Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
Well I am not talking about the recording I could not stand listening more than afew seconds.
Pianist have limited amount of energy availeable with touch, due to action saturation.
If you hear the key before the tone, you have not enough aftertouch (if you hear the tone before, you eventually have too much, and the energy of the key bump cannot add anything to tone)
The attack is so annoying for the tuner that the ear close and avoid listening at that moment, it is part of the tuner's training to get used to it. one of the most employed method to be able to tune with relaxed ears is to play the note repeatedly, this allow to tune sooner. Another is to wear earplugs another is to play softly enough
If the tuner is able to tune sooner (by listening more early in the attack) he begin to be able to preserve some energy of the attack for the tone, less is lost.
I agree it is a very short moment of course, but it can be thickened or stay thin.
When the tuning is opened the attack is discrete, but the raise in energy is better immediately after it and the dynamics is optimum.
If the attack is too much constrained I feel the attack as if it is a bawl that rebound at fast speed between twoo walls , loose energy and then only allow for a clear sustain.
Then the energy level left is lower than if the attack is pushed in the tone with a strong coupling at last at the 2nd partial level.
If the wanted effect is to have a huge concentration of tone immediately, no problem but it is OK for Jazz, the tone when played strong send too much partials at once, it sound like a trumpet note attack,brassy, witha huge "klang" that occurs soon in the dynamic plague.
Last edited by Kamin; 01/15/1305:05 PM.
Professional of the profession. Foo Foo specialist I wish to add some kind and sensitive phrase but nothing comes to mind.!
Isaac if you're not talking about the recording then this discussion belongs elsewhere. It is extremely difficult for anything constructive to come out of Max posting here, and it is made a lot worse by totally irrelevant discussions carrying on in his threads.
Some very charitable people are trying to help Max improve, but he seems to be quite a stubborn guy. He's been doing this for a long time without anybody to tell him it is wrong, on here we bombard him with so much information, in a language he barely speaks, and we expect him to improve?
It's quite horrible to watch him get ripped to shreds by unsympathetic professionals. People simply can't comprehend how big the gap is between his and our experiences.
Max, keep working on those unisons! Make sure you are using your mutes so you are only tuning one string while listening to another.
Phil, I do agree with you that people should leave out the crude/rude labels when the topic at hand is Max's tuning, not his character. Isaac, perhaps your level of tuning has got to the point where you feel experimental or the need to pursue something beyond what you consider a plain good tuning. Your obviously satisfying some internal need for perfection as you envision it. I don't agree with you about a unison needing any tweaking more that just sounding like the same darn note, but just a little louder with that extra string(s) beside it.
I see the piano as a single purpose instrument, not a synthesizer in this respect, and feel that it doesn't require tweaking past its own natural tone (if that tone is pleasant). I think however it would be distracting and counterproductive for a neophyte like Max to aim for anything other than getting a clean sounding note with a unison.
I have never in my life heard a top notch tuner feel brazen enough to negatively criticise a tuning because they felt the unisons were "too clean". Yeah, I've heard of so and so big name tuners giving a lecture on messing with unisons at the annual cheese melts, but no tech ever lost a job or their credibility by getting a 3 string unison to sound like 1. That is what Max should strive for.
When we started learning tuning at college the first thing we learned was unisons, and we worked on them until the day we left...it is probably the hardest thing in tuning to perfect and remain consistant with. Even to this day, if I find myself lingering on something too long in a tuning, its usually a troublesome unison, not a temperament/octave or a stretch. There was a point early on that I thought a unison was good and my teacher would come in, twist the hammer this way and that and it sounded better. It is one of the easiest things in a tuning to feel misleadingly content with. After all, you have to start moving a pin around to determine if it can be any better and at the same time you feel a strong need to move on to the next note in order to finish.
Last edited by Emmery; 01/15/1310:02 PM.
Piano Technician George Brown College /85 Niagara Region
Phil, I do agree with you that people should leave out the crude/rude labels when the topic at hand is Max's tuning, not his character. Isaac, perhaps your level of tuning has got to the point where you feel experimental or the need to pursue something beyond what you consider a plain good tuning. Your obviously satisfying some internal need for perfection as you envision it. I don't agree with you about a unison needing any tweaking more that just sounding like the same darn note, but just a little louder with that extra string(s) beside it. I see the piano as a single purpose instrument, not a synthesizer in this respect, and feel that it doesn't require tweaking past its own natural tone (if that tone is pleasant). I think however it would be distracting and counterproductive for a neophyte like Max to aim for anything other than getting a clean sounding note with a unison. I have never in my life heard a top notch tuner feel brazen enough to negatively criticise a tuning because they felt the unisons were "too clean". Yeah, I've heard of so and so big name tuners giving a lecture on messing with unisons at the annual cheese melts, but no tech ever lost a job or their credibility by getting a 3 string unison to sound like 1. That is what Max should strive for. When we started learning tuning at college the first thing we learned was unisons, and we worked on them until the day we left...it is probably the hardest thing in tuning to perfect and remain consistant with. Even to this day, if I find myself lingering on something too long in a tuning, its usually a troublesome unison, not a temperament/octave or a stretch. There was a point early on that I thought a unison was good and my teacher would come in, twist the hammer this way and that and it sounded better. It is one of the easiest things in a tuning to feel misleadingly content with. After all, you have to start moving a pin around to determine if it can be any better and at the same time you feel a strong need to move on to the next note in order to finish.
Tune four pianos a day, five days a week for two months, then post another video. During that time compare your tunings to recordings and try to find someone to spend an hour teaching you.
Thank,Bob. If don't see this grand piano, then my main job is to try to restore the junk vertical. Which ultimately should resound. So before you start to tuning the "Belarus" I must first install the broken strings and put cardboard shim under pins. I'm must configure a semitone lower, otherwise there will be failure. I have not a possibility the tuning (2-3 piano) on the day .
Why will there be failure??? Because of your cardboard fix??? Then, fix it correctly, with larger tuning pins.
Only the application of corrugated cardboard shim is possible make quality and long to provide the necessary friction between the pins and the pinblock. The use of oversize pin copse is deeply misleading and it's harm for piano
I guess there are both musicians and tuners who differ in their opinions of what a good unison should sound like. For the latter, it never used to be like this in the past. Some regard perfect unison clarity much like they do the state of pregnancy, it either exists, or it doesn't. Some consider the slight disparity of inharmonicity in the full spectrum of each string enough of a richness to the tone by itself and it requires no additional help with deliberate detuning. To the same effect, some regard the amount of sustain on the piano as sufficient, without the need for trying to induce more. Most likely of all, some tuners who can't tune nice clear unisons try and cover their tracks by suggesting the shortcoming is intentional or by design.
Max tries, but still does not work, but he is full of energy and enthusiasm to move on. He must find a clean unison. However, " A people see the taste and color is different " "Ðа Ð²ÐºÑƒÑ Ð¸ цвет, товарища нет".
Max tries, but still does not work, but he is full of energy and enthusiasm to move on. He must find a clean unison. However, " A people see the taste and color is different". "Ðа Ð²ÐºÑƒÑ Ð¸ цвет, товарища нет".
The clearest explanation of unison tuning I have seen begins, Gabriel Weinreich (I hope I am spelling it right), published "The Coupled Motion Of Piano Strings" in the late 70's. The gist of his research was that the coupled motion required, at times, that the strings not be tuned to the exact same pitch in order to produce the longest sustain and clearest sounding tone.
Phil, I do agree with you that people should leave out the crude/rude labels when the topic at hand is Max's tuning, not his character. Isaac, perhaps your level of tuning has got to the point where you feel experimental or the need to pursue something beyond what you consider a plain good tuning. Your obviously satisfying some internal need for perfection as you envision it. I don't agree with you about a unison needing any tweaking more that just sounding like the same darn note, but just a little louder with that extra string(s) beside it. I see the piano as a single purpose instrument, not a synthesizer in this respect, and feel that it doesn't require tweaking past its own natural tone (if that tone is pleasant). I think however it would be distracting and counterproductive for a neophyte like Max to aim for anything other than getting a clean sounding note with a unison. I have never in my life heard a top notch tuner feel brazen enough to negatively criticise a tuning because they felt the unisons were "too clean". Yeah, I've heard of so and so big name tuners giving a lecture on messing with unisons at the annual cheese melts, but no tech ever lost a job or their credibility by getting a 3 string unison to sound like 1. That is what Max should strive for. When we started learning tuning at college the first thing we learned was unisons, and we worked on them until the day we left...it is probably the hardest thing in tuning to perfect and remain consistant with. Even to this day, if I find myself lingering on something too long in a tuning, its usually a troublesome unison, not a temperament/octave or a stretch. There was a point early on that I thought a unison was good and my teacher would come in, twist the hammer this way and that and it sounded better. It is one of the easiest things in a tuning to feel misleadingly content with. After all, you have to start moving a pin around to determine if it can be any better and at the same time you feel a strong need to move on to the next note in order to finish.
That is very well said!
P.S. Paragraphs would be nice as well.
+1.
In such an elegant stream of cohesive thought, I can forgive paragraphure (paragraphageing?)...paragravery. That's the word.
Amanda Reckonwith Concert & Recording tuner-tech, London, England. "in theory, practice and theory are the same thing. In practice, they're not." - Lawrence P. 'Yogi' Berra.
Emmery I agree that you can describe an unison as hearing one string, I would add more or less thick.
I confirm you can tune non beating unisons and have a bland too clear tone.
It is not a question of beats nor "too clean"
An unison is supoosed to be clean, it is a question of life in tone, and musicality .
Maxim is not a beginner tuner, as I see it he write since 2 years on that forum , and recived a lot of help from most of us.
If Max did not understood yet and hear what is an unison, probably he better look for other occupations than tuning, or only focus on the repairs, regulation, etc.
An unison between 2 strings is like railroads, they go all along the same direction without touching one another.
I suspect Max does not want to WORK tuning, as he may have some results if he did follow a little the advices given.
What I write is for general purpose and for anyone interested, When I hear some tunings I know I can talk of unison and not only that, indeed. Musicians need the tuner to be an artist himself (while I dont consider myself as so creative I mostly want my tuning to hold for the longer possible time, and to sound clear, full and dynamic)
It is indeed easy to finish a hair aside the nicer tone, because of ear's fatigue, bad analysis of tone, too much straightening.
Then the piano because of its own voice will correct that to a point.
I found advantageaous to install the tuning in a tone which is natural to the piano, not to force it one way of the other as you think
Between top tuners the unison cn tone slightly differntly, musicaisn recognize that, and others tuners too, as ther is always an "level of opening" parameter, and a "level of energy at the attack also"
Not only avoicing question, as asked to Pierre Laurent Aimard the tuner in the movie Pianomania " do you wnat the tone to go straight and strong to the ceiling , or do you want it to fullfill the place and go around ?" (PL Aymard answered "both" ) What he talk of is attack managment , plus voicing, but you dont change the whole voicing for a concert, ypou modify the regulation so the timing of the hammer bumb is more or less synchro with the key bottoming
So you can obtain 2 perfectly clear unisons, one with a thicker attack and more warm specra, one with a dicrete attack and enlarged specra.
You can strenghten the fundamental plus all the partials at once, but then the crown of the hammer must be lively.
On an old piano with hard strings , not enough partials, adn much differnce in specrta between each string, you can "hide the defects" by tuning all the notes the same with a similar "woosh" in the tone, that help to mask the beats the strings will produce if you try to tune them too clear, but this is an extreme case.
I will record experiments someday.
Before ETD nobody would argue about a few cts, pianos where tuned and nobody complained.
regards
Last edited by Kamin; 01/16/1308:40 AM.
Professional of the profession. Foo Foo specialist I wish to add some kind and sensitive phrase but nothing comes to mind.!
Emmery said " It is one of the easiest things in a tuning to feel misleadingly content with. After all, you have to start moving a pin around to determine if it can be any better and at the same time you feel a strong need to move on to the next note in order to finish."
Yes I agree that ear fatigue, position, can lend to misleading unison.
That is why I find so important to be able to analyse and organize it.
Hopefully you are not obliged to "turn" the pin to check for the quality of your unison, pushing/pulling on the tuning lever is generally enough (unless rendering is so poor)
Professional of the profession. Foo Foo specialist I wish to add some kind and sensitive phrase but nothing comes to mind.!
Max tries, but still does not work, but he is full of energy and enthusiasm to move on. He must find a clean unison. However, " A people see the taste and color is different". "Ðа Ð²ÐºÑƒÑ Ð¸ цвет, товарища нет".
The clearest explanation of unison tuning I have seen begins, Gabriel Weinreich (I hope I am spelling it right), published "The Coupled Motion Of Piano Strings" in the late 70's. The gist of his research was that the coupled motion required, at times, that the strings not be tuned to the exact same pitch in order to produce the longest sustain and clearest sounding tone.
An unison between 2 strings is like railroads, they go all along the same direction without touching one another.
It's more of an ideal. In reality unison must be "live" with a barely perceptible beats. This is not the fact that the tuner can not hear, he just wants to paint the sounds. There are also objective factors uneven unison: 1 Poor hold pin 2 the differential cross section of strings 3 additional waves adjacent strings in the chorus
I suspect Max does not want to WORK tuning, as he may have some results if he did follow a little the advices given.
Max asks the people of good will, if it is possible to listen to the next clip of the same concert. I think Mozart will identify inaccuracies temperament. Your constructive criticism will allow Max's professional development
An unison between 2 strings is like railroads, they go all along the same direction without touching one another.
It's more of an ideal. In reality unison must be "live" with a barely perceptible beats. This is not the fact that the tuner can not hear, he just wants to paint the sounds. There are also objective factors uneven unison: 1 Poor hold pin 2 the differential cross section of strings 3 additional waves adjacent strings in the chorus
All of these are excuses for not doing a good job.
1. There are few pianos that hold so poorly that the unisons cannot be tuned properly. You can usually see the tuning hammer turn on those when you let it go. 2. There should be no difference in the cross section of strings, and even if there is, it should not affect the tuning enough to be audible. 3. The difference between adjacent strings in a choir is what you are trying to eliminate.
The main reasons unisons will be as far off from exact as yours are, are lack of skill and care by the tuner! You need to be able to tune unisons as exactly as possible.
A good way to test for unisons is to listen to the beats in a moderately fast beating interval with a single string, and then with the string that you have tuned in unison with it. If the beats change, your unison is not good enough.
Enough people have told you your tuning is not adequate. Stop arguing and start working on improving your tuning!
yes , beats may not be audible, it is easy to be confused between beats and coupling 2 strings (as the coupling rarely can occur for all the partials and the fundamental, some "move" can be perceived)
There is yet a large space where a beat between 2 strings can stay unnoticed, because it is at the same speed that the lowering of the strength of the note in time.
That is why what allows to hear unison is more the energetic answer of the note. Then if some beat remain it may be chased .
It oblige to use the playing hand precisely and to perceive well the rebound of the hammer that say to the ear : "listen, open"
beats in unison are heard even from far, the quality of tone is "greasy" , It is possible to have the partials "caught" by the fundamental that mean, partials couple in the fundamental. generally the note is then moaning a little and the dynamic levels out too soon.
It is better to couple the partials, the fundamental have then a better tone.
None of those solutions produce audible beats. the tone projects out of the piano, clear, strong and focused.
I believe that it is basically the delay between the coupling at fundamental level and the one at the 2nd partial level that is worked, the instrument does the rest of the job itself.
Bad voicing is a big hassle for tuning.
Laquer on the strike zone makes lot of trouble. also the acidity of tone is enhanced by the too low pitch (iH raise)
Very difficult to tune correctly a piano with that tone. at last a strong brushing of the hammers with a metal brush should be done before tuning, but those hammers are shot, probably hard rock because of impregnation.
No dynamic (playing strong or lightly) No lenght of tone
probable huge imprints make the hammer "slap" the strings. There is no other choice than brush the edges of the imprints so to have some fluffy felt that will adbsorb a little the extra partials produced. Softening the zone on the outer of the imprints is even better (plus the fluffing of the felt)
The piano begin to correct itself in the second part of the concert, unison follow the most direct path to equilibrium, hence the tone is slightly better.
I cannot say for the temperament or tuning as it sound so much out of tune, also because of the pitch.
Last edited by Kamin; 01/16/1301:35 PM.
Professional of the profession. Foo Foo specialist I wish to add some kind and sensitive phrase but nothing comes to mind.!
[quote=Kamin] An unison between 2 strings is like railroads, they go all along the same direction without touching one another.
Enough people have told you your tuning is not adequate.
"not adequate" is insulting expression. Please be condescending Max's. "Tuning the Max-not made perfect" is correct
"Not adequate" is an honest assessment. What you call tuning is an insult to the pianists who have to put up with it. It is an insult to those who have sent you equipment and have tried to help you, and "insult" may be too soft a term. You could be an outright fraud.
I must disagree with you there Kamin. You first need to tune the best possible tuning before there's any point in addressing voicing. As to the subject matter of this thread ... If Max actually did tune this grand for the concert, I must admit that he has most certainly improved.
The tuning remains pretty dreadful compared to a normal concert tuning, and as far as commenting about temperament .... it's one that I have never heard before.
Max has far to go and is best advised to try listening to all the good advice being imparted by tuners that really can tune, instead of constantly arguing and promoting cardboard fixes.
If Max really wants comments on a temperament then for goodness sake tune the initial 12 notes and make a video to demonstrate the relationship of intervals.
I must disagree with you there Kamin. You first need to tune the best possible tuning before there's any point in addressing voicing.
Well if tuning hurt your ears too much it is really difficult. Of course you may voice after tuning (you cannot really voice an untuned piano) but you certainly see what I mean, no sustain, no dynamics, tuning is really limited then and have to be done again after voicing
I agree that there is an improvement, it was not really audible in the first video, it was horrible, to listen.
The pins seem to be set even if possibly not strong
Last edited by Kamin; 01/16/1302:27 PM.
Professional of the profession. Foo Foo specialist I wish to add some kind and sensitive phrase but nothing comes to mind.!
)