If you are trying to say that there is a point of diminishing returns, yes you're right. And, of course, if you focus on thirds and sixths to the exclusion of all other intervals, you will likely run into problems on some pianos. I try and keep things balanced as much as possible. Two octave temperaments go a long way toward insuring that third and sixth progressions are smooth through the piano. Let's not forget, though, that temperament is mostly defined by thirds, and equal temperament means a smooth progression of thirds, at least when possible. David Love davidlovepianos@comcast.net -----Original Message----- From: caut-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces@ptg.org] On Behalf Of Horace Greeley Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 7:31 PM To: College and University Technicians Subject: RE: [CAUT] Sacrifice (was tuners- technology) At 06:48 PM 2/28/2005, you wrote: >I did hear a presentation by Franz Mohr (not that he was necessarily >Steinway trained) and he clearly listened to thirds when assessing a >tuning. Franz had his original apprenticeship at the Ibach factory. Yes, thirds, sixths, and tenths, too. Now, listen to how he, himself, tunes; and you will find that he uses them only seldom once the temperament is set. > He pointed out a few bumps, in fact, as notes being slightly >off. I know that if I tune a very tight equal temperament all the way >up and down, I can hear in the course of playing (depending on the >piece) if a third sounds a bit overripe. ET vs HT debate aside, it does >seem that a clear pattern of thirds and sixths does say something about >how the tuning fits together as a whole. Yes. > While pianists certainly don't >go through and check thirds progressions, the overall impression of a >piano that is balanced that way does produce a certain sonorous effect. Some do, some do not. And, that's before we start worrying about what may/may not be stylistically appropriate - decisions which include, but are not necessarily limited to, ET/HT/etc. (...two lumps and milk, please.) >As the article (and experience) suggests, some pianists are indeed >sensitive to the nuances of tuning even between tuners at very high >skill levels. I'm not really talking about what is passable or >acceptable, but what gets to that next level of really bringing >something else out of the instrument. I think there is a difference. Yes; and, that is where the debate always winds up. Repeated attempts to, and insistence on, reductively define "fine" tuning are simply doomed to fail on their premise. At some point, the limit of reliable analysis is reached. It's rather like the changes that businesses go through when "modernizing" from mainframe applications to a client/server architecture. In the former, it is not unusual to be able to carry out fractions to 64 or more decimal places. In the latter, once you pass 10, you start running into hardware architecture problems; and the "rounding" of numbers is accomplished at a much more gross level. In individual transactions, the differences are truly infinitessimal. In aggregate, however, they can easily amount to hundreds of millions of dollars, or widgets, or whatever. Best. Horace >David Love >davidlovepianos@comcast.net > >-----Original Message----- >From: caut-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces@ptg.org] On Behalf Of >David Ilvedson >Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 4:35 PM >To: caut@ptg.org >Subject: RE: [CAUT] Sacrifice (was tuners- technology) > >If I hear an aural problem with my SAT III assisted tunings it is mainly >in single octaves and for that reason it is what I keep an ear on. I >suspect the a lot of the tuning problems are where I place the SAT. I >can move it around and get different readings. Do any of you SAT users >find this? I remember Jim Coleman Sr. mentioning the big thing in >moving ETDs further on is their mic quality/pickup etc. > >In a related issue. Ed brings up the issue of progressing fast beating >intervals and their, in his opinion, less of importance in the overall >tuning scheme. I believe Steinway teaches a sort of 4th/5ths kind >tuning, which would probably mean less importance of fast beating >interval progression...Can anyone explain a "Steinway" style tuning? >I'm interested in what they actually teach for tuning. Maybe someone >on the List has been trained there...? > >David Ilvedson > > > > >----- Original message ---------------------------------------- >From: <A440A@aol.com> >To: <caut@ptg.org> >Received: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 18:43:16 EST >Subject: [CAUT] Sacrifice (was tuners- technology) > > > >David writes: > > ><< The > >problem, I believe, lies in the fact that they are programmed to select > >a certain partial (or in the case of the VT a certain balance of > >partials). But frequently, those need to be fudged a little. This is > >most obvious at the tenor break where inharmonicity spikes up and in > >order to keep a good thirds progression, the notes often need to be > >tuned a little flatter. >> > > >Greetings, > > Hmmm, This suggests that the pianist will be more sensitive to the > >evenness of the thirds than other intervals, and I have not always >found that to be > >the case. On smaller pianos, I often need to let the thirds lose that >perfect > >progression of decreasing beat rate speeds in order to maintain the >same > >sound to my octaves as they pass over the bass break. I have never had >a pianist > >complain about this inconsistancy, but when I was getting a smooth >decrease > >in the thirds (which the SAT will usually do), at the expense of the >octave, I > >did get complaints,(sometimes). The problem tends to show up an octave >below > >this break when that "fudging" requires even more flatness to keep the >single > >octave acceptable and then the double octave has a noticeable roll to >it. > > Within tolerances, I think the eveness of the thirds is more for the >aural > >tuners benefit than the pianist's. It seems to be most useful in >checking the > >accuracy of ET, but beyond that, it makes little musical >difference,(again, > >within tolerances). I don't know of a pianist alive that could tell >that, say, > >F#-A# is beating the same speed as the adjacent G-B or F-A, especially >at the > >slow speeds found in the 3rd octave. It is simply below the threshold >of > >perception unless one is specifically trained AND looking for it. > > All of the above applies to ET. Since I have found so many >customers that > >greatly prefer a more "Victorian" ET than an absolute clinical one, I >don't > >worry about sacrificing the thirds progression in ET before I >compromise any of > >the others. There isn't anything particularly musically magical about >13.7 > >cents wide. > >Regards, > > > >Ed Foote RPT > >http://www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/index.html > >www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/well_tempered_piano.html > > > >_______________________________________________ > >caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > >_______________________________________________ >caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > > >_______________________________________________ >caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives _______________________________________________ caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC