|
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!
|
|
75 members (bluebilly, accordeur, BillS728, aphexdisklavier, bobrunyan, anotherscott, AaronSF, apianostudent, 16 invisible),
2,119
guests, and
357
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,515
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,515 |
No pitch in the chain of CM3's can be sharp or flat of a perfect arrangement by any more than 0.5 cents without it being very obvious. This can be proven with an ETD. Use the ETD calculated program to tune F3-A3-C#4-F4-A4. Now sharpen or flatten any of those notes by 0.5 cents and you will hear that the arrangement is disturbed. That may be so but the question is "how much error can you have before it sounds wrong". Not "given a perfect CM3 sequence and a non perfect one, how much can the non perfect one be off before you notice the difference". For me the answer to the correct question is 2 cents (on a badly scaled upright). This conforms to the analysis I gave here. Kees
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,028
4000 Post Club Member
|
4000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,028 |
Kees, I can't see your analysis right now because of limited bandwidth but really, I know that if you changed any note of a perfected CM3 chain by 2 whole cents, it would not just be noticeable, it would be way off!
Move any note of a reasonably good representation of ET by 2 whole cents and it would be obvious to any good technician. The exam tolerance is 0.9 cents and your idea of "noticeable" is more than double that!
That brings to mind the legal limit for impairment due to alcohol consumption. If someone is at .08, maybe it would be barely noticeable but certainly at .16, it would be obvious to anyone!
The point in this discussion is that when tuning by 4ths & 5ths alone, it would be rather easy to make an error in excess of 0.5 cents and with no way to check it at the moment, build upon it and spread that error, if not increase it geometrically with each new note tuned.
That is what I did puposefully in the video that you last analysed. All the 4ths & 5ths sounded "good" as I tuned them but the final results were wacko and an example of you know what.
That simply is not going to happen with the "Up a 3rd..." sequence, no matter how many small errors may be made when executing it.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 6,425
6000 Post Club Member
|
OP
6000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 6,425 |
.....
The point in this discussion is that when tuning by 4ths & 5ths alone, it would be rather easy to make an error in excess of 0.5 cents and with no way to check it at the moment, build upon it and spread that error, if not increase it geometrically with each new note tuned.
.....
That simply is not going to happen with the "Up a 3rd..." sequence, no matter how many small errors may be made when executing it. Oh, really? .....
With a U3U3D5 sequence there is less accumulation and it may not be obvious at all, especially if the error is not consistent. Where you will notice it is when listening to the M6s, especially using the inside/outside test. Consider the beatrates from the Video you made, Bill:
M3
FA 6.4 F#A# 7.3 GB 7.8 G#C 9.3 AC# 9.5 A#D 8.2 BD# 9.9 CE 10.3 C#F 12.2
M6
FD 7.1 F#D# 8.2 GE 8.6 G#F 10.5
Comparing the M6s to the M3s we get the following differences:
FD/GB -0.7 F#D#/G#C -1.1 GE/AC# -0.9 G#F/A#D +1.7 !!!
Now whether this particular result is due to accumulative, random or systematic errors is hard to say. But changing the width of A#D alone to get the M3s progressive will not solve the problem.
..... No, Bill, there is something wrong with this temperment and it was tuned with an U3U3D5 sequence. It is just not obvious when listening to only the chromatic M3s and M6s within this one octave. There certainly are errors of over 0.5 cents.
Jeff Deutschle Part-Time Tuner Who taught the first chicken how to peck?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,087
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,087 |
.....
The point in this discussion is that when tuning by 4ths & 5ths alone, it would be rather easy to make an error in excess of 0.5 cents and with no way to check it at the moment, build upon it and spread that error, if not increase it geometrically with each new note tuned.
.....
That simply is not going to happen with the "Up a 3rd..." sequence, no matter how many small errors may be made when executing it. Oh, really? .....
With a U3U3D5 sequence there is less accumulation and it may not be obvious at all, especially if the error is not consistent. Where you will notice it is when listening to the M6s, especially using the inside/outside test. Consider the beatrates from the Video you made, Bill:
M3
FA 6.4 F#A# 7.3 GB 7.8 G#C 9.3 AC# 9.5 A#D 8.2 BD# 9.9 CE 10.3 C#F 12.2
M6
FD 7.1 F#D# 8.2 GE 8.6 G#F 10.5
Comparing the M6s to the M3s we get the following differences:
FD/GB -0.7 F#D#/G#C -1.1 GE/AC# -0.9 G#F/A#D +1.7 !!!
Now whether this particular result is due to accumulative, random or systematic errors is hard to say. But changing the width of A#D alone to get the M3s progressive will not solve the problem.
..... No, Bill, there is something wrong with this temperment and it was tuned with an U3U3D5 sequence. It is just not obvious when listening to only the chromatic M3s and M6s within this one octave. There certainly are errors of over 0.5 cents. Jeff, I'm not sure if you realize this or not, but Bill is a Certified Technical Examiner with the PTG. He will never tell you that because he is not allowed to, but I can. The point being, he had to score 90% or above on a piano that was tuned by three other master tuners. You may not think that is something, but most of us do. It seems like you have some kind of vendetta out on Bill and it just makes you look bad. The fact is, you can't tune a temperament with just M3's, or just P4/P5. In your own video, you proved that by using RBI to check your tuning. Bill is not advocating using only M3's or M6's, he is simply stating that throwing in the CM3's into your arsenal is another tool that will improve precision, efficiency, and speed. And finally, whatever temperament sequence that is used, how many people can say they never have to tweek or refine it when they are done? In other words, the actual temperament sequence one uses, is moot, if refinement is needed at the end, which, IMHO, is always needed. Your video was good but just needed the extra refinement to produce a better temperament. And the better a temperament is, the more accurate one can tune the octaves, 12ths, 15ths, 19ths, and 22nds in the treble. Without that kind of precision up top, the tuning looses its brilliance and resonance. Finally, the 3/6 test is not that accurate. They should be similar, but they do not need to be identical. Best Regards,
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,087
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,087 |
Also, my experience with ETDs is that, once you get lower than a 1 cent error, you can't get any lower; as your tuning gets better, your score gets worse.
My theory is that the skilled aural tuner is better than an ETD or computer at hearing the "whole" sound, and judgements that produce better aural tunings, may disagree with an ETD.
My students use a spreadsheet I created that mimics the RPT exam, and Tunelab with a calculated stretch for the specific piano being tuned, to measure their aural tunings.
The goal is to pass with 80%, not try and get more than 90%, because whenever we do that, the marks seem to get lower. Again, I feel that the ETD is close, but not close enough, so that when the ear refines the tuning, the tuning is really moving closer to "perfection", but away from the ETD's calculated perfection. Has the PTG ever done a tuning exam (at least the part where the candidate is not allowed to use it) on the various brands of ETD? It would be interesting to see how well they score. Kees I think there's too much human error involved to be an accurate comparison. However, the offsets from the master tuning could be compared with the offsets predicted by various ETD's. That would be interesting.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,028
4000 Post Club Member
|
4000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,028 |
Yes, there are errors of more than 0.5 cents and they are in the initial CM3's. The F3-A3 and F4-A4 are slightly too slow so they can be heard upon careful listening. (Remember that, just as with your "gift" temperament, this was done as quickly as possible).
Those errors however are far less than 2 whole cents. If this temperament had been presented on a tuning exam, the exam tolerances and Pitch Correction Number would probably have yielded only one point. The Pitch Correction Number may have directed the "error" to another note and that "error" might not have been able to be aurally verified.
While Kees' hard numbers show irregularities, the easily audible irregularities are barely discernible except with very careful scrutiny. If there had been any error that amounted to 2 whole cents, it would have been very clearly heard.
What I am saying is an initial set of CM3's that contain 0.5 cets or less error most likely cannot be heard except perhaps under the most extreme scrutiny by very experienced technicians.
This means that the initial set of CM3's can be a good foundation even with some small errors. They just can't be very far off without it being obvious.
A chain of 4ths & 5ths, each one being an estimate that has no available check and built upon before there finally is a check can contain errors of 2 whole cenrs or more and go undetected until the first check is available. That check may only be comparing two intervals that are both incorrect and therefore may be erroneously deemed to be correct.
Don't try to tell me it doesn't happen because it is on You Tube!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 6,425
6000 Post Club Member
|
OP
6000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 6,425 |
Mark:
Reputations mean little to me. Bill says one thing and his own evidence disproves it. Why would anyone keep quiet about such a thing?
Jeff Deutschle Part-Time Tuner Who taught the first chicken how to peck?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,087
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,087 |
Mark:
Reputations mean little to me. Bill says one thing and his own evidence disproves it. Why would anyone keep quiet about such a thing? Jeff, If reputations mean nothing to you, how can you function in the real world? I have read the posts by Bill and you and I have yet to see exactly where Bill says one thing and his evidence disproves it. I am sure I am not the only one who does not see the reason for this vendetta. Reputation or not, I, for one, get a much closer temperament without as much tweaking needed, when I start with a foundation of CM3's. Having said that, my next approach is the white anchor, (AD, DG, GC, CF), P4/P5, the best of both worlds. You are forgetting a very very important fact; your temperament was obviously in error with decreasing M3's that would not have been there if you had checked more M3's. Yes, CM3's can result in incorrect P4/P5, but that is only if you do not check the P4/P5 as you go. And the error discernible in CM3's is much lower than P4/P5. It is obvious. There is a larger window for a P4 or P5 that sounds right, but a smaller window for a M3 in a CM3 to work. The M3's are more like using a micrometer to measure interval size, and the P4/P5 are more like using a ruler. When putting all the P4/P5 together, it is possible to smooth out the errors, but that involves much more tweaking. Like I said, a comprehensive approach using P4/P5 and CM3's has helped me get good ET fast with minimal tweaking needed at the end. Jeff, your signature says Part-Time Tuner. Perhaps your animosity is due to your own inability to work the CM3's into a useful and advantageous tool. And also, perhaps your frustration is due to Bill's inability to successfully convince of the merits and provide you with ample technique to reproduce his result. Don't give up on it. Check out my extra classes in my youtube channel. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChguBSds-C8. After a brief discussion of changing strings, I proceed to tune the temperament using a hybrid CM3 and P4/P5 sequence, but even then, I have to tweak to improve it at the end. Best Regards,
Last edited by Mark Cerisano, RPT; 12/30/13 01:55 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 6,425
6000 Post Club Member
|
OP
6000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 6,425 |
.....
Jeff,
If reputations mean nothing to you, how can you function in the real world?
..... By paying attention to a person's demeanor. Can they talk about a subject without it relating personally to themselves or to those they relate to? .....
And the error discernible in CM3's is much lower than P4/P5. It is obvious. There is a larger window for a P4 or P5 that sounds right, but a smaller window for a M3 in a CM3 to work.
..... I find the opposite to be true. At the risk of inviting a cross-post, I realize the biggest mistake in the demo was tweaking D after tuning the first 3 SBIs. Many people really can tune with SBIs!
Jeff Deutschle Part-Time Tuner Who taught the first chicken how to peck?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,087
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,087 |
Jeff,
If your post of your video was to show how accurate P4/P5 is in producing an ET temperament, why did you let it go with all those M3's that didn't fit?
A person's demeanor does not indicate competency.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,087
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,087 |
BTW, the opposite is not true. Mathematically speaking, CM3's have a smaller margin of error than P4/P5 before you can hear it. Unless of course you can't hear it. Then I guess you have to use what works best for you.
Hearing the small differences in beat speeds between chromatic and contiguous M3's is not trivial. It takes some time and technique for them to be heard.
One technique that helps my students is to concentrate on the colour of the interval. Faster beat speeds have a slightly brighter tone.
Also, focus on Coincidental Partials for the beat (colour) source.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,515
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,515 |
One technique that helps my students is to concentrate on the colour of the interval. Faster beat speeds have a slightly brighter tone.
That's one thing that throws me off in practice; because of uneven voicing for example C#4F4 may appear to beat faster than it does because F4 is brighter due to uneven voicing already. Kees
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,028
4000 Post Club Member
|
4000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,028 |
Mark, Here is the truth since you haven't been on here long enough to realize it yet: By demeanor, Jeff means that I never back down or away from the use of non-equal temperaments.
There are a lot of technicians who feel the same way about that subject. It is only supposed to be for harpsichords and even then, you are a nut case if you believe that.
As far as many technicians are concerned, Bach did not invent ET, no, GOD created it and it is the one and only way to ever tune a piano, is now, always has been and forever shall be.
For me to openly say that I do not tune pianos in ET is akin to blasphemy! It is morally corrupt and unnatural and yet I am flaunting my sacrileges when I should be doing penance and bowing to the almighty monolith of ET.
What is worse is that I have identified the hypocrisy of it all by saying that 9 out of 10 aural tuners do not even tune ET but offer their own personalized version of a backwards Well Temperament as a substitute for ET.
I was supposed to cowar and hide in a corner, apologize for not speaking the one and only truth about ET but I never did and I keep shooting holes in what technicians want to believe in but never really was the truth.
Jeff actually believes that Bach wrote the Well-Tempered Clavier music for ET which is an absurd notion to have but he started a topic on that subject anyway. He argued about it, presented no hard evidence to support his claim but refuted all logic and documentation that contradicted him until he got tired of defending a senseless legend and declared himself the winner.
Any rational technician can see that the book by Willuam Braide White is obsolete and that tuning only by 4ths & 5ths would lead to compound and cumulative errors. Jeff, however takes my saying that as a personal insult. That is what he means by "demeanor".
Never mind that the use of CM3's has an obvious advantage, that has been taught since the early 1980's, was a fundamental and guiding principal behind the development of the first programmable ETD, is used by examiners both in creating a master tuning and aural verification of errors.
Never mind all of that! Jeff is right! My demeanor is distasteful because I don't think the same things as he does. My behaviour is unacceptable because I keep repeating what I know to be the truth.
Eventually, this topic will end and Jeff will declare that once again, he has proven himself to be right.
Never mind that his own video produced CM3's that did not progress and the result was Reverse Well, as he so correctly said, most people would call it ET.
My demeanor and attitude are very bad because I am telling the truth about it. It is audibly, without numerical verfication, Reverse Well and that is the result of theway he insists upon tuning the piano.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 6,425
6000 Post Club Member
|
OP
6000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 6,425 |
de·mean·or n. The way in which a person behaves; deportment.
Bill your demeanor is self-promoting.
All:
Here is a thought I just had. I don't think it is difficult to tune a 4th on top of a fifth (tempered) and end up with a good octave. Has anyone tried that with two M3s given one that is already tuned? If it is true that M3s are so much easier to discern, it should be easy to tune two more and end up with a good octave. Maybe it is easy. I have never tried it.
Jeff Deutschle Part-Time Tuner Who taught the first chicken how to peck?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,571
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,571 |
Silently hold down the notes of the M3 then a short sharp hit on the note that is equivalent to the fifth partial of the lower note of the M3. The result will be a "ghost" note with an almost pure beat rate that seems to hold its tempo better. It takes out all the interference and disconnects the beat rate from any tonal issues with the hammers.
All that is required then is an aquired sense of rhythm and an aquired sense of tempo in order to help compare beat rates. This, of course, can be used on any tuning interval. Holding the interval notes and a short rap on the LCP (Lowest Common Partial).
It doesn't take much dexterity to rap the LCP and then go to the tuning lever to make any fine adjustment while holding the notes of the interval. It doesn't take any longer in realistic terms and a whole new order of accuracy can be practiced.
We are indoctrinated to "count" an odd number plus fractions of beats per second. This is not intuitive. To me, a series of intervals is reckoned as the same beat rate but at a slightly faster or slower tempo.
For example, eight per second is four beats to every metronome click at mm=120 then i can vary the speed by minute increments by setting the mm to 121 or 119, etc. While these exact numbers are not used in tuning, it is a good practice exercise to do this so that a comparative sense of beatrates is developed.
Practice.
Experience.
These are two words I'm not hearing much in most tuning threads.
Also, the books, as I remember talk of tuning pure, then introducing a beatrate. This might be fine for learning what is pure and what is not but I don't think is necessarily a good tuning habit.
Some teaching and learning ideas are held on to long past their usefulness.
I prefer to tune fifths downward, that is to tune the lower note of the fifth to the already established upper note. It is easier for me to hear more noise than I need then reduce it. This enables setting the pitch and the pin at one and the same time.
It seems to me that a downward fifth, if tuned pure first, severely obstructs the pin setting process (the way pins are usually set in that region of the piano) and slows the process down. This may be producing difficulties with someone who trained themselves from books.
A certain speed, or continuity is essential in comparative work, the mind can only hold a beatrate for so long when another beatrate has to be compared to it.
Please excuse any need for editing, Internet reception is a bit thin out here. I'm not exactly at the end of the world but you can see it from here.
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.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,571
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,571 |
De-mean- or
Isn't that one of those cheesy, churchy definitions so beloved of disgraced televangelists back in the '70's. Like "at-one-ment".
Perhaps it had all gone way too far when I heard one of them pronounce exegesis as exejeeezuz.
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.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 7,439
7000 Post Club Member
|
7000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 7,439 |
Jeff actually believes that Bach wrote the Well-Tempered Clavier music for ET which is an absurd notion to have but he started a topic on that subject anyway. No matter how extensive my search, I've never found a score for Die Gleichtemperierte Klavier.Even us "lowly" pianists understand the difference. And yea, many of us can hear it too.
Marty in Minnesota
It's much easier to bash a Steinway than it is to play one.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,082
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,082 |
...
Perhaps it had all gone way too far when I heard one of them pronounce exegesis as exejeeezuz. A new word. Hilarious
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 1,131
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 1,131 |
Practice. Experience. These are two words I'm not hearing much in most tuning threads. Hence the thread I started on the tinkerings of others. There seem to be a few that convinced themselves that all one needs is a software program and a couple of tools (perhaps a pointer from a tech if you aren't brave enough yet), and voila. If its true then I started too young! I should have waited for the technological and mathematical miracles of modern tuning freeware and VandaKing's website. (Sarcasm intended)
PTG Associate AIO Regular Member ASCAP Pipe Organ Builder Chief Instrument Technician, Director, Chancel Arts Church Music Professional AA Music Arts 2001, BM Organ, Choral 2005
Baldwin F 1960 (146256) Zuckermann Flemish Single
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,082
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,082 |
No matter how extensive my search, I've never found a score for Die Gleichtemperierte Klavier....
You guys are on a roll. Hilarious, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:34 PM
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:23 PM
|
|
Forums43
Topics223,408
Posts3,349,457
Members111,637
|
Most Online15,252 Mar 21st, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|