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
(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 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Topic Options
#2010953 - 01/08/13 01:52 AM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
Mark Cerisano, RPT Online   content
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/24/10
Posts: 1400
Loc: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
I just listened again. The F5 is flat. M3>M10. But the rest still stands. It's not the right piano to show this stuff on.
_________________________
Mark Cerisano, RPT
www.howtotunepianos.com

Top
(ad PTG 568) Grand Action Regulation in 37 Steps
Grand Action Regulation in 37 Steps
#2010959 - 01/08/13 02:43 AM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
Mark Davis Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 04/10/08
Posts: 658
Originally Posted By: Mark Cerisano, RPT
Mark, I do not like the tone of your posts. They are verging on an attack of my personality and I believe that is against the forum rules.

My reason for continuing these posts is to prove "my superior 4:2+ octaves" But, they are not just mine. Read what you posted by Bill Bremmer:

Originally Posted By: Mark Davis quoting Bill Bremmer

In other words, the test for a 4:2 octave should reveal a slightly faster F3-A4 M10 than F3-A3 M3 and the test for a 6:3 octave should reveal a slightly slower C4-A4 M6 than A3-C4 m3. When you have found the spot for A3 which reveals this slight discrepancy between the 4:2 and 6:3 tests, you will hear that the A3-A4 octave has a very slow beat to it, about one beat in every two seconds. This is now considered the optimum width for the initial A3-A4 octave in Equal Temperament and what is used by
most CTE’s to set up the Master Tuning for the Tuning Exam.


That's the 4:2+.

So, if you want to know why it is superior, keep reading the posts. Otherwise, stop attacking me please.


Mark, firstly, the problem is this, you are stating your opinion, and maybe some others too with regard to the “superiority” of the 4:2+ octave. That’s fine. I do not have to agree?

The reason I re-posted Ryans quote is to show just this, that there are differing views on the optimal octave size, and I would go further and say that this is probably because of personal preference (like you) and the pianos preference (the piano will not sound good apart from what is dictating)!?

I agree with what Bill Bremmer says but not entirely, as I have stated throughout this thread with regards to what I know and practice. I do not have to agree with everything Bill says either?

Originally Posted By: Mark Cerisano, RPT
My reason for continuing these posts is to prove "my superior 4:2+ octaves" But, they are not just mine. Read what you posted by Bill Bremmer: .


Yes, this is what you’re all about and you have said it so well. Please take note of your assertion and claiming that this is your superior 4:2+ octave etc…

This is where the problem begins and ends Mark. I have not harped on this at all. Just stated my difference of opinion and preferance. You, however are harping on this one string and it is just plain obsessive and boring.

Now, Mark the following is your private email to me,

Originally Posted By: Mark Cerisano, RPT
“Where the h**l do you get off criticizing me like that, after I spent all that time trying to help you understand superior tuning techniques AFTER YOU ASKED ME? REMEMBER? Don't bother asking me any more questions or posting your snide remarks to me about about how you don't like my tone. You're off my radar.”


I have not asked you to teach me any "superior tuning techniques" I have not been asking you, you have just been sprouting your version of the story and your preferance and your hobby horse.

In fact, the truth of the matter is, I have actually written about certain aspects of tuning that i have learned and that others have written about (from whom I have learnt).

I think you prove who has the wrong attitude in this whole discussion. Please do not send me any further private mail. I do not appreciate or need them!

Please consider the following for your own edification,

Originally Posted By: rysowers
Originally Posted By: Mark

I have been tuning for 13 years, teaching tuning for 7 and am a mechanical engineer. I think I know what I'm talking about. It appears your constant opposition to my teachings show your lack of openness. How can you go against the largest and most respected piano technology association in the world (PTG) when they state the proper size of the octave in the midrange is 4:2+.

Mark, 13 years is a modest amount of experience in this field. I've been at it for 20 and am discovering new things about tuning every year. That's part of the fun of this business. I suspect in 5 years you may look back at your old thinking at realize that you didn't have it all figured out. At least that's what should happen to an open minded student of the craft.

I'm not sure what mechanical engineering has to do with teaching tuning. Maybe you can clarify that statement.

I would be careful using the PTG as an authority on tuning. The standard that the PTG promotes and tests for is a minimal standard. A tuner has to work within a 1 cent tolerance relative to the "Master Tuning" in the middle two octaves in both temperament and unisons to get a perfect score. The tolerances increase until they are at 6 cents for the lowest and highest octaves. In fact, in one case I observed an examinee get a very poor score on the temperament, (under 60 percent) yet passed the high treble with very high scores (over 90 percent). He was good at tuning octaves! As he progressed up the scale the tolerances became wide enough to give him better scores.

In PTG literature you will find differing opinions among experts. I do not believe that PTG as an organization has an "official" stand on what the right octave size is.


I agree with Ryan entirely and here I stand!




Edited by Mark Davis (01/08/13 07:20 AM)
_________________________
Mark Davis
Piano Tuner & Technician

Top
#2011025 - 01/08/13 07:08 AM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
UnrightTooner Offline
4000 Post Club Member

Registered: 11/13/08
Posts: 4949
Loc: Bradford County, PA
Originally Posted By: Mark Davis
...

Now, Mark the following is your private email to me,

...


If anybody wonders, this is one of the reasons I have my private email turned off. I prefer to have everything above board.
_________________________
Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?

Top
#2011026 - 01/08/13 07:17 AM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
Mark Davis Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 04/10/08
Posts: 658
Mark, I also do kindly request that you start your own thread now, maybe something along the lines of "My superior 4:2+ octaves".
_________________________
Mark Davis
Piano Tuner & Technician

Top
#2011028 - 01/08/13 07:23 AM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Cerisano, RPT]
RonTuner Online   content
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/21/04
Posts: 1665
Loc: Chicagoland
Originally Posted By: Mark Cerisano, RPT
I just listened again. The F5 is flat. M3>M10. But the rest still stands. It's not the right piano to show this stuff on.


And there's "the rub" whenever techs start these tuning discussions... We tend to come up with "universal approaches" for the "best tuning method", never to admit that they are only universal on really good scales. We go to tuning classes using big pianos. I know I've written before that Virgil Smith was limiting his tuning practice to Steinway grands by the time he was working out his tuning approach....

What does that let us do? Blame any tuning problems due to a specific approach on the "problem scale" of a lesser piano!

So yes, keep up the research - just realize that it may only be the best approach for your ears on certain pianos - which is a very good thing for any tech to discover and share!

Ron Koval
_________________________
Piano/instrument technician
www.ronkoval.com
@ronkoval

my piano videos:
http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=drwoodwind


Top
#2011029 - 01/08/13 07:24 AM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: DoelKees]
UnrightTooner Offline
4000 Post Club Member

Registered: 11/13/08
Posts: 4949
Loc: Bradford County, PA
Originally Posted By: DoelKees
Originally Posted By: UnrightTooner
if you "crunch the numbers" for an octave where the 4:2 partial match beats wide at the same speed as the 6:3 partial match beats narrow, the 2:1 partial match will also beat at this exact same speed.

Could you please demonstrate this surprising (and not well-known) fact?

If not I will, but I learned this from you...

Kees


It should be demonstrated. I encourage Mark C. to do so. I think it would be a good thing for all concerned.

But what I don't know is why this happens. It can only happen in the presence of iH. I guess it is either a natural result of the square of the partial/cent-logarithm thing or perhaps some bizarre numbers theory thing. I do not have a science degree. wink I wonder about the octave size/pure 12th relationship, too. I can demonstrate it but do not know why.

This reminds me of a joke about two contestants on a quiz show. The host could not stump either one, so he invited them to ask each other questions. The first contestant asked the second one about a species of ground hog (the big day is coming...) whose hole has no dirt around it. How does it dig a hole and not leave any dirt? The second contestant replied, that is easy, the groundhog starts from the bottom of the hole and ends at the top. Now my question for you is: How did the little bugger get down there in the first place? The second contestant won.
_________________________
Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?

Top
#2011198 - 01/08/13 01:32 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: UnrightTooner]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1760
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted By: UnrightTooner
Originally Posted By: DoelKees
Originally Posted By: UnrightTooner
if you "crunch the numbers" for an octave where the 4:2 partial match beats wide at the same speed as the 6:3 partial match beats narrow, the 2:1 partial match will also beat at this exact same speed.

Could you please demonstrate this surprising (and not well-known) fact?

If not I will, but I learned this from you...

Kees


It should be demonstrated. I encourage Mark C. to do so. I think it would be a good thing for all concerned.

But what I don't know is why this happens. It can only happen in the presence of iH. I guess it is either a natural result of the square of the partial/cent-logarithm thing or perhaps some bizarre numbers theory thing.

OK so I crunched the symbols.

First of all let's use the following inharmonicity model.
The offset in cents of the k-th partial is
B*(c[k]-1)
where B is the inharmonicity constant of the note, and c[k]=k*k according to Young's model, but experimentally the following lookup table (taken from the Tunelab manual) is more accurate:

c[1] = 1
c[2] = 4
c[3]=8.45
c[4]=13.18
c[5]=19.72
c[6]=27.27

Now let's tune an octave with inharmonicity constants B1 for the lower note and B2 for the upper note, such that 4:2 and 6:3 are equal beating. The 2:1 octave is now beating at the same speed as the 4:2 and 6:3 if the following formula holds:

B1*(3*c[6]-8*c[4]+5*c[2]) = B2*(3*c[3]-8*c[2]+5).

If we now plug in Young's formula both parenthesized expressions turn out to be exactly zero so 2:1 is always beating at the same speed irrespective of the inharmonicity values B1 and B2. This is just a lucky numerical coincidence.

But if we use the more realistic Tunelab table this is no longer true, and instead we get a condition relating B2 and B1 which turns out to be

B2 = 2.2*B1.

Magically this relation is not too far off on most piano's in the mid-upper range so the equal beating phenomena is still approximately true!

The derivation is a couple of pages of high school algebra which I could post if someone really wants to see it.

Kees

Top
#2011355 - 01/08/13 05:26 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
Withindale Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 02/09/11
Posts: 1959
Loc: Suffolk, England
To have a look at the numbers associated with pure 12ths I ran some up. Using a Steinway B inharmonicity curve, and a pure 12th for the ET stretch, the A3/A4 octave came out at:

2:1 0.55 bps wide
4:2 0.30 bps wide
6:3 0.73 bps narrow

I guess this a bit wider than some prefer but can see why it is a reasonable basis for an aural tuning.


Edited by Withindale (01/09/13 02:39 AM)
Edit Reason: typos
_________________________
Ian Russell
Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 55" upright
Ibach, 1922 49" upright (project piano)

Top
#2011702 - 01/09/13 01:15 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: RonTuner]
Mark Davis Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 04/10/08
Posts: 658
Originally Posted By: RonTuner
And there's "the rub" whenever techs start these tuning discussions... We tend to come up with "universal approaches" for the "best tuning method", never to admit that they are only universal on really good scales. We go to tuning classes using big pianos. I know I've written before that Virgil Smith was limiting his tuning practice to Steinway grands by the time he was working out his tuning approach...


Ron, as I am the OP, you lump me into the same group that make claims of a universal approach for the “best tuning method” never to admit that they are only universal on really good scales.

If you really want to, that is ok by me. However, please take note of the following excerpts from some of my posts in this thread.

I hope you can see that I clearly have not done as you have said. BTW, this is the second time that I have brought this to your attention.

Originally Posted By: Mark Davis
The important thing is to check your work as you progress through the tuning, so that one has the wood and the trees in view, not missing anything, as much as is possible to the fallible human mind.

So, as I have been saying, one need's to listen to the whole tone SBI's and listen to the whole tone RBI's to make sure one's work is as accurate as possible, whether it be for E.T or H.T.


Originally Posted By: Mark Davis
The other thing is this, as one checks one's work/tuning as it develops and progresses, with all the available checks, SBI's and RBI's, then one is tuning objectively and one is in a position to make the subjective and subtle changes (the art of tuning)that are necessary. .


Originally Posted By: Mark Davis
Ron, which some folks don't seem to be getting is this,

I am just saying that one needs to check one's work, whether it be spinet, studio or grand. Check your workk as it develops and progresses through the tuning. Now, one needs to realise that in what I am saying, one may not tune a piano as quickly as other folks but in the end it is solid, stable, musical and accurate.

I just find that for a better, more sure and accurate tuning I check my work. Once again, I re-iterate what Virgil Smith has said,

"The amount of expansion and contraction of each interval necessaery to achieve a quality equal tempered tuning (I would go so far as to say all tuning, whether E.T or H.T), can only be determined by use of tuning checks. Checks are used before the note is tuned to determine if the note is sharp or flat and by how much,during the tuning, and after it is tuned to check the accuracy of the tuning." .


Originally Posted By: Mark Davis
Every piano is different and I tune accordingly. I do not hold fast to any particular sequence except checking my work as I progress and smoothing things out as I go, in order for the best possible tuning for that particular piano.

I think that I am a whole lot more flexible when it comes to poor quality pianos and poorly scaled pianos, one just has to get through them, but nevertheless one is checking and getting a feeling for the piano and for what is going on and therefore one is in a better position as to what compromises to make and how. .


Originally Posted By: Mark Davis
I hope and trust that it may be plainly evident that i have made tried and trusted claims, though maybe different from others.


Originally Posted By: Mark Davis
The other thing is this, which you are not grasping/accepting and that is this, which I have been saying throughout this thread and say it again and I do think that this was the key to a powerful technique of and for tuning, but nothing fancy, but which Virgil said and practiced, .
_________________________
Mark Davis
Piano Tuner & Technician

Top
#2011704 - 01/09/13 01:24 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: DoelKees]
Withindale Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 02/09/11
Posts: 1959
Loc: Suffolk, England
Originally Posted By: DoelKees
The derivation is a couple of pages of high school algebra which I could post if someone really wants to see it.


Kees

I'd be interested, the back of my envelope soon ran out on this one. PM if you prefer.
_________________________
Ian Russell
Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 55" upright
Ibach, 1922 49" upright (project piano)

Top
#2011727 - 01/09/13 02:18 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: RonTuner]
Mark Cerisano, RPT Online   content
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/24/10
Posts: 1400
Loc: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Hi Ron,

Thanks for listening and making comments.

Originally Posted By: RonTuner
And there's "the rub" whenever techs start these tuning discussions... We tend to come up with "universal approaches" for the "best tuning method", never to admit that they are only universal on really good scales.


As a teacher of a one week basic tuning class, I am constantly trying to develop and explain a universal method that will give good results fast. I have had very good success, so I am trying to pass that on. These techniques, I personally use on all sizes of pianos with differing scales. The only difference is how close to perfect I can get. The P4 window creates an unbelievably accurate and consistent stretch on concert grands.

Originally Posted By: RonTuner

What does that let us do? Blame any tuning problems due to a specific approach on the "problem scale" of a lesser piano!


Well, I was not blaming the piano on my poor tuning, that I blame on myself. I could have muted off one of the F3 bichords and fixed the F5, then it would have sounded awesome.

Did you listen to the recording I posted in a new thread? That was a different piano. Not a pitch raise, but still a small console. Much better results, same technique.

Here is the link to the new recording:

http://youtu.be/ys_2vxtEAnw


Edited by Mark Cerisano, RPT (01/09/13 02:23 PM)
_________________________
Mark Cerisano, RPT
www.howtotunepianos.com

Top
#2011732 - 01/09/13 02:26 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
Mark Davis Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 04/10/08
Posts: 658
It was Kent's article "Every Which Way Temperament which really got me heading in the right direction with regards to striving for accurate tunings.

Some excerpts,

"If one learns nothing else from this paper, one should learn the importance of using fourths and fifths “against ”one another in a refinement procedure to improve a temperament after tuning through a temperament sequence.

The single, distinguishing characteristic of equal temperament is that chromatically ascending and/or descending intervals have smoothly progressing beat rates. The procedure for aurally tuning a piano in equal temperament “lays the bearings” for the tuning within a single octave in the middle of the piano, in this case, F3to F4. The procedure for tuning the temperament octave in equal temperament starts with tuning each note to approximations of its proper beat rates, and then may be followed by a separate refinement procedure to tweak the approximations to achieve the smoothest possible progression of beat rates. The two-step procedure is useful because the exact beat rates necessary to achieve the smoothest possible progression of beat rates of “parallel intervals” will vary a bit from piano to piano due to the variability of inharmonicity. Inharmonicity varies both from piano to piano and through the scale of individual pianos…

There are many “bearing plans” or “temperament sequences” to tune equal temperament. It may be necessary to try many of them to find one that fits your particular aptitudes. There are many temperament sequences because a given tech may be unable to make a given sequence work correctly. The Every-Which-Way plan makes use of many checks early in the sequence. Sequences that use fewer checks may allow the tech to accumulate tuning errors as the sequence progresses. The beauty of the Every-Which-Way plan is that you can use more and more checks as one progresses through the sequence and tune each new note as a “best compromise” with all the previous notes, that is, each new note will not depend only on the last note tuned, so there will be more of a chance that errors will not accumulate in the later notes tuned. The last notes to be tuned in the sequence are tuned from many other previously tuned notes, that is, from “every which way.”…


The piano tech must have general knowledge of the beat rates of intervals relative to the beat rates of other intervals:

Assuming the octaves are stretched, fourths beat faster than fifths in the temperament octave and the beat rates of fourths and fifths can be inversely proportional. That is, if there is a fast fifth then there is likely a slow fourth somewhere or vice versa. This is the basis for an extremely powerful set of checks. If a properly expanded perfect fourth and a properly contracted perfect fifth have a common top or bottom note,and if you change the tuning of the common note, the width of both intervals will be changed; widening the intervals will speed up the beat rate of the fourth and at the same time will slow down the beat rate of the fifth; narrowing the intervals will slow down the beat rate of the fourth and speed up the beat rate of the fifth. This inverse relationship is one of the most powerful checks available in the tuning of equal temperament. The successful piano tuner will have learned to use these checks well. Check the relative beat rates of the fourth and fifth on one side of a note being checked. Example: to check the tuning of D4 within the temperament octave, play A3-D4 and G3-D4. The fourth should beat faster than the fifth. If the fifth is too fast and the fourth too pure perhaps the D4 is flat; if the fourth and fifth beat at the same rate, perhaps the D4 is flat; if the fourth beats too fast and the fifth is too pure, perhaps the D4 is sharp. Do not fail to learn to use 4ths and 5ths in this way...


The interval of the perfect fourth and the interval of the perfect fifth are inverted forms of the same interval.(That is, take the bottom note of a fifth and move it up an octave, and you now have a fourth.) In the mathematical model of equal temperament, perfect fourths and perfect fifths beat at much the same rate. But inthe tuning of real pianos, fourths beat faster. Why? It is because of stretch. There exists the P4-P5 test of the 4:2octave; that is, there is a check of the 4:2 octave that uses as a reference the note that is a perfect 4th above the lower note and the perfect 5th below the upper note. In this check, if the 4th and 5th beat exactly the same then the 4:2 octave is beatless or “just”. But we generally do not tune octaves this way. When tuning octaves up the scale we generally raise the top note and slow the fifth down. As Alan Crane puts it, “Stretch happens.”
If the fourths beat faster than the fifths, then there is sufficient stretch…

“If one must choose between tunings that feel right and tunings that check out right, go with the objective checks every time.”

From my personal experience I know that feeling good about a tuning does not guarantee that the tuning is actually good. Tunings that are a struggle and unsatisfying when they are over may be very good indeed. Emotions are a poor guide. Learn this for yourself by checking many tunings the day after or as soon as you can after the fact when the mood is different.

Pianos are not necessarily in tune because you have performed a tuning procedure on them; they are in tune when you have tuned them AND the tuning checks still work out when you go back to check your work…"



Edited by Mark Davis (01/09/13 02:36 PM)
Edit Reason: minor correction
_________________________
Mark Davis
Piano Tuner & Technician

Top
#2012126 - 01/10/13 08:04 AM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
UnrightTooner Offline
4000 Post Club Member

Registered: 11/13/08
Posts: 4949
Loc: Bradford County, PA
Mark D:

Can we tie together the original subject of this Topic (clean sounding octaves) with temperment sequences? I think this is incredibly important. For instance: fourths and fifths have the inherent ability to test the 4:2 octave, while ladders of contiguous M3s check the 8:4 octave, and ladders of contiguous m3s the 6:3 octave.

Mr. Swafford's method is basically to use all tools available, which is good. But what happens when one check is at complete odds with another? It can be accepted as an "indulgent mystery" and the least-worse compromise made. But if it is understood that some checks are more appropriate for one type of octave than another, a better choice can be made. In particular I am talking about when dealing with a scaling break, whether actually setting a temperment or expanding one.

I believe that if the cleanest sounding octave is chosen the type should be determined and then the co-responding temperment tests and checks should take priority over others. Or a certain octave type can be chosen (if it results in being clean enough) because of the priority of temperment tests and checks that will be used.
_________________________
Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?

Top
#2012204 - 01/10/13 11:20 AM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
Mark Davis Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 04/10/08
Posts: 658
Hello Jeff

I want to make an important qualifier, and it is this, fudging/compromising when tuning and knowing when to, why to and how to is a key in tuning.

There are at least three camps of tuners/thinking that I know of, maybe more?

One camp favours RBI's and the other favours SBI's, though they both use either or in tuning. The third camp, seems to use it all. In other words, fudge it all!? Cluster tuning and ETD tuning come to mind

However, in saying that, and from what I understand is, it is that most tuners are striving for the most consonant tuning possible. Then again there are those that will sacrifice the consonance saying that it is the RBI's (some/more dissonance?) which adds/brings the true character out that they and or their clients are looking for.

In saying what I have just said, the whole issue of the amount of stretch comes into play now and so on...

I tend to favour both the SBI and RBI, sometimes tuning for just D8ves and sometimes 4:1+ D8ves and sometimes tempered 12ths and sometimes pure 12ths and so on.

With regards to scaling breaks, I in general use the SBI's to determine/guide. Once I have tuned through I may/will listen to the RBI's and make minor corrections if I think I can and need to.

I have a general understanding of most of the important intervals. I tune for the best possible sounding tuning for the piano that I am tuning, and that may involve much compromise/fudging or hardly any at all.

I hope this answers your question and submission?
_________________________
Mark Davis
Piano Tuner & Technician

Top
#2012208 - 01/10/13 11:26 AM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
Mark Davis Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 04/10/08
Posts: 658
Sorry Jeff, to answer, finding tests/checks that are at complete variance with one another in the piano and in the temperament in particular, I cannot think of any.

Can you give me an example or two of such a case so that I am more enlightened and have the opportunity to think it through? Though I may never think it through and may need to ask someone else myself!
_________________________
Mark Davis
Piano Tuner & Technician

Top
#2012217 - 01/10/13 11:46 AM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
UnrightTooner Offline
4000 Post Club Member

Registered: 11/13/08
Posts: 4949
Loc: Bradford County, PA
Originally Posted By: Mark Davis
Sorry Jeff, to answer, finding tests/checks that are at complete variance with one another in the piano and in the temperament in particular, I cannot think of any.

Can you give me an example or two of such a case so that I am more enlightened and have the opportunity to think it through? Though I may never think it through and may need to ask someone else myself!


Yes I can. I run across this often:

Take a large, old upright with the break around C3. The F3-F4 temperment is tuned and then expanded downward. As each octave is tuned the RBIs such as M3, M6, and M10 (when available) are checked. Everything is hunky dunky until crossing into the bass. Then all these RBIs want to beat faster than they do for the note above the break.

Well, you can make the RBIs more progressive by contracting the octave that spans the break and stretching the octaves above the break. This will make the 4ths and 5ths sound different across the berak, but since they beat slower it won't be so obvious when listening to chromatic checks.

Or you can expand the temperment with good sounding octaves and be assured that the 4ths and 5ths will be at thier best even though the M3s and M10s are not progressive.

However, if the temperment was expanded downward with 6:3 octaves, then you can expect the m3s and M6s to be at thier best even if the M3s P4s and P5s are not. The 6:3 octave test uses m3s and M6s.

Do you follow what I am saying even if you have not experienced this? It happens on shorter, older grands, too. The scaling for a "hockey stick" bridge is the likely culprit.
_________________________
Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?

Top
#2012259 - 01/10/13 01:10 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
Mark Davis Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 04/10/08
Posts: 658
Ok, I hear you.

I suppose the fudge factor comes in here. 4th, 5th, m3, M3, M6, Octave, D8ve, 10th, 17th. I would try for the best compromise for the best sounding octave and SBI's and then move on. I would not be overly concerned with any particular size of octave and interval here in so much as making it fit into the overall bigger picture and sound as best as is possible to my ears!?

You know, thinking about it, and this is not a boast but just a thought that has come through my mind now as I am writing, I in general, and thankfully so, do not get call backs, so either I am doing something right, or maybe my clients know and realise that pianos are not perfect and what they are hearing is not unpleasant to them or of major concern to them.

Maybe, we should not be overly concerned if our clients are happy with our work.
_________________________
Mark Davis
Piano Tuner & Technician

Top
#2012268 - 01/10/13 01:30 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
UnrightTooner Offline
4000 Post Club Member

Registered: 11/13/08
Posts: 4949
Loc: Bradford County, PA
Mark:

Since tuning is not my livelyhood, more like a paid community service, I have the luxury of considering my own needs in the actually tuning process. I have an inherent need to understand things and find consistent ways of doing things. (This has served me well in my full time careers.)

Anyway, I had been perplexed when reading about tuning CM3s across breaks and not being able to have decent sounding octaves and SBIs when I tried it. After really studying the effects of iH, and learning to objectively listen to the tests and checks in my tunings, I have settled in on something that I understand and is consistent: pure twelfths. It meets my needs.

Even though I have changed how I tune over the past few years, and tuned differently for the same customers, I do not get call backs either. Tuners are usually much more discerning than thier customers. That is as it should be.

I do understand that the needs of other tuners are different. And so they would tune differently. smile
_________________________
Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?

Top
#2012269 - 01/10/13 01:31 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
Olek Offline
7000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/14/08
Posts: 7901
Loc: France
I guess I agree with Mark, octave size test are useful to learn to hear differnt types of octaves may be, but in the end I totally stopped using them, while I focus on clean sounding octaves as one of the priorities.

there is some room to fudge in most intervals, sticking to an octave type may push the tuner to pass the moment the octave type have to change.
What amaze me is being able to tune by octaves with some even progression of FBI, I have always be instructed that it was not really possible, may be only the habit...


Edited by Kamin (01/10/13 01:31 PM)
_________________________
It is critical that you call your Senators and Representatives and ask them to cosponsor S. 2587 and H.R. 5052. Getting your legislators to cosponsor these bills


Top
#2012272 - 01/10/13 01:37 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: UnrightTooner]
Olek Offline
7000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/14/08
Posts: 7901
Loc: France
Originally Posted By: UnrightTooner
Mark:

Since tuning is not my livelyhood, more like a paid community service, I have the luxury of considering my own needs in the actually tuning process. I have an inherent need to understand things and find consistent ways of doing things. (This has served me well in my full time careers.)

Anyway, I had been perplexed when reading about tuning CM3s across breaks and not being able to have decent sounding octaves and SBIs when I tried it. After really studying the effects of iH, and learning to objectively listen to the tests and checks in my tunings, I have settled in on something that I understand and is consistent: pure twelfths. It meets my needs.

Even though I have changed how I tune over the past few years, and tuned differently for the same customers, I do not get call backs either. Tuners are usually much more discerning than thier customers. That is as it should be.

I do understand that the needs of other tuners are different. And so they would tune differently. smile


Sure enlarged twelve begin to sound strange, but when going thru the basses the 5ths can enlarge too much also. Any method allowing to have a standard is good, in the end..
_________________________
It is critical that you call your Senators and Representatives and ask them to cosponsor S. 2587 and H.R. 5052. Getting your legislators to cosponsor these bills


Top
#2012280 - 01/10/13 01:59 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
Mark Davis Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 04/10/08
Posts: 658
Jeff,

I appreciate you delving into it so much. You have the discipline and brain. That's great! As for me I am also still delving but at my own slow pace.

Are you willing to explain then in a bit more detail as to your procedure, say from E3 down, across the break and through the bi-chords?
_________________________
Mark Davis
Piano Tuner & Technician

Top
#2012285 - 01/10/13 02:13 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Olek]
UnrightTooner Offline
4000 Post Club Member

Registered: 11/13/08
Posts: 4949
Loc: Bradford County, PA
Originally Posted By: Kamin
I guess I agree with Mark, octave size test are useful to learn to hear differnt types of octaves may be, but in the end I totally stopped using them, while I focus on clean sounding octaves as one of the priorities.

there is some room to fudge in most intervals, sticking to an octave type may push the tuner to pass the moment the octave type have to change.
What amaze me is being able to tune by octaves with some even progression of FBI, I have always be instructed that it was not really possible, may be only the habit...


"... sticking to an octave type may push the tuner to pass the moment the octave type have to change."

Exactly! I believe that if 12ths are used to tune, pure or tempered, the octave types will change when they should: wider with less iH and narrower with more iH; like a governor on a generator.
_________________________
Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?

Top
#2012289 - 01/10/13 02:30 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
Mark Davis Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 04/10/08
Posts: 658
Jeff and Isaac, i see! Interesting!

So, if i may ask, what would be wrong or the difference in tuning 5ths down and acoss and regulating the 4th as compared to using 12ths?
_________________________
Mark Davis
Piano Tuner & Technician

Top
#2012291 - 01/10/13 02:35 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
UnrightTooner Offline
4000 Post Club Member

Registered: 11/13/08
Posts: 4949
Loc: Bradford County, PA
Originally Posted By: Mark Davis
Jeff,

I appreciate you delving into it so much. You have the discipline and brain. That's great! As for me I am also still delving but at my own slow pace.

Are you willing to explain then in a bit more detail as to your procedure, say from E3 down, across the break and through the bi-chords?


Well, first, I set a pure 12th D3-A4 temperment tuning fifths up and octaves down after A3, D4, E4, G3, E3 and G4 are tuned and adjusted. One test for a pure twelfth is the P5-P8 test. The 3:2 D3-A3 P5 beats the same as the 2:1 A3-A4 P8. So when the temperment is tuned, the fifths should be no slower than the A3-A4 2:1 partial match and the octaves should be no faster than the D3-A3 3:2 partial match.

The smaller the piano, the more pure the octaves and fifths. And the more pure an interval is, the more difficult it is to make them trully progressive. And some pinblock are not very friendly... Contiguously progressive fifth is really about my limit.

In reality, I just do the best I can. To tell the truth at these beatrates I mostly just hear a tonal change as they are tuned. I think the additional partial matches are involved. An evenly voiced piano helps.

Expanding the temperment I use a spanner to directly tune the 12th and then check the octave and various RBIs. The M6-M17 test is useful. F2-D3 beats the same as F2-A4 when the D3-A4 12th is pure.

I tune any and all wound strings differently. I do not trust any one partial to be true to the rest. Instead, I play the twelfth and an octave above the lower note at the same time and strive for the most resonance. Or on very challenging pianos the area that sounds the least-worst.
_________________________
Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?

Top
#2012293 - 01/10/13 02:41 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: UnrightTooner]
Withindale Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 02/09/11
Posts: 1959
Loc: Suffolk, England
Originally Posted By: UnrightTooner
Exactly! I believe that if 12ths are used to tune, pure or tempered, the octave types will change when they should: wider with less iH and narrower with more iH; like a governor on a generator.


That's down to the f*(1+Bn^2)^0.5 formula for partials; less B more n, more B less n.
_________________________
Ian Russell
Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 55" upright
Ibach, 1922 49" upright (project piano)

Top
#2012302 - 01/10/13 03:01 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
Mark Davis Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 04/10/08
Posts: 658
Thanks Jeff! Food for thought!

How much of a difference is there between a 4:1 D8ve and a pure 12th?

And if one is tuning a pure 12th tuning in the treble and high treble, does this not increase the stretch more than say, a just 4:1 octave throughout the treble and high treble? or does this vary from piano to piano?

What do your octaves and double octaves sound like when tuning this way?
_________________________
Mark Davis
Piano Tuner & Technician

Top
#2012368 - 01/10/13 04:59 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
Olek Offline
7000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/14/08
Posts: 7901
Loc: France
Originally Posted By: Mark Davis
Jeff and Isaac, i see! Interesting!

So, if i may ask, what would be wrong or the difference in tuning 5ths down and across and regulating the 4th as compared to using 12ths?


Quickly said I would said it is useful to take the 12ths as a parameter of the tuning; then this is probably the interval that have the most "give" (around "pure" also) Learning to listen to them is just another helpful tip , providing a fast way to listen to the double octave ( I often use an inverted min interval with the 12t h (17th double - twelve)

A 12th being and octave an a 5th it sort of show the level of tempering of both intervals (and octave at the piano could be "tempered" in my way of seeing things

However I believe that pure 12ths tend to break in when the piano is played, and finish tempered. I try to keep them tempered as if not the double octave beat begin to be noticed.

When all is tempered FBI can stay moderately noisy particularely M6, that are soon screaming, to me...

the 12th is used since a long time by ETDs because the 3d partial is the pitch tested in the mediums; then if you know it you can perceive the perfect smoothing of twelves; the defect come from not taking in account other partials enough (I talk of older RTC or SAT, in the medium range)


muddy, probably ....


Edited by Kamin (01/10/13 05:00 PM)
_________________________
It is critical that you call your Senators and Representatives and ask them to cosponsor S. 2587 and H.R. 5052. Getting your legislators to cosponsor these bills


Top
#2012372 - 01/10/13 05:03 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
Olek Offline
7000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/14/08
Posts: 7901
Loc: France
Originally Posted By: Mark Davis
Thanks Jeff! Food for thought!

How much of a difference is there between a 4:1 D8ve and a pure 12th?

And if one is tuning a pure 12th tuning in the treble and high treble, does this not increase the stretch more than say, a just 4:1 octave throughout the treble and high treble? or does this vary from piano to piano?

What do your octaves and double octaves sound like when tuning this way?


To me, yes
_________________________
It is critical that you call your Senators and Representatives and ask them to cosponsor S. 2587 and H.R. 5052. Getting your legislators to cosponsor these bills


Top
#2012410 - 01/10/13 06:34 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Mark Davis]
Mark Davis Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 04/10/08
Posts: 658
Ok, I have been digging around and found some info with regards to 12ths tuning and temperament tuning.

The following is written by Jim Coleman,Snr, I think, "At G5, the 19th (C3-G5) also becomes available as a test. One will often find this interval to be slightly on the narrow side even though the 12th (C4-G5) test is pure. This is decision time again. If one prefers to have pure triple octaves eventually, it may be necessary to widen the 12ths slightly and slow down the narrow 19ths gradually. In doing this, one now forces the single octaves to be stretched even more (sometimes even more than 1bps) and the double octaves may be stretched up to 1bps.

By the time one gets to C6 the triple octave comes into play. If the 12ths have been kept pure, the double octave is stretched and the triple octave is slightly narrow. If one one wishes to have the triple octave pure, then the double octave will need to be stretched more, the 12ths will need to be widened, and the 19ths will need to be almost pure but on the narrow side.All of this of coarse will make the single octave stretched even more. Here again is a decision time. Does the tuner prefer pure triple octaves at the expense of the double octave and single octaves? What the overall desired effect? Outside of unison work this is a point where art enters..."

Don Mannino wrote some time ago on this forum, the following, " Extra wide octaves in the center of the piano cause the temperament area to sound brighter , more aggressive, less focussed perhaps, and more "tense". This is because the 3rds and 6ths are made to beat faster when the octaves are wide.
The 5ths are more pure than a normal stretch would give, but these are not as audible during complex music than the business of the 3rds and 6ths.

There are fine tuners at work today who regularly tune center octaves so that they are very, very wide and the 5ths are almost pure! So the old pythagorean comma gets put into the octave, instead of compromising all of the 5ths between! This is how the wide tuning in my seminar is done - I try to get the 5ths pure.

Narrow Octaves in the center of the piano tend to make a temperament area to sound more sweet and pure in tone, even though the 5ths will tend to beat faster than they might in a "normal" tuning.

The relative width of the octaves in the high treble also impacts the tone. Concert tunings are often stretched higher in the top octaves, as this can add brilliance and intensity to the top up there.

A more narrow octave in the treble area helps the piano to sing more, and 'bite' less, as the lower partials within the octaves set up sympathetic ringing that builds sustain. Some of the attack of the tone is quickly transferred to the octave above or below, reducing intensity and adding sustain...

So there is no one "correct" way to tune any octave..."


Edited by Mark Davis (01/10/13 06:40 PM)
Edit Reason: minor correction
_________________________
Mark Davis
Piano Tuner & Technician

Top
#2012526 - 01/10/13 11:05 PM Re: Clean Sounding/Beatless Octaves [Re: Withindale]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1760
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted By: Withindale
Originally Posted By: DoelKees
The derivation is a couple of pages of high school algebra which I could post if someone really wants to see it.


Kees

I'd be interested, the back of my envelope soon ran out on this one. PM if you prefer.


OK, I put it in a pdf.

I have some more analysis (pershaps forthcoming) which shows that equal beating 4:2/6:3 can be used in the temperament octave (and will result in equal beating behaviour) but not beyond, as it will result in too fast beating 4:2 and 4:1. There the 4:2+ has to lean more towards 4:2 than 6:3. The 12th also seems to get wide.

Unrelated to my writeup, note that the default tuning curve in Tunelab has pure 6:3 octaves in the bass, and pure 4:1 double octaves in the treble, with a smooth transition in-between. In particular the 4:2 always becomes narrow in the higher octaves (around C6). A pure 12th tuning results in narrow 4:2 and wide 4:1.

Kees

Top
Page 5 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

Moderator:  Piano World 
What's Hot!!
8 Live Ragtime Piano Players on the Cape!
-------------------
HOW TO POST PICTURES on the Piano Forums
-------------------
Sharing is Caring!
About the Buttons
-------------------
(125ad) Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
Ad (Seiler/Knabe)
Knabe Pianos
Sheet Music
(PW is an affiliate)
Sheet Music Plus Featured Sale
(ad) HAILUN Pianos
Hailun Pianos - Click for More
(ad) Lindeblad Piano
Lindeblad Piano Restoration
New Topics - Multiple Forums
Heading to the junk pile...
by Emmery
23 minutes 54 seconds ago
Piano make
by ali123
Today at 06:24 PM
Yamaha UX vs WX
by goldmund
Today at 11:34 AM
Need help with chords
by Shirz
Today at 07:52 AM
Which are the best forums for piano technicians and DIYers?
by Withindale
Today at 03:17 AM
Who's Online
133 registered (36251, Alan_Dublin, A Guy, alfredo capurso, 39 invisible), 1367 Guests and 17 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
76656 Members
42 Forums
158494 Topics
2327613 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