2022 our 25th year online!

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!

SEARCH
Piano Forums & Piano World
(ad)
Who's Online Now
65 members (brennbaer, accordeur, antune, Colin Miles, anotherscott, AndyOnThePiano2, benkeys, 11 invisible), 1,823 guests, and 309 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 38 of 38 1 2 36 37 38
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 6,425
6000 Post Club Member
Offline
6000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 6,425
I think much of it is marketing, whether we are talking about ETD vs aural, ET vs WT, or 12ths vs 15ths. It is all so subjective that the tuner can infuence a customer's perceptions.


Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,831
P
4000 Post Club Member
Offline
4000 Post Club Member
P
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,831
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso
Originally Posted by prout
Alfredo,
You said, "IMO, today the actual question should be: How is any temperament and tuning meant to be expanded, both in theory and practice, beyond the first octave? How can we manage the whole scale semitonal geometry?"

While the above statement is not about a standard, it is a very interesting question. Put another way, " On a piano, how many octaves above and below the temperament octave can one maintain the essential character of the temperament and still maintain a cohesive musical sound over the whole piano? This would true of ET as well as UTs.


Hi prout,

Why do you think that my "statement is not about a standard"? Would not you like a reference standard of that kind? How do you expand your temperament octave?

You ask "..how many octaves..". But when you say "..can one maintain the essential character of the temperament and still maintain a cohesive musical sound over the whole piano.." you are still thinking in terms of "octave/s". That is partly wrong, as you are asking about "the whole piano".


Hi Alfredo,

The aim of an UT is to create unequal intervals, so a cohesive sound in UT would be divided into 12 distinct cohesive keys, whereas an ET could have a cohesiveness that is spread among all the keys. Both have value, but I don't think we could say that there is a standard that could be applied to both types of temperament. I say this as a neophyte tuner, so there may be a valid rebuttal.

With regard to octaves, it is a necessary measure of an UT, since the intervals are not equal.

Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,831
P
4000 Post Club Member
Offline
4000 Post Club Member
P
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,831
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso
Originally Posted by prout
Originally Posted by Bill Bremmer RPT
Thanks Ed,

That is one problem we have when a player system is used to play examples. It often plows right through what any pianist would adjust to naturally. I'll never forget the comment of a German pianist who said when asked to comment, "[upon reaching a certain passage in the music], when I went to make the expression, I found that it was already there".

The primary reason for using a cycle of 5th based temperament is to augment the total amount of expression and color that is meant to be in the music. ET actually negates what is there to be explored.


Thanks BDB, Bill and ED for your thoughts.

BDB - I agree that some people are more sensitive to the sound of an M3, though I would argue, as you mentioned, that it is possibly a matter of exposure only to presumed ET. Enough time spent listening to other temperaments would increase their sensitivity and appreciation of the differences.

Ed - Thanks for the information. I measure the degradation of the temperament as it expands as well on my piano tuned in Young. It looks wild when graphed, but sounds reasonable. Our brains do wonderful things.

Bill - You and Ed are so right about the pianist wanting and being able to control the colour of the intervals. I find that I am intensely aware of the harshness or calmness of the intervals, and adjust the voicing of a chord to make use of the colour to enhance the emotional/musical impact of the work.


Yes, it would be nice to talk about color, intervals, voicing, emotions and musical impact... if only all of us were able to tune progressive intervals.

Prout, Ed, have you already shared a recording "for tuners", with chromatic intervals played slowly?


Alfredo,

Here is link to a test tuning of Young I - Chromatic M3s from C3 through C4. The beat rate analysis is given below (accuracy +-0.2bps):

M3 Measured Theoretical
C3E3 2.3 2.0
C# 8.1 7.9
D 4.2 4.2
D 5.3 6.2
E 8.1 8.5
F 3.5 3.8
F# 11.1 11.6
G 5.2 4.3
G# 11.5 10.8
A 9.3 8.8
A# 7.0 6.6
B 14.9 14.1
C4E4 3.1 4.1

I still have some work to do yet for tuning accuracy.

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,404
A
1000 Post Club Member
Offline
1000 Post Club Member
A
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,404
Originally Posted by prout
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso
Originally Posted by prout
Alfredo,
You said, "IMO, today the actual question should be: How is any temperament and tuning meant to be expanded, both in theory and practice, beyond the first octave? How can we manage the whole scale semitonal geometry?"

While the above statement is not about a standard, it is a very interesting question. Put another way, " On a piano, how many octaves above and below the temperament octave can one maintain the essential character of the temperament and still maintain a cohesive musical sound over the whole piano? This would true of ET as well as UTs.


Hi prout,

Why do you think that my "statement is not about a standard"? Would not you like a reference standard of that kind? How do you expand your temperament octave?

You ask "..how many octaves..". But when you say "..can one maintain the essential character of the temperament and still maintain a cohesive musical sound over the whole piano.." you are still thinking in terms of "octave/s". That is partly wrong, as you are asking about "the whole piano".


Hi Alfredo,

The aim of an UT is to create unequal intervals, so a cohesive sound in UT would be divided into 12 distinct cohesive keys, whereas an ET could have a cohesiveness that is spread among all the keys. Both have value, but I don't think we could say that there is a standard that could be applied to both types of temperament. I say this as a neophyte tuner, so there may be a valid rebuttal.

With regard to octaves, it is a necessary measure of an UT, since the intervals are not equal.


Prout,

Thank you for your reply and for the link to the tuning of Young I; please, pardon me if I do not manage to write tonight, it was (again) a hard day.

My regards, a.c.
.


alfredo
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,028
B
4000 Post Club Member
Offline
4000 Post Club Member
B
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,028
Prout,

I should explain to you my octave tuning perspective which I have held for more than 30 years. I started it when I was still tuning ET. It had always seemed to me that I could balance the octave with the 5th. The octave would be wide and the 5th still be narrow but each by the same amount.

Somehow, I got the bright idea that when I had progressed to a double octave, I could balance the double octave with the octave-fifth below it. The double octave would still be wide and the octave-fifth still be narrow but each would be wide and narrow by a very small amount. They both would sound apparently beatless but still be technically wide and narrow.

It seemed to me to be a great way to deal with the piano's natural inharmonicity. It occurred to me to use the sostenuto pedal to accomplish that goal. I used it to pass my tuning exam in 1983 and got superior scores with it. If I dared to speak of the idea to any other piano technician, it was of course, scoffed at and condemned. Nobody had ever heard of doing that before!

In 1989, I began using a Well Temperament as my usual tuning. I simply continued the practice. Since the first Well Temperament I used (the Vallotti) had half of the 5ths beatless and the other half tempered twice as much as in ET, that meant that the octaves, double octaves and octave-5ths would have differing widths, just as the 5ths did.

It provided for the most "razor sharp", in tune I have ever heard from a piano when I tuned the Beethoven Emperor concerto in the Vallotti temperament in 1990. The artist, André-Michel Schub was thrilled with it! A local newspaper reviewer also noticed the sound and wrote a favorable comment about it.

In 1992, I tuned an early version of the EBVT for a recital at the PTG convention. The esteemed, Jim Coleman, Sr. and Virgil Smith were in the audience and hurriedly approached me after the performance. I will never forget Jim's words: "You've done something with the octaves! I don't know what it is but I like it!".

It was not until 1997 that I got my first computer and I began to write on the PTG list called Pianotech. Of course, everyone complained that my posts were too long and "consumed too much bandwidth!". [I didn't even know what I was consuming too much of!] The typical post of the time was like those found on Twitter today, a forum I refuse to even join because I never want to be limited to such brevity.

When I dared to explain my octave tuning method, of course, it was ridiculed. <<Use the sostenuto pedal to tune? Ha Ha! Why does no piano tuning book say what you do? How would that work for passing the tuning exam, huh? I tune my octaves pure!>> All of the above were comments that were directed at me.

As it turns out, what I was doing was really what most other technicians were trying to accomplish by other means such as 3rd, 10th, 17th tests. It turned out to be the default amount of stretch that all of the ETD designers ended up using (with the exception of the pure 12th software). In my opinion, it is the most natural solution to both the problem of inharmonicity and the mitigation of the Pythagorean comma.

I have read all sorts of comments such as I "turn the EBVT into ET in the outer octaves" which is certainly not true. The effects of temperament itself are really confined to the midrange of the piano. The outer octaves are a completely different matter where temperament does not really play a role.

I believe it was you that asked what the Sanderson Accu-Tuner (or Tunelab, Verituner or RCT for that matter) does about what I do when tuning a Well-Temperament. If not, here it is for that person: The unfortunate answer is that none of them deal with octaves, double octaves and octave-fifths the way that I do when tuning a Well-Temperament. They all create a calculated ET and then if temperament "correction figures" are applied, they simply apply those figures to all notes of the scale, end to end.

The problem with that is for an 18th Century Well temperament like the Vallotti or Young, the octaves associated with pure 5ths are widened too much and the octaves associated with tempered 5ths are not widened enough. It definitely requires aural correction to change that. The ETD can still be useful in getting the piano close but to get the final result that I believe any astute aural tuner would want and do naturally, it takes some careful tweaking, especially in the 5th and 6th octaves and also in the 2nd octave.

In the case of a mild Victorian temperament such as the EBVT or one of Coleman's, Broadwood, etc., the difference is slight enough that it does not really make that much difference. Perhaps only a tweak here and there. Typically, I only have to raise the note D5 by 1.0 cents and the rest sounds OK.

If a mild Meantone such as 1/7, 1/8, 1/9, 1/10 or any other gradation in between those is chosen, the calculated program works well because by definition, a Meantone temperament has all 5ths tempered equally. There are no pure 5ths as in a Well Temperament. One may want to scrutinize the untuned 5th and perhaps tweak the octave associated with it but otherwise, when I tune a Meantone temperament, I typically enjoy the results of the calculated program.


Bill Bremmer RPT
Madison WI USA
www.billbremmer.com
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,831
P
4000 Post Club Member
Offline
4000 Post Club Member
P
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,831
Good Afternoon Bill,

Thank you for your thoughtful and informative post. I am learning (a slow and long process) to hear the interplay of the octave-fifth-double-octave effect when they are tuned for overall sound and cohesiveness, and am trying to work towards the most calm sounding octaves and fifths played together over the whole keyboard. Each set of octaves/fifths has a unique set of partial strengths that seem to require widening a note here, narrowing a note there, which throws the temperament out a bit at the extremes of the keyboard.
I will take your comments to heart, and ear.

Thanks again.

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,404
A
1000 Post Club Member
Offline
1000 Post Club Member
A
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,404

Hi Bill,

There are some issues that create a distance, perhaps it is how we consider some evidences. Also language is very important, in that through language we might perpetuate clichés and wrong mental postures. Hope we can help each other. Oh (with sympathy), have you heard about Hiroo Onoda? World War II had ended, but...

You wrote: ..."I have read all sorts of comments such as I "turn the EBVT into ET in the outer octaves" which is certainly not true. The effects of temperament itself are really confined to the midrange of the piano. The outer octaves are a completely different matter where temperament does not really play a role."...

Perhaps the one above is another issue, I consider the 88 notes range as a whole, where all tones and intervals are interrelated. So, "the outer octaves" and any other inner or outer intervals will not "confine" the effects of temperament, at the opposite, they are the expression of a geometry (perhaps you call it design?) that takes proportions into account, that is harmonious in that it takes the proportions of the Whole into account.

Originally Posted by Bill Bremmer RPT
No, Alfredo, I have not found the "ET chromaticisms", whatever you may mean by that. What I am saying is that just because some music may have some chromatic elements in it, it does not imply that ET is a requirement for that music to sound correct.

What I always sense is that piano technicians and musicians alike, when presented with the mere concept of unequal temperament, that instantly one is gripped with the fear of howling wolves and blood curdling dissonances!

One may have read something about the ancient, archaic form of tuning called MEAN tone where only a few keys sounded acceptable at all and probably lifeless and the rest were violently out of tune! Modulation is impossible!

Our savior and redeemer, J.S. Bach then found the solution for that, the glorious path to all music sounding in tune, forever more, the one and only true and final solution: ET. A scale is a scale and a note is a note and that is what Hermann Helmoltz figured out 150 years ago and THAT is the standard! Accept it! Live with it! Don't mess with it!

Whatever any of these eccentric people who go advocating something else will inevitably be proved unacceptable. It would not work, it cannot work and should not be tried! We need a one and only standard to which all music will fit and must conform!

I really believe that is more or less what the Original Poster thought in terms of. He is a really nice guy, a great singer in his own right and serves a great clientele. His local opera company produced educational videos where a pianist talked about and performed the great melodies of great operas. Surely, only ET would suffice for that! Surely, any vocalist should only train with a piano tuned in ET! Right?

I heard the same objections from a sponsor of our own opera company in the early 90's. She was the one putting up a large amount of the money it took to produce those productions. She asked me, "Wouldn't an unequal temperament tend to throw the singers off!!!??? (with piercing eyes and a scowl upon her face).

That question was put to me after many operas and symphony chorus rehearsals, (year after year with the encouragement of the artistic director at the time), had been accomplished using 18th Century style Well Temperaments.

I looked at her very deliberately and directly. I said, "Were you not present over the last several seasons for opera rehearsals [and then named the many famous and well known operas that had been on the schedule]? "Yes", she replied, "And since you have been maintaining the piano, it has sounded so much better that before! The pitch and intonation have improved greatly."

Then I asked, "Were you aware that in each and every one of those cases where I had been a member of that opera chorus, the piano had been tuned in an unequal temperament?"

The look on her face had to be seen to be described! SHE had been paying for all of that! She went to the rehearsals to hear the music that she loved and hear it develop. She had never once given a thought to the piano being tuned in anything but ET!

She then remarked, "I just don't understand it! All I can say is, the entire time I was growing up and I had voice lessons, I am quite sure that the piano was only ever tuned in ET!" I replied to her that ET is only really a point of reference. No instrument or voice really ever adheres strictly to it. If they did, they would actually cause the music to sound less interesting.

This discussion came up when a new, world premier opera had been commissioned and the subject was the story of the local but world famous architect, Frank Lloyd Wright. It had material in nearly every key imaginable. It was modern. It had chromaticism, to be sure.

I knew then, that I needed a Victorian style Well Temperament and developed one for it. If one plays a chromatic scale in a late 19th Century (Victorian) style Well Temperament, it cannot be distinguished from ET on that basis alone because the deviations from ET are too small.

The late professor, Owen Jorgensen taught and demonstrated that fact during his lectures. Yet, when actual music and harmony were played, a Victorian style Well Temperament still retains the Key Signature distinctions of earlier (18th Century) style Well Temperaments.

The opera rehearsals went on with the way I had chosen to tune the piano. The symphony chorus rehearsals also went on and were successful that season with the same Victorian style Well Temperament. I do not recall what the symphony chorus did that season but never, at any time nor from anyone, was there an objection nor a single remark made that the piano sounded out of tune or was unsatisfactory in any way.

The artistic director (conductor of both rehearsals and performances) was always pleased with my work at the public venue as he was with what I did for his personal piano at home. We had long discussions about it. He was given Owen Jorgensen's book, Tuning as a gift. He told me that he had enjoyed reading the many anecdotes that he found within it about how people argued over temperament and that no one really ever actually tuned ET at any time in the past.

So, here we are in the present, well into the 21st Century and the Original Poster, Opera Tenor found out that his temperament that he truly believed to be ET was not quite ET after all. One technician jumped all over it but I came to his defense that it actually did show some adherence to Key Signature.

So, you, Alfredo, I encourage to continue doing what you have found to be successful but frankly, I find your whole premise about "modern ET's" to be fatally flawed in its very concept! It is either ET or it is not!

It is either what Hermann Helmholtz figured out (and actually warned would not work) or not! Whatever "CHAS" represents or signifies, I do not know but I also do not care. I am not going to try to attempt it. Whatever university studies have been done, whoever lauded how you made the piano sound, does not interest me, but is, of course, good for you, sorry to say.

As for what people say that one "cannot tell" what the last temperament was, I would say this: I went to a Men's Chorus rehearsal tonight and after that rehearsal, I spoke to the director about how the piano sounded at the last performance.

It just so happened that last December, I took ill enough with coughing and sneezing that I could not participate in the performance. I did, however, manage to get the piano tuned earlier in the day for it.

The director today told me that the piano had been excellent, better than he had heard it for quite some time. I remarked to him that I could tell that I had been the one to tune that same piano two years previously for the same kind of performance. I said, "Don't ask me how I would know just now, but be assured that I could tell that I had been the last person to tune the piano a full two years prior to that event".

In the meantime, we had performed at other venues but had come back to that venue that time. So, here is a nice recording of the piano two years ago, accompanying a choir of men's voices performing a work by Ralph Vaughn Williams. It does modulate and it does so chromatically. The temperament is NOT ET! The piano is a Yamaha C3. I used the amount of stretch in the octaves that I believed would make the piano sound its best.

https://app.box.com/s/ea642d1482eb9cf1fb2f

When I put my muting strips in to tune the piano last December, I could definitely tell that it had been my Victorian style Well Temperament which had last been tuned on the piano 2 years previously!

So, to any and all who say that one cannot tell anything from a piano that had not been very recently tuned, I say that is not true at all. One can often actually tell a lot!

And yes, that really DOES mean that I can quite often distinguish whether the piano had been previously tuned in Reverse Well or not. It is actually the pervasiveness of Reverse Well over and above anything else that leads me to throw out any sort of establishment of any kind of standard whatsoever.

One, single standard is only an illusion. It is only something imagined but which rarely exists with the possible exception of the present concert/broadcast recording industry. They certainly do have a handle on it but I am resisting that choke hold!


..."No, Alfredo, I have not found the "ET chromaticisms", whatever you may mean by that."...

That was a rhetorical question, if you had managed to get proportional and beat_rate_progressive intervals all across the scale you would appreciate the meaning of chromatic intervals and how they relate with color, say how beats translate intervals into color.

...SNIP.. ..."Then I asked, "Were you aware that in each and every one of those cases where I had been a member of that opera chorus, the piano had been tuned in an unequal temperament?"
The look on her face had to be seen to be described! SHE had been paying for all of that! She went to the rehearsals to hear the music that she loved and hear it develop. She had never once given a thought to the piano being tuned in anything but ET!
She then remarked, "I just don't understand it! All I can say is, the entire time I was growing up and I had voice lessons, I am quite sure that the piano was only ever tuned in ET!" I replied to her that ET is only really a point of reference. No instrument or voice really ever adheres strictly to it. If they did, they would actually cause the music to sound less interesting."...

Well done. I understand that you know what a "point of reference" can be, so it might only take a little effort on your part and you could realize that that "point of reference" has been improved.

..."So, you, Alfredo, I encourage to continue doing what you have found to be successful but frankly, I find your whole premise about "modern ET's" to be fatally flawed in its very concept! It is either ET or it is not!"...

Hmm... problem. I do not think it should be me to explain you what a geometric progression is, you ought to ask someone from the PTG or friends here: 12 root of two is only one of infinite exponential scales.

..."It is either what Hermann Helmholtz figured out (and actually warned would not work) or not! Whatever "CHAS" represents or signifies, I do not know but I also do not care. I am not going to try to attempt it. Whatever university studies have been done, whoever lauded how you made the piano sound, does not interest me, but is, of course, good for you, sorry to say."...

Hmm... In this thread I'd rather not talk about Chas. Here (and for the time being) I would deepen on pure 12ths tuning. Anyway, Bill, I feel closer when I can read the positive and inquisitive Bill.

Re: Why bother? (tongue in cheek) [Re: jmw]

..."Thanks for the video link, jmw! This could turn out to be a multi-page thread. I understand your premise. Piano technicians often tend to be perfectionists. I tried in recent topics to say and demonstrate that this one particular ideal that many of us hold in our heads is all but impossible. (See such topics as, "Should there be a standard?") And then, if we could really reach that Helmholtz Monolith, (perfectly mathematically correct Equal Temperament) would that really mean that the music actually sounds better?"...

Unfortunately, Herr Helmholtz wont know about Modern ET's.

... SNIP.. ..."The work of an artist such as we are is to simply do the best that we can utilizing all of the knowledge that we have at our disposal."
_________________________
Bill Bremmer RPT


More tomorrow.

Regards, a.c.

Last edited by alfredo capurso; 02/08/14 08:10 PM. Reason: spelling

alfredo
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,404
A
1000 Post Club Member
Offline
1000 Post Club Member
A
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,404

Hi,

It was not "tomorrow", I admit and apologize. Some months have gone passed but imo this thread should not die.

Recently Doel Kees was mentioning the "state of the art"; there is good material here, if anyone was interested in getting an idea of both the theoretical approach to tempering in these days and our tuning practice.

The whole question is still open, and there is another thread on tuning perception and expectations, here:

http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/2395490/1/temperaments_and_tuning_-_why_.html

Regards, a.c.
.



alfredo
Page 38 of 38 1 2 36 37 38

Moderated by  Piano World, platuser 

Link Copied to Clipboard
What's Hot!!
Piano World Has Been Sold!
--------------------
Forums RULES, Terms of Service & HELP
(updated 06/06/2022)
---------------------
Posting Pictures on the Forums
(ad)
(ad)
New Topics - Multiple Forums
Estonia 1990
by Iberia - 04/16/24 11:01 AM
Very Cheap Piano?
by Tweedpipe - 04/16/24 10:13 AM
Practical Meaning of SMP
by rneedle - 04/16/24 09:57 AM
Country style lessons
by Stephen_James - 04/16/24 06:04 AM
How Much to Sell For?
by TexasMom1 - 04/15/24 10:23 PM
Forum Statistics
Forums43
Topics223,390
Posts3,349,223
Members111,632
Most Online15,252
Mar 21st, 2010

Our Piano Related Classified Ads
| Dealers | Tuners | Lessons | Movers | Restorations |

Advertise on Piano World
| Piano World | PianoSupplies.com | Advertise on Piano World |
| |Contact | Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map


Copyright © VerticalScope Inc. All Rights Reserved.
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission, which supports our community.