[CAUT] why does it feel better?

[A440A at aol.com]

Wim writes: 
>>   I put a Coleman II on the piano. <snip>. Another professor also 
mentioned that the piano 

played better than ever before.  

     So why does tuning the piano, not just a regular ET tuning, but also a 

historical tuning, make the piano feel different? <<

   Greetings, 
    My father has claimed, all his life, that a clean car has a smoother 
ride.  I spent the better part of my life thinking he was dreaming, but I have now 
come to believe him.  Our perception is dependant on many things.   I have 
felt the difference and it is as real as the action getting "lighter" when the 
hammers get juiced.

      The pianists, when describing the "feel" of an action are describing 
the nature of the feedback loop they become when playing.  Somewhere in their 
brain, it is known how much effort went into the key. When the ear tells the 
brain what it receives back, a "response" is felt as this information merges, 
usually stirred by expectations in a bowl of hopes.  If the tuning provides more 
information to the ear, the response is judged to be better.  The pianist 
often "feels" the piano to be different. 
      The response is really what I try to focus on when a player is telling 
me what they feel.  If the weight is too high or low, hammers too hard or 
soft, tuning too whatever, I can decide what to change if the pianist can describe 
the response they are seeking and not getting.  Or at times, if the pianist 
tells me what they are getting but not wanting, but that is more difficult.  
       As to the tuning, a clean ET has an unmistakably organized sound.  If 
nothing else changes in a piano with say a lot of 2 or 4 cent unisons, an 
clean ET or WT tuning will subtract significant cents from some octaves (out of 
tune unisons produce an octave variance of their accumulated error).  The 
increase in clarity is apparent to all but the most unawakened ears.  This is a big 
move, and a postive move, the piano feels more responsive. ( But not always:  
I once had a hard rock-a-billy pianist complain that the piano was brighter 
before I tuned it.  Since it hadn't been tuned in 2-3 years, and moved, I 
thought I would be carrying some kudos home that day, but noooo...........)
       When moving a piano out of ET into something with a slight harmonic 
palette, such as Wim has done, it is common for the pianist feel that the action 
is in better shape.  I think there are two reasons for this.  One is that the 
sense of control is heightened by the ease of separating the melodic line 
from the harmony. Most keys have either an "expressive" (read: more highly 
tempered) set of thirds and more nearly pure fifths, or vice versa.  This is not a 
bad thing, it creates an easier texture for the ear to sense and the pianist 
"feels" more control of the overall balance. 
    The second is that the pedal can be used more,  a lot more.  The more 
pedal used, the more sound. Since all the strings are coupled, there is more 
power available, musically, when there is no damping to absorb the energy,(this is 
assuming a condition within the limits of the sounding structures impedance). 
 If the tuning is changed to a WT, response to the open pedal tends to form a 
harmonic focus, perhaps due to some psycho-emotive pitch response (a subject 
I know little about), or some statistical, can't-miss result of resonantly 
aligned partials. Whatever, the sound is more focussed on the key, rather than 
the broad spectrum of ET.          This makes a big difference in the classical 
field, where generations of teachers have professed that the modern piano's 
greater sustain is the reason we can't use the original pedal markings of 
Beethoven etal because the sound will "blur".  They go on to explain that the 
earlier pianos could keep the pedal down because the sound died away before this 
happened.  I disagree.  Experience is consistantly supporting that the cause of 
the blurring is the temperament, not the sustain.    
      In Beethoven's Waldstein Sonata, (Op 53), the composer has the pedal 
down for 12 unbroken measures.  We played this passage back to back on ET and Co
leman 11 in Rochester,  using the original pedal markings.  The difference was 
evident to most in attendance that the equality in ET works against the 
music, since you have to half pedal to keep things from turning to mud.  The 
Coleman tuning allowed the pedal to stay down the entire time, and the harmonic 
underpinning were distinct and clear.  General consensus was that it was extremely 
clear. 
      I agree with RicB,  the ET is hugely taken for granted to be the better 
tuning, but comparisons are continuing to demonstrate that a WT sounds 
bigger, cleaner, and more controllable. The pianists sense this as improved "feel", 
even though the action is the same.  
     It may also be the increased consonance found in a WT that creates the 
impression of more power.  Since all keys in ET have tonic thirds of 13.7 
cents, and the Coleman 11 will only produce that amount of dissonance if all the 
keys are used the same amount, (which doesn't happen in the literature until we 
get to the atonal and 12-tone music), most music played on the Coleman tuning 
is more consonant, allowing the occasional foray into higher tempering to 
merely emphasize the increased consonance everywhere else.  This is sensed as 
power, and that affects the sense of control.  
     I would encourage all techs that have the opportunity to tune that 
"second" piano in a Moore and Co. or Coleman 11 tuning without saying anything and 
allowing musicians to respond with as little input from the tech as possible.  
There may be some real surprises there. 
Regards,  
 
Ed Foote RPT 
http://www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/index.html
www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/well_tempered_piano.html