enough, yes... it is possible that it might be this specific piano, or the scaling. I'd also leave the benefit of a doubt towards my accurateness. If D4 was just a little on the low side, and D5 slightly sharp, it would exlain some of it.I will research it a little, as my own piano is a Yamaha G2. I'll try the numbers on that as soon as I find the time for it!
_________________________
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
#1662618 - 04/18/11 11:30 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 tried the EBVTIII 2,1 numbers this evening on a brand new Knabe grand, 6'4". I made a recording, but it didn't turn out very well. To set the ET tuning curve, I set the tuning for 8:4/8:2, and then manually adjusted the mid treble stretch until the twelfths went wide of pure at C7.

Here are my thoughts on it:

These numbers did lead to very nice sounding octaves and fifths, but the fourths were pretty active going up from the temperament. To those who have more experience aurally tuning EBVT III, how much movement can there be in the fourths before it becomes an issue? Some of the fourths were as active as the A4-D5 fourth when correctly placed.

The overall sound seemed to be very nice, and I think I got something that you could call a pipe organ effect in the key of C, but I'm not sure I've ever really heard that, or could pick it out easily anyway.

If anyone else has tried the 2,1 numbers, please let me know how they went.

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

Top
#1664301 - 04/21/11 05:00 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
Thomas,

sorry that I didn't write earlier - been busy over here. I had the same feeling about the 2.1, that is, the 4ths seemed a bit busier than I tune aurally. Now, this would mainly be about the initial fourths, when you get up to about A4-D5 I feel it becomes less of an issue.

I have a theory that is just based on empirical research. I've used your original numbers quite a few more times during the week, and what seemed to be random at first boils down to this: I believe that you'd have to be prepared to adjust notes aurally across both breaks - both the tenor and the treble break!

On a Kawai grand, the plain strings above the tenor break were fine, but then I had to adjust their corresponding lower notes forming the fifths (just beneath the break). Then again, on many pianos the last few notes before the treble break seem to need a bit more stretched corresponding higher notes (in the 5ths). That phenomenon viewed from the other side (the last notes before the treble break "taking off" a bit) could possibly be why D5 worked on the Yamaha G2, which has the treble break at D5/D#5. It seems like there are deviations regarding inharmonicity at the treble break, too.

Does this make sense?

Kees,

regarding beats (4ths/5ths/8ths) being less offensive with all strings pulled in, I think it might at least to some extent have to do with the way I tune unisons. When I tune L/R strings to the center strings, I approach them from above and basically never go below the center string.

Alfredo had a great description of this kind of unison tuning, he spoke about "putting smileys on the unison". Isaac wrote about "projecting the tone into the room". It gives an airy feeling to the tone, and seems to disguise even a quite daring stretch of the perfect intervals.


Edited by pppat (04/21/11 05:15 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
#1664995 - 04/22/11 05:01 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 guess the final limit will always be the inharmonicity model we are using to tune the piano from. I would expect that many pianos have a iH jump or change at the treble break, especially if they don't "dogleg" enough (that may not be the proper word...), in other words, there is a significant difference in speaking lengths on each side of the break. Perhaps the requirements of EBVT III expose errors in the iH model, as the requirements are quite specific.

I wonder how Tunelab reacts when more than six measurements are taken in? If you were to measure iH on each side of each break, would that yield a more accurate measurement, or does the program average out the extra numbers? If Mr. Scott is reading this, perhaps he might chime in. I've noticed that the sample tunings that come with Tune lab can have more than 6 measurements. Or perhaps if Kees knows, he could answer.

I realize that the actual formula used to calculate the iH model is probably very valuable, so I'm not asking for specifics, just a basic idea.

I'll change EBVTIII 2,1, so that it there is an equal compromise between an ET octave and pure fifth. That might calm down some of the fourths above the temperament. Perhaps I will have to add the fourths back into the equation again.

Regards,


Edited by Thomas Dowell (04/22/11 06:45 PM)
Edit Reason: Spelling
_________________________
Thomas Dowell, R.P.T.
Dowell Piano
www.dowellpiano.com

Top
#1665023 - 04/22/11 05:39 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: Thomas Dowell
.
I wonder how Tunelab reacts when more than six measurements are taken in? If you were to measure iH on each side of each break, would that yield a more accurate measurement, or does the program average out the extra numbers? If Mr. Scott is reading this, perhaps he might chime in. I've noticed that the sample tunings that come with Tune lab can have more than 6 measurements. Or perhaps is Kees knows, he could answer.

This would certainly be most interesting to know smile
_________________________
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
#1665105 - 04/22/11 08:17 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: Thomas Dowell]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1701
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted By: Thomas Dowell
I wonder how Tunelab reacts when more than six measurements are taken in? If you were to measure iH on each side of each break, would that yield a more accurate measurement, or does the program average out the extra numbers? If Mr. Scott is reading this, perhaps he might chime in. I've noticed that the sample tunings that come with Tune lab can have more than 6 measurements. Or perhaps if Kees knows, he could answer.

I realize that the actual formula used to calculate the iH model is probably very valuable, so I'm not asking for specifics, just a basic idea.

A smooth curve is fitted to the ih data, so taking more measurements does not help. The IH curve is a sum of two exponential functions, as is the tuning curve.

Kees


Edited by DoelKees (04/22/11 08:18 PM)

Top
#1665170 - 04/23/11 12:09 AM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1701
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Pat: I think we're losing focus a bit here. Which offsets work better, mine or Thomas'? Do they have the same problems across the 2 breaks?

Kees

Top
#1665562 - 04/23/11 09:49 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: DoelKees]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1701
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
I have full ih data for only two pianos, plotted below with the smooth ih fit. I see a clear possibility to improve across the tenor break with a split scale curve, but nothing that suggests itself at any other breaks.

Even what happens at the tenor break is very messy.

In the past I tried to use the ih for every note in that region to compute just a 6:3 octave tuning and the results were worse than just ignoring the break electronically. Perhaps the ih model per note also breaks down there. Should be easy to figure out. Tunelab's ih model per note is documented in the help menu.


Estonia 190

Heintzmann upright 1901

Kees

Top
#1665564 - 04/23/11 09:55 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
Interesting, I didn't realize that the program included that information in the help file.
_________________________
Thomas Dowell, R.P.T.
Dowell Piano
www.dowellpiano.com

Top
#1665568 - 04/23/11 10:02 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
How much accuracy is needed to properly execute your program Kees? Would a iH model within .1 of the actual iH be sufficient, or higher? Ideally, the end accuracy should be about 1/4 of a cent, the reasonable edge of human hearing on many pianos. Could we possibly set up a more detailed iH model, by measuring four notes within each section? Your program doesn't rely on Tunelab's stock iH model, but could adapt to the higher accuracy needed for a well temperament.

I will try the pianos you privately sent me, and give some feedback on either Monday night or Tuesday evening. If you want, I can sample all the notes, or do the pattern I described above, and we all could compare the results.
_________________________
Thomas Dowell, R.P.T.
Dowell Piano
www.dowellpiano.com

Top
#1665572 - 04/23/11 10:26 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
smile you two please carry on... and please throw any aural verification stuff my way.

Like I said earlier, the breaks seem to be throwing us off.

Kees: Haven't had any chance of checking your numbers, but soon i will (tuesday).
_________________________
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
#1665573 - 04/23/11 10:30 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
Another thing that went through my mind...

Perhaps we should change the partials being used to tune certain areas? Obviously, one would still use the fundamental for the highest notes, but Tune lab defaults to the second partial for the temperament, and fourth partial for the octave below. Perhaps using the third partial all the way up to at least A4. This would set one half of both the fifth (3:2) and fourth (4:3), and would lend itself perhaps to more consistency between the temperament and the area just below.

On the same thought, maybe using a higher partial above A4 as well might help directly above the temperament, as the aural method doesn't really employ the fundamental until F5, the switch to mindless octaves.

Just a thought.

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

Top
#1665574 - 04/23/11 10:31 PM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: Thomas Dowell]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1701
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted By: Thomas Dowell
How much accuracy is needed to properly execute your program Kees? Would a iH model within .1 of the actual iH be sufficient, or higher? Ideally, the end accuracy should be about 1/4 of a cent, the reasonable edge of human hearing on many pianos. Could we possibly set up a more detailed iH model, by measuring four notes within each section? Your program doesn't rely on Tunelab's stock iH model, but could adapt to the higher accuracy needed for a well temperament.

I will try the pianos you privately sent me, and give some feedback on either Monday night or Tuesday evening. If you want, I can sample all the notes, or do the pattern I described above, and we all could compare the results.


My experience is if you use the raw ih data per note, rather than fitting a smooth curve through it the results of a computed tuning based on that are terrible. My guess is that the ih model per note is quite rough (in reality the partials do not form a pattern that can be captured with a 1 parameter model) but if you combine it with smoothing the ih data the errors more or less average out, just as in aural tuning you'd compromise on a weird string.

As far as I know the Verituner is the only device that just measures the partial positions for each note, not trying to fit them into a 1 parameter model) but I don't have one, and its design does not encourage hacking into it if you know what I mean.

Of course if you have all the partials for two notes, trying to tune one to the other, you have to decide what to do with them. Tuning aurally you compromise on what sounds best. Such esthetic value judgments would be very hard to encode. Of course an aural tuner would then also check other intervals.

I'm not sure how far ETD tuning can be pushed beyond where it is now. Interesting topic though!

Kees

Top
#1665593 - 04/23/11 11:35 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: Thomas Dowell
Another thing that went through my mind...

Perhaps we should change the partials being used to tune certain areas? Obviously, one would still use the fundamental for the highest notes, but Tune lab defaults to the second partial for the temperament, and fourth partial for the octave below. Perhaps using the third partial all the way up to at least A4. This would set one half of both the fifth (3:2) and fourth (4:3), and would lend itself perhaps to more consistency between the temperament and the area just below.

On the same thought, maybe using a higher partial above A4 as well might help directly above the temperament, as the aural method doesn't really employ the fundamental until F5, the switch to mindless octaves.

Just a thought.

Regards!

Thomas, I'd be eager to try that! Could you make a .tun file where you utilize the 3rd partial a bit more?
_________________________
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
#1665601 - 04/24/11 12:00 AM Re: Possible EBVT III implementation on TuneLab [Re: pppat]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1701
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted By: pppat

Thomas, I'd be eager to try that! Could you make a .tun file where you utilize the 3rd partial a bit more?

The offsets will be identical.

Kees

Top
#1665796 - 04/24/11 01:29 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
Yes, as Kees said, my numbers take no account of iH, so the numbers can't change. Simply change the default partial selection of your tuning file. There should be an option to "Edit Partials" or "Edit Table of Partials". Any of the notes can be tuned at different partials, but Tunelab won't automatically select the second partial above C7, though you can manually change to nearly any practical partial.
_________________________
Thomas Dowell, R.P.T.
Dowell Piano
www.dowellpiano.com

Top
Page 8 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.
(ad) HAILUN Pianos
Hailun Pianos - Click for More
Ad (Seiler/Knabe)
Knabe 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
Who's Online
60 registered (aesop, beeboss, accordeur, AndrewJCW, 17 invisible), 1065 Guests and 23 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
75908 Members
42 Forums
156882 Topics
2305129 Posts

Max Online: 15252 @ 03/21/10 11:39 PM
New Topics - Multiple Forums
What kind of fingering should I be using for these phrases?
by Jormungandr
Today at 03:04 AM
Mason & Hamlin BB Long distance purchase a few questions
by bigun
Today at 02:26 AM
MY NEW PIANO
by Jvmvidela
Today at 02:14 AM
Here's a Paranoid Question:
by Paul678
Today at 01:19 AM
Are you must always make A4= 440?
by Maximillyan
Today at 12:55 AM
(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