pitch

[Lorraine Manz]

Dear Ted- I did not know you were leaving Banff and hope that your departure
is one that will take you to places where you can still be an inspiration to
piano tech "groupies". The few days I speant with you and Denis in your
marvelous shop in that mountain paradise will always be remembered. Your
hospitality and piano wisdom were the best. Happy Trails!
========================

Ken Sloane, formerly of Oberlin Conservatory

--On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 3:56 PM -0700 "Sambell, Ted"
<Ted_Sambell@BanffCentre.CA> wrote: 

> Hello Denis!
> 
> Having read your post today (very valuable information) I am motivated to
> get in touch with you; it is long overdue that I should do so, especially
as
> it is my last day here  at the Banff Centre, though I am coming back on an
> ad hoc basis. In fact, April is already filled up wth other work
> including a wierd commission to design and build a damper mechanism for a
> santur (Iranian dulcimer) for one of the musicians here. 
> I have just installed a set of hammers in a Yamaha C7, one of the older
ones
> with a 23 note bass, and used your spreadsheet program for the boring
> angles. It worked perfectly for me, except that the angles on this piano
> change from note 88 individually all the way down to the tenor break. I
used
> the tenor page for the treble angles and put them on a separate sheet. You
> might consider an extra page for the treble (section(s)), or extend the
> angles for all the sections other than the bass.I finally made a new brass
> disc for the boring jig too, and fine adjusted the jig so that it bores on
> axis. It works superbly at last, and is a real joy to use. I am thinking
of
> writing for the journal on hammers, and wonder if I could persuade you to
> collaborate for a joint effort, especially on the calculating of the
angles.
> 
> Last weekend I went to the PNW Conference; instructed two classes twice
and
> had a great time. Many of your old friends asked after you, so you are not
> forgotten.
> 
> I trust you, Estelle and the children are all well and hope to hear from
> you,
> 
> Fondest regards, Ted-----Original Message-----
> From: Denis Brassard [mailto:brassadp@potsdam.edu]
> Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 9:14 AM
> To: caut@ptg.org
> Subject: Re: pitch
> 
> 
> Greg,
> If you are familiar with logarithms, there is a simple formula you can use
> that works for every frequencies on any given note at the piano.
> Here it is:
> 
> 1+ Log (Freq./27.5)/ Log (2) X 12 = Note Number
> 
> In your post you mentioned 435 Hz.
> 
> 1+ Log (435/27.5)/ Log (2) X 12  = 48.8021
> 
> 48 is your note number, i.e. G#4 and the decimal part X 100 is the amount
> that note is sharp; i.e. 80.21 cents.
> A semitone being 100 cents, G#4 +80.21cts = A4 -19.79cts.
> When you stated A 435 being offset by 19.79 cents, you were right on the
> money.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Denis Brassard,
> Head Piano Technician
> SUNY Potsdam
> Potsdam, New York.
> 
> 
>>Hi Greg,
>>
>>Each beat per second is roughly equal to 4 cents. Hence, 440 bps -
>>435 bps = 5 bps X 4 cents = 20 cents. Your offset was pretty close,
>>I'd say.
>>
>>Best wishes,
>>
>>Tom
>>
>>>Greetings folks,
>>>    I recently tried to tune an older instrument that seemed as though
>>>it was designed for 435. I went about it in an unusual way. Since I'm
>>>just dense enough not to remember the formula I had to figure out how to
>>>offset the ETD to read for 435. In TuneLab (check out the new TuneLab
>>>PRO) I used the mouse on the left side of the floating boxes window
>>>until the frequency said 435. When I did that the offset read -19.79.
>>>Does this sound correct to you folks or did I mess up again?
>>>    o.k. that's one more item off of my to do
>>>list............................
>>>
>>>--
>>>Greg Newell
>>>Greg's Piano Forté
>>>12970 Harlon Ave.
>>>Lakewood, Ohio 44107
>>>216-226-3791
>>>mailto:gnewell@ameritech.net
>>
>>
>>Tom Seay
>>Piano Tech Office
>>School of Music
>>The University of Texas at Austin
>>(512) 232-2072
>>mailto:t.seay@mail.utexas.edu
> 
>