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 21 of 25 < 1 2 ... 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 >
Topic Options
#2191035 - 12/01/13 04:46 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 07/10/07
Posts: 1060
Loc: Sicily - Italy

I too have a question: in English, is it more correct if I say "modern" ET's or "contemporary" ET's?

Cheers, a.
_________________________
alfredo

Top
(ad PTG 568) Grand Action Regulation in 37 Steps
Grand Action Regulation in 37 Steps
#2191257 - 12/02/13 06:28 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: rxd]
Olek Online   content
7000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/14/08
Posts: 7457
Loc: France
Originally Posted By: rxd

I was talking with a colleague who understands UT's and had tuned a piano in Kirnberger lll for a modern piano concerto that specified Kirnberger lll. The pianists' only comment was that the piano didn't sound out of tune enough!!! After a good laugh, we discussed it more seriously. I wonder If this typifies the real underlying thinking of pianists in this matter?


That is funny as that can be understood differently :

Not enough change from usual ET
or
The "out of tuneless" of ET missed to the pianist.

The pure 5th of the temperament create an "in tune" perception that was not expected.

The piano, used to its usual tuning, did go back toward it..

Which was ?

I had a look, it is difficult to tune that temperament aurally, yet on a harpsichord, then on a piano it may loose a lot of character (may be also thecomment from the pianist, if he is harpsichord player for instance)

Pianos does not seem to be well suited for strong UT's






Edited by Olek (12/02/13 06:29 AM)
_________________________
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
#2191330 - 12/02/13 10:16 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: alfredo capurso]
Withindale Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 02/09/11
Posts: 1938
Loc: Suffolk, England
Originally Posted By: alfredo capurso
Originally Posted By: Withindale
Trying to follow the argument so far, progressive M3/6's appear to be necessary for the attainment of ET but not sufficient. Bill cited examples of tunings with progressive M3/6's that were not ET.

Is it sufficient for ET that all intervals are progressive, or are further conditions necessary?


Modern ET's include "pure fifths" (proposed by Serge Cordier), which encompasses 7 tones, "pure 12ths" (proposed by Bernhard Stopper), which includes 19 tones, and Chas which encompasses 24 tones.


Alfredo

If I were drafting a standard for ET today (which of course I am not), I'd be inclined to cover the range of possibilities you mention from 12-TET to Cordier.

Before allowing for inharmonicity, my calculations of octave stretch are 12-TET: 0 cents; Chas: 0.32 cents; Stopper, pure 12ths: 0.86; Cordier, pure 5ths: 2.32.

Franz Mohr, or was it the Steinway tuning guide, said all octaves are stretched a bit. One way and another, octave progression appears to be significant.

I'd say any such standard, that's to say a document setting things out, should include tests related to thirds, fourths, fifths, sixths, octaves, tenths, twelfths, fifteenths, seventeenths and maybe others.

It might well have something to say about beat rate curves but there would have to be a precise definition (with examples for the various types of temperament). Does one exist?

I note that: Bill Bremmer said the higher the octave stretch the brighter the sound; Isaac thinks pure twelfths put an upper limit to stretch for the temperament octave, and prefers something closer to 2:1, possibly within a Chas framework; and that Jeff D say pure twelfths may sometimes be tempered to advantage.
_________________________
Ian Russell
Schiedmayer & Soehne, 1925 Model 14, 55" upright
Ibach, 1922 49" upright (project piano)

Top
#2191392 - 12/02/13 11:56 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: Olek]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1707
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted By: Olek
Originally Posted By: rxd

I was talking with a colleague who understands UT's and had tuned a piano in Kirnberger lll for a modern piano concerto that specified Kirnberger lll. The pianists' only comment was that the piano didn't sound out of tune enough!!! After a good laugh, we discussed it more seriously. I wonder If this typifies the real underlying thinking of pianists in this matter?


That is funny as that can be understood differently :

Not enough change from usual ET
or
The "out of tuneless" of ET missed to the pianist.

The pure 5th of the temperament create an "in tune" perception that was not expected.

The piano, used to its usual tuning, did go back toward it..

Which was ?

I had a look, it is difficult to tune that temperament aurally, yet on a harpsichord, then on a piano it may loose a lot of character (may be also thecomment from the pianist, if he is harpsichord player for instance)

Pianos does not seem to be well suited for strong UT's





KBIII is the easiest WT to tune aurally.

Kees

Top
#2191407 - 12/02/13 12:14 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]
Phil D Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/15/10
Posts: 551
Loc: London, England
It sounds like we're at a loose definition of ET as a standard - beat rates should be progressive and octaves should sound pure. Everything else follows from those two criteria. Having 5ths, or 12ths, beatless (or using any other ratio) is just a way to define how pure the octaves are, and as we can't reach agreement on this question (it depends on too many variables), it shouldn't be defined in any standard.

I love the sweet smell of progress wink

edit: perhaps an addition: "Octaves should sound pure, whilst allowing as many of the larger intervals (double octaves, 12ths, 17ths, triple octaves) as possible to also sound pure."


Edited by Phil D (12/02/13 06:44 PM)
_________________________
Phil Dickson
The Cycling Piano Tuner

Top
#2191413 - 12/02/13 12:22 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: Withindale]
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 07/10/07
Posts: 1060
Loc: Sicily - Italy
Originally Posted By: Withindale
Originally Posted By: alfredo capurso
Originally Posted By: Withindale
Trying to follow the argument so far, progressive M3/6's appear to be necessary for the attainment of ET but not sufficient. Bill cited examples of tunings with progressive M3/6's that were not ET.

Is it sufficient for ET that all intervals are progressive, or are further conditions necessary?


Modern ET's include "pure fifths" (proposed by Serge Cordier), which encompasses 7 tones, "pure 12ths" (proposed by Bernhard Stopper), which includes 19 tones, and Chas which encompasses 24 tones.


Alfredo

If I were drafting a standard for ET today (which of course I am not), I'd be inclined to cover the range of possibilities you mention from 12-TET to Cordier.

Before allowing for inharmonicity, my calculations of octave stretch are 12-TET: 0 cents; Chas: 0.32 cents; Stopper, pure 12ths: 0.86; Cordier, pure 5ths: 2.32.

Franz Mohr, or was it the Steinway tuning guide, said all octaves are stretched a bit. One way and another, octave progression appears to be significant.

I'd say any such standard, that's to say a document setting things out, should include tests related to thirds, fourths, fifths, sixths, octaves, tenths, twelfths, fifteenths, seventeenths and maybe others.

It might well have something to say about beat rate curves but there would have to be a precise definition (with examples for the various types of temperament). Does one exist?

I note that: Bill Bremmer said the higher the octave stretch the brighter the sound; Isaac thinks pure twelfths put an upper limit to stretch for the temperament octave, and prefers something closer to 2:1, possibly within a Chas framework; and that Jeff D say pure twelfths may sometimes be tempered to advantage.


Ciao Ian,

You wrote: ..."If I were drafting a standard for ET today (which of course I am not), I'd be inclined to cover the range of possibilities you mention from 12-TET to Cordier."...

Hmmm... 12-TET does not work, because any scale ratio smaller than Chas would "deflate" the two-octave compass. On the other hand, scale ratios larger than Chas may well be considered (in practice), as mentioned in my previous post.

..."Before allowing for inharmonicity, my calculations of octave stretch are 12-TET: 0 cents; Chas: 0.32 cents; Stopper, pure 12ths: 0.86; Cordier, pure 5ths: 2.32."...

I see, :-) you do not waste time.. :-)

..."Franz Mohr, or was it the Steinway tuning guide, said all octaves are stretched a bit. One way and another, octave progression appears to be significant."...

That's for sure.

..."I'd say any such standard, that's to say a document setting things out, should include tests related to thirds, fourths, fifths, sixths, octaves, tenths, twelfths, fifteenths, seventeenths and maybe others."...

I agree. Let me ask: You say "tests", do you mean aural tests, or graphs, or...?

...It might well have something to say about beat rate curves but there would have to be a precise definition (with examples for the various types of temperament). Does one exist?..."...

Well, what I could do in my research report was comparing 12_root_of_two and Chas beat-curves, and I think you are right about definition and examples. I can define beat-curves, but right now it is no possible for me to work on "various types of temperament", as I have little spare time.

..."I note that: Bill Bremmer said the higher the octave stretch the brighter the sound;..."...

True, the more you pull a (any) string, the more it tends to shout, I think my quasi-wife would agree :-)

..."..Isaac thinks pure twelfths put an upper limit to stretch for the temperament octave, and prefers something closer to 2:1, possibly within a Chas framework;..."...

That's why Isaac is my favorite :-)

..."..and that Jeff D say pure twelfths may sometimes be tempered to advantage."

Yes, perhaps Jeff could work on beat-curves and "examples for the various types of temperament", Jeff was the first in PW to grasp the concept and was able to provide some very vivid graphs.


Edited by alfredo capurso (12/02/13 12:26 PM)
_________________________
alfredo

Top
#2191427 - 12/02/13 12:38 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]
Hakki Online   content
2000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/26/01
Posts: 2476
Originally Posted By: OperaTenor
After all of the incessant arguing over ET vs. UT's, maybe this is a fundamental question we should first ask ourselves.

Should there still be a universally-accepted standard of tuning; something that is a failsafe upon which all musicians can ultimately rely? I'm not talking about what happens in the privacy of one's own home, but what goes on for large groups and itinerant performers.

And please please please, can we keep name-calling and insults off this thread?


First, I admit that I have read non of the replies and I am just replying to the original post above.

This is not a fundamental question that should be asked. Why?

Because, as of today, there is not a fundamental issue between these tuning temperaments.

Because, as of today, it is both unfair and not very meaningful to compare some scarce UT (lower that 0.1%) that belongs to past to ET (higher than 99.9%) that is in use today.

Because, ET is already THE universally accepted standard already.

Because, 99.9% of the population even do not know what an UT means.

Because 99.9% of the population is not aware of something ET vs. UT.

Because 99.9% of the population is not aware what ET means.
_________________________
Put in one of IMO, I think, to me, for me... or similar to all sentences I post

http://www.youtube.com/user/hakkithepianist

Top
#2191488 - 12/02/13 03:17 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: Phil D]
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 07/10/07
Posts: 1060
Loc: Sicily - Italy
Originally Posted By: Phil D
It sounds like we're at a loose definition of ET as a standard - beat rates should be progressive and octaves should sound pure. Everything else follows from those two criteria. Having 5ths, or 12ths, beatless (or using any other ratio) is just a way to define how pure the octaves are, and as we can't reach agreement on this question (it depends on too many variables), it shouldn't be defined in any standard.

I love the sweet smell of progress wink

edit: perhaps an addition: "Octaves should sound pure, whilst allowing as many of the larger intervals (double octaves, 12ths, 17ths, triple octaves) to also sound pure."


Hi Phil,

What do you mean by ..."..loose definition"? A translation (in Italian) of the term "loose" may mean too many different things.

You say .."...octaves should sound pure..", and one question is precisely there: octaves that "sound pure" may be on the narrow side or on the wide side of the octave leeway, before the octave sounds beating. And the point here is to see if and how we can share a standard, not a tale.

The two criteria you mention prove that the ET subject is pretty abstract, how to say... evanescent? And everything would follow that?

..."Having 5ths, or 12ths, beatless (or using any other ratio) is just a way to define how pure the octaves are, and as we can't reach agreement on this question (it depends on too many variables), it shouldn't be defined in any standard."... etc.. + edit...

Oh, perhaps now I get it, you are not being serious :-)
_________________________
alfredo

Top
#2191502 - 12/02/13 03:44 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: Hakki]
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 07/10/07
Posts: 1060
Loc: Sicily - Italy
Originally Posted By: Hakki
Originally Posted By: OperaTenor
After all of the incessant arguing over ET vs. UT's, maybe this is a fundamental question we should first ask ourselves.

Should there still be a universally-accepted standard of tuning; something that is a failsafe upon which all musicians can ultimately rely? I'm not talking about what happens in the privacy of one's own home, but what goes on for large groups and itinerant performers.

And please please please, can we keep name-calling and insults off this thread?


First, I admit that I have read non of the replies and I am just replying to the original post above.

This is not a fundamental question that should be asked. Why?

Because, as of today, there is not a fundamental issue between these tuning temperaments.

Because, as of today, it is both unfair and not very meaningful to compare some scarce UT (lower that 0.1%) that belongs to past to ET (higher than 99.9%) that is in use today.

Because, ET is already THE universally accepted standard already.

Because, 99.9% of the population even do not know what an UT means.

Because 99.9% of the population is not aware of something ET vs. UT.

Because 99.9% of the population is not aware what ET means.



Hi Hakki,

From your post I understand that you would adhere to present days and perhaps you like large numbers.

Ok, that may well be your preference, but one thing you state above says it all:

..."Because, ET is already THE universally accepted standard already."

In fact, all we can do with that "universally accepted" standard (for the time being) is only... write about it. Oh... can you tune it?

:-)
_________________________
alfredo

Top
#2191560 - 12/02/13 06:43 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: alfredo capurso]
Phil D Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/15/10
Posts: 551
Loc: London, England
Originally Posted By: alfredo capurso
Originally Posted By: Phil D
It sounds like we're at a loose definition of ET as a standard - beat rates should be progressive and octaves should sound pure. Everything else follows from those two criteria. Having 5ths, or 12ths, beatless (or using any other ratio) is just a way to define how pure the octaves are, and as we can't reach agreement on this question (it depends on too many variables), it shouldn't be defined in any standard.

I love the sweet smell of progress wink

edit: perhaps an addition: "Octaves should sound pure, whilst allowing as many of the larger intervals (double octaves, 12ths, 17ths, triple octaves) to also sound pure."


Hi Phil,

What do you mean by ..."..loose definition"? A translation (in Italian) of the term "loose" may mean too many different things.

You say .."...octaves should sound pure..", and one question is precisely there: octaves that "sound pure" may be on the narrow side or on the wide side of the octave leeway, before the octave sounds beating. And the point here is to see if and how we can share a standard, not a tale.

The two criteria you mention prove that the ET subject is pretty abstract, how to say... evanescent? And everything would follow that?

..."Having 5ths, or 12ths, beatless (or using any other ratio) is just a way to define how pure the octaves are, and as we can't reach agreement on this question (it depends on too many variables), it shouldn't be defined in any standard."... etc.. + edit...

Oh, perhaps now I get it, you are not being serious :-)



No, I'm certainly being serious.

A loose definition is an imprecise one. I don't think a precise definition is appropriate.

My addition, which you may not have noticed: Octaves should sound pure, whilst allowing as many of the larger intervals (double octaves, 12ths, 17ths, triple octaves) as possible to also sound pure."

Your CHAS definition allows many of the larger intervals to sound pure. Narrow octaves do not achieve this. Pure 12ths also allow many of the larger intervals to sound pure.

It's clearly evident in this thread that trying to set a precise definition on the width of any interval is not appropriate as a tuning standard that everyone can agree on. It is necessary to be imprecise to allow for the many different stylistic and artistic interpretations that individual tuners bring.

Can anyone think of a style of ET tuning that is not encompassed by this description?

All intervals should be progressive - the width of an interval should be between the width of the same intervals chromatically adjacent to it.
Octaves should sound pure, whilst allowing as many of the larger intervals (double octaves, 12ths, 17ths, triple octaves) as possible to also sound pure.
_________________________
Phil Dickson
The Cycling Piano Tuner

Top
#2191566 - 12/02/13 06:53 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: DoelKees]
Olek Online   content
7000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/14/08
Posts: 7457
Loc: France
Originally Posted By: DoelKees
[
KBIII is the easiest WT to tune aurally.

Kees


Yes it seem, I confused with Kirnberger.
_________________________
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
#2191575 - 12/02/13 07:15 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: Hakki]
Ed Foote Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/03/03
Posts: 1134
Loc: Tennessee
Originally Posted By: Hakki


First, I admit that I have read non of the replies and I am just replying to the original post above.
Because, ET is already THE universally accepted standard already.


Greetings,
This is patently not true. Universal means everyone, and I, for one, have many customers that want nothing to do with ET. I know of many other techs that can say the same thing. One's desire to find that "universal truth" is scant reason to claim consensus, and there is no consensus on temperament, and there never has been.

The amount of harmonic variety available from a piano is a subject that that can be looked at as a continuum. The amount of variety can range from none ( ET) to unmusical. If we look closely enough, we find that there is never a completely equal division, but it is close enough so that the brain of the listener shuts down all the circuitry that is attuned to register the differences in physical harmony. Since it is scientifically proven that the emotional state of the listener can be affected by consonance and dissonance of intervals, whatever emotional response that could be heightened by variety is lost without it.

I tune all manner of temperaments, from compressed ET in the recording studio, to wildly stretched ET for modern concerti. There are Victorian shadings of ET that are preferred for the teaching studios, and full blown Young temperaments for songwriters here in Nashville. harpsichord mavens fluctuate between 1/4 C, Kirnberger, and Vallotti. The pre-college students' teachers have an easier time of listening all day when I can reduce the tempering in the easier keys used by young students. Steve Fairchild offered a "Piano Teachers' Delight" temperament about 36 years ago. It was almost a copy of a WT, and I know of several tuners around the country that have been tuning it their entire careers with success.

Then there is the temperament tuned by so many of the aural tuners I have observed. In this temperament, there is no order to the variety, just random width thirds scattered about the barely acceptable fifths and suspicious fourths. I would wager that 90% of the aural tuners I have seen in this business couldn't pass the current RPT test with what they normally offer their customers. And that test is an easy one to pass!

There are many ET's,(Chas. Stopper, etc) so even a "standard ET" is not going to be easily defined. However, ET's ability to remove a tonal center makes it flavorless and a "one size fits all, sorta" tuning. This makes it the most common, but it is NOT universal.
Regards,

Top
#2191697 - 12/03/13 01:55 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: Ed Foote]
SMHaley Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/06/13
Posts: 559
Loc: Seattle
And just as hotly debated would also be pitch level. Its not hard to forget that it wasn't all that long ago that ET @ A440 was "adopted" as a general guideline for keyboard instruments (primarily piano).

I think with the modern awareness of historic performance practice it has allowed one to reconsider the purpose of pitch and temperment. There is no such thing as one tuning method fits all. If anything it would suggest that the more well rounded tuner will stand a better chance of having the ability to be flexible.

A program of early keyboard works will most certainly benefit from a WT than vanilla ET, even if the instrument isn't totally authentic to the period. I believe that the informed audience with an equally informed ear need something of color in a performance beyond what can be had from exclusively using ET.

ET might be best left for the concert stage with instrumentalists playing works of the romantic period and later.
_________________________
AA Music Arts 2001, BM 2005
Pipe Organ Builder
Practitioner of piano technology
Church Music Professional
Curator of instruments - Chancel Arts
Baldwin F 1960 (146256)
Zuckermann Flemish Single

Top
#2191778 - 12/03/13 07:40 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: SMHaley]
rxd Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/11/09
Posts: 1703
Loc: London, England
Originally Posted By: SMHaley
And just as hotly debated would also be pitch level. Its not hard to forget that it wasn't all that long ago that ET @ A440 was "adopted" as a general guideline for keyboard instruments (primarily piano).

I think with the modern awareness of historic performance practice it has allowed one to reconsider the purpose of pitch and temperment. There is no such thing as one tuning method fits all. If anything it would suggest that the more well rounded tuner will stand a better chance of having the ability to be flexible.

A program of early keyboard works will most certainly benefit from a WT than vanilla ET, even if the instrument isn't totally authentic to the period. I believe that the informed audience with an equally informed ear need something of color in a performance beyond what can be had from exclusively using ET.

ET might be best left for the concert stage with instrumentalists playing works of the romantic period and later.


Thats the way it is currently.

Early music faculties have duplicate instruments at both 415 and 430.

There are harpsichords that can be converted from 440 to 415 by means of a sliding keyboard. Ironically, this only works effectively in ET without total retuning of the instrument.

Even most of those departments have settled on Vallotti as their standard in the face of much opposition. Even where flexibility of temperament is a requirement, people eventually settle for a "standard".

Rarely are the harpsichord and fortepiano technicians asked for anything other than Valotti.

There are, of course, harpsichord specialists who tune their own instruments in a variety of temperaments and will retune a couple of notes in each octave between program items but they, too, work from a default temperament.
_________________________
Concert & Recording tuner-tech, London, England.
"in theory, practice and theory are the same thing. In practice, they're not." - Lawrence P. 'Yogi' Berra.

Eschew obfuscation.



Top
#2191785 - 12/03/13 07:55 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]
Olek Online   content
7000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/14/08
Posts: 7457
Loc: France
I am reading an amazing documentation on the subject, witnessing uses of ET really early (XVI) Yet with complaints wink

A small exemple from Mersenne , as Luths and violas tuned in ET, and who stated that this should be advantageous for justness in concerts if organs and harpsichord followed the same use.

Also, that modern ET is an extension of mesotonian, being based on M3, when looked at it historically.

Interesting differences between Italy, Germany, England, France.

It was also stated that for music since XVIII, using g temperaments that are near ET is better, as their large fifths would satisfy better modulations (that arise by 5ths)

Mersenne finished by saying that" the praticiens did not want to change their tuning so it semble to the luth tuning, as they fear loosing the perfection of their thirds and half tones, (which are one of the largest beauty of our music) "





Edited by Olek (12/03/13 09:51 AM)
_________________________
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
#2191810 - 12/03/13 09:57 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: rxd]
Olek Online   content
7000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/14/08
Posts: 7457
Loc: France
Originally Posted By: rxd
Originally Posted By: SMHaley
And just as hotly debated would also be pitch level. Its not hard to forget that it wasn't all that long ago that ET @ A440 was "adopted" as a general guideline for keyboard instruments (primarily piano).

I think with the modern awareness of historic performance practice it has allowed one to reconsider the purpose of pitch and temperment. There is no such thing as one tuning method fits all. If anything it would suggest that the more well rounded tuner will stand a better chance of having the ability to be flexible.

A program of early keyboard works will most certainly benefit from a WT than vanilla ET, even if the instrument isn't totally authentic to the period. I believe that the informed audience with an equally informed ear need something of color in a performance beyond what can be had from exclusively using ET.

ET might be best left for the concert stage with instrumentalists playing works of the romantic period and later.


Thats the way it is currently.

Early music faculties have duplicate instruments at both 415 and 430.

There are harpsichords that can be converted from 440 to 415 by means of a sliding keyboard. Ironically, this only works effectively in ET without total retuning of the instrument.

Even most of those departments have settled on Vallotti as their standard in the face of much opposition. Even where flexibility of temperament is a requirement, people eventually settle for a "standard".

Rarely are the harpsichord and fortepiano technicians asked for anything other than Valotti.

There are, of course, harpsichord specialists who tune their own instruments in a variety of temperaments and will retune a couple of notes in each octave between program items but they, too, work from a default temperament.


So would that mean that using Valotti could be more an intellectual posture, or the need for more stable instruments, more than due to a musical justification?

For what I am reading actually, it is not the temperament the most suited for any baroco music. Is there an ease to modify it to other forms? Is it seen as a sort of ET adapted for most period music?
_________________________
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
#2191826 - 12/03/13 10:24 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]
UnrightTooner Offline
4000 Post Club Member

Registered: 11/13/08
Posts: 4919
Loc: Bradford County, PA
Using a WT as a standard temperment would be like going back to using 3 barley corns as an inch.
_________________________
Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?

Top
#2191833 - 12/03/13 10:49 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]
Olek Online   content
7000 Post Club Member

Registered: 03/14/08
Posts: 7457
Loc: France
Not quite, it is instrument driven, and also relate to the repertoire.

Even for Organs, it is said that a modern polyphonic and symphonic organ is to be tuned in ET, while a period instrument is seen differently.

The modern piano have not as much "flaws" had the ones in 1830.

That said, I like to understand how to use the somewhat generous leeway provided by the piano (in slow intervals) at the advantage of more relief in harmonic progressions.
Up to now the kind of relief it tend to is melodic and due to the tuner following the Ih curve.

Surimpression of a cycle if 5 to the own imbalance of the piano must be possible in a very mitigated way.

That said I owned a scaling software that proposed to "match inharmonicity"

What I noticed in the way Steinway mod B where tuned is that a huge slowing g of fast intervals when attaining the break and that was exactly giving it that "old style tone" that was much appreciated, by Michel Legrand for instance who did not like too much straight ET for what I understood.
_________________________
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
#2192170 - 12/03/13 10:27 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: rxd]
SMHaley Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/06/13
Posts: 559
Loc: Seattle
I think it is a bit too much of a generalization to say that Vallotti is the go to WT for early music. Since my region has quite a strong contingent of early music ensembles perhaps we are the exception to the rule... but a number of things float around in these parts. The Lehmann/Bach, Young, Kellner.

I don't think settling on a particular temperment, at least for things like harpsichord or forte piano is stability related. My harpsichord changes based on what I'm doing with it and I have not experienced any stability issues. Of course one tunes it just prior to performance anyhow (both choirs of strings).
_________________________
AA Music Arts 2001, BM 2005
Pipe Organ Builder
Practitioner of piano technology
Church Music Professional
Curator of instruments - Chancel Arts
Baldwin F 1960 (146256)
Zuckermann Flemish Single

Top
#2192550 - 12/04/13 05:36 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: Phil D]
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 07/10/07
Posts: 1060
Loc: Sicily - Italy
Originally Posted By: Phil D
Originally Posted By: alfredo capurso
Originally Posted By: Phil D
It sounds like we're at a loose definition of ET as a standard - beat rates should be progressive and octaves should sound pure. Everything else follows from those two criteria. Having 5ths, or 12ths, beatless (or using any other ratio) is just a way to define how pure the octaves are, and as we can't reach agreement on this question (it depends on too many variables), it shouldn't be defined in any standard.

I love the sweet smell of progress wink

edit: perhaps an addition: "Octaves should sound pure, whilst allowing as many of the larger intervals (double octaves, 12ths, 17ths, triple octaves) to also sound pure."


Hi Phil,

What do you mean by ..."..loose definition"? A translation (in Italian) of the term "loose" may mean too many different things.

You say .."...octaves should sound pure..", and one question is precisely there: octaves that "sound pure" may be on the narrow side or on the wide side of the octave leeway, before the octave sounds beating. And the point here is to see if and how we can share a standard, not a tale.

The two criteria you mention prove that the ET subject is pretty abstract, how to say... evanescent? And everything would follow that?

..."Having 5ths, or 12ths, beatless (or using any other ratio) is just a way to define how pure the octaves are, and as we can't reach agreement on this question (it depends on too many variables), it shouldn't be defined in any standard."... etc.. + edit...

Oh, perhaps now I get it, you are not being serious :-)



No, I'm certainly being serious.

A loose definition is an imprecise one. I don't think a precise definition is appropriate.

My addition, which you may not have noticed: Octaves should sound pure, whilst allowing as many of the larger intervals (double octaves, 12ths, 17ths, triple octaves) as possible to also sound pure."

Your CHAS definition allows many of the larger intervals to sound pure. Narrow octaves do not achieve this. Pure 12ths also allow many of the larger intervals to sound pure.

It's clearly evident in this thread that trying to set a precise definition on the width of any interval is not appropriate as a tuning standard that everyone can agree on. It is necessary to be imprecise to allow for the many different stylistic and artistic interpretations that individual tuners bring.

Can anyone think of a style of ET tuning that is not encompassed by this description?

All intervals should be progressive - the width of an interval should be between the width of the same intervals chromatically adjacent to it.
Octaves should sound pure, whilst allowing as many of the larger intervals (double octaves, 12ths, 17ths, triple octaves) as possible to also sound pure.


Hi Phil,

I would say that the first part of your description is quite appropriate, ..."All intervals should be progressive - the width of an interval should be between the width of the same intervals chromatically adjacent to it."

Have to say though, if I consider what I do, there is one detail missing, namely that 4ths and 5ths invert their beat rate progressions. Perhaps that is negligible? Or perhaps could be part of a more detailed/technical description.

Then you say ..."..Octaves should sound pure..", possibly there you talk about ordinary listeners, 'cos I do not tune pure octaves, "dead" octaves, but octaves that are more and more tense and eventually beating very slowly, towards the bass and the high trebles.

Then you say ..."..whilst allowing as many of the larger intervals (double octaves, 12ths, 17ths, triple octaves) as possible to also sound pure."

There my approach deviates significantly: my target is not ...intervals (larger or whatever) that "sound pure", but right as part of a whole, and 17ths (double octaves + M3) are not pure at all, as they have their smooth progression from bass up to the trebles.

You wrote: ..."..It's clearly evident in this thread that trying to set a precise definition on the width of any interval is not appropriate as a tuning standard that everyone can agree on. It is necessary to be imprecise to allow for the many different stylistic and artistic interpretations that individual tuners bring."...

That is a dense sentence..., and here I need to be breaf. IMO, this thread proves that it is not easy/direct to fix a standard, not even talk about it :-)

It looks like we have a standard already, it seems to be an ET that is very "imprecise"; in fact, it is impossible to tune it as a standard, to the point that we all describe what we tune (say some kind of WT) as if it was... ET.

Why, after three centuries, should we keep on being "imprecise"? In the name of style and/or artistry?

Hmmm..., many things come to mind, my apprentiship and the "imprecise" directions I received, "artistic" tunings, theories of all kinds and pianist (and musicians) expectation, and when I tune... just want that intrument to sound in tune.
_________________________
alfredo

Top
#2193491 - 12/06/13 01:02 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]
Chris Warren Offline
Full Member

Registered: 10/10/03
Posts: 50

Top
#2193517 - 12/06/13 02:03 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]
erichlof Offline
Full Member

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 369
Hi Chris,
Thanks for posting those intervals. We'll see what Mr. Kees' software says, but they sound pretty smooth to me! If I were a piano tuning customer of yours I would be pleased and give you repeat business. smile

Top
#2193659 - 12/06/13 08:05 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: Chris Warren]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1707
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted By: Chris Warren


M3

FA 6.3
F#A# 7.1
GB 8.0
G#C 9.3
AC# 8.8
A#D 8.8
BD# 9.2
CE 9.6
C#F 9.9

M6

FD 7.3
F#D# 7.9
GE 9.0
G#F 9.1
AF# 10.5
A#G 10.7
BG# 11.4
C4A 9.4
C#A# 11.3
DA 13.5
D#G# 14.0

Kees

Top
#2193678 - 12/06/13 09:30 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]
erichlof Offline
Full Member

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 369
That's really really close Chris. Good job! :-)

Top
#2209224 - 01/06/14 09:49 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: erichlof]
Bernhard Stopper Offline
Full Member

Registered: 09/22/08
Posts: 211
Loc: Germany


Major thirds:
http://www.piano-stopper.de/dl/M3.wav

Major sixths:
http://www.piano-stopper.de/dl/M6.wav

Upright Piano, size 120 cm.

Regards,

Bernhard Stopper
_________________________
Bernhard Stopper
www.piano-stopper.de

Salieri: "Mediocrities everywhere, now and to come: I absolve you all! Amen! Amen! Amen!"
(Amadeus, the movie)

Top
#2209444 - 01/06/14 02:30 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 07/10/07
Posts: 1060
Loc: Sicily - Italy

Very good job, Bernhard, your posting is simply commendable but... you are spoiling my plan... :-)

What will Bill have to write, when Kees gives us the numbers?

Now serious, what can be said about that tuning, on a 120cm. upright... Nothing.

(Due) Aurally, there are a couple of bichords that are inverted (in terms of "hair"), others are pretty similar, meaning that the whole progression per se could be better... progressive, but that (IMO) is not the point (and I guess is not your point either). The thing is that we should not ride on the idea that 16 notes are enough to define a modern ET. Hmmm...

BTW, don't you advocate pure 12ths? And don't you check 15ths and 17ths going up the treble? Why don't we try to reason in terms of "whole" and share our results, together with the idea of a real Standard?

Regards, a.c.
.
_________________________
alfredo

Top
#2209854 - 01/06/14 10:22 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: Bernhard Stopper]
DoelKees Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/01/10
Posts: 1707
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted By: Bernhard Stopper


Major thirds:
http://www.piano-stopper.de/dl/M3.wav

Major sixths:
http://www.piano-stopper.de/dl/M6.wav

Upright Piano, size 120 cm.

Regards,

Bernhard Stopper

So it is possible after all! Impressive. Did you tune this with OnlyPure? The plots are explained here.

Perhaps the cent plots should have their sign reversed and be interpreted as the error of the 3 parameter model, rather than the other way around. smile

M3

FA 6.6
F#A# 6.8
GB 7.2
G#C 7.9
AC# 8.3
A#D 9.1
BD# 9.7
CE 10.4
C#F 10.8
DF# 11.6
D#G 12.1
EG# 13.2
F4A 14.2

M6

F3D 7.6
F#3D# 7.9
GE 8.5
G#F 9.2
AF# 9.8
A#G 10.3
BG# 11.4
C4A 12.0




Kees

Top
#2210013 - 01/07/14 07:16 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]
UnrightTooner Offline
4000 Post Club Member

Registered: 11/13/08
Posts: 4919
Loc: Bradford County, PA
The M3/M6 tests also show that the P4s are most likely progressive. There is one that is 0.1bps off, but that could be in the tolerance of the measurement.

Yes, Mr. Stopper, was this aural or OnlyPure ETD? Or perhaps it was by measuring beatrates somehow? Inquiring minds want to know! smile
_________________________
Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?

Top
#2210036 - 01/07/14 08:05 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]
Bill Bremmer RPT Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/21/02
Posts: 3196
Loc: Madison, WI USA
Interesting that Jeff did not interpret Doel's graph as exhibiting "whopping errors" and "problems" with this temperament. We still don't know whether the temperament was aurally generated or through one of the most precise programs on the market. Either way, as I had often maintained, neither would ever show a perfectly numeric progression. Not that it matters because it doesn't. There has been, however those who seem to think that the more perfected ET is, the better music would sound. I have long known two facts about that: It can't be done and if it could be, it would be disappointing that the results did not make the music sound any better. Nor would it answer or help the premise of this topic: a standard that would help all instruments (voices included) play together better.

Imagine this: A 9 foot concert grand placed in front of a 100 piece orchestra in the imagined "perfect" ET. It can never really happen but even if it could, it would still be the most out of tune instrument on the stage!
_________________________
Bill Bremmer RPT
Madison WI USA
www.billbremmer.com

Top
#2210050 - 01/07/14 08:33 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]
UnrightTooner Offline
4000 Post Club Member

Registered: 11/13/08
Posts: 4919
Loc: Bradford County, PA
Bill:

Oh yes, as long as it is imperfect in the way YOU want it to be, then it is OK! It is the ancient example of liberty vs license.

But that is not what is going on here in this Topic right now. We are looking at what tolerance ET can be tuned to. That's all. Your are just hanging paper. It is really disrespectful.
_________________________
Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?

Top
Page 21 of 25 < 1 2 ... 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 >

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

The world's most popular piano web site.
-------------------
PIANO BOOKS
Interesting books about the piano, pianists, piano history, biographies, memoirs and more!
(ad) HAILUN Pianos
Hailun Pianos - Click for More
Ad (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
132 registered (accordeur, AEMontoya, 88 Fingers Jeff, A Guy, 42 invisible), 1419 Guests and 19 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
76007 Members
42 Forums
157167 Topics
2308272 Posts

Max Online: 15252 @ 03/21/10 11:39 PM
New Topics - Multiple Forums
Stravinsky - Valse pour les enfants
by Peter071
08/30/14 06:05 PM
Recommend me a slab keyboard with full grand touch.
by TwoSnowflakes
08/30/14 05:24 PM
What's the value of my piano?
by Athos
08/30/14 04:51 PM
Portable keyboard stand for Kawai ES7
by gbitw
08/30/14 04:24 PM
Recital Piece to go with Fur Elise
by eccp19
08/30/14 03:22 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