Jim-Virgil Tune-Off Revisited

[Jim]

To Danny and the List:

Since the purpose of the TuneOff in Chicago was to see if there
was a major difference between Aural Tuning and Electronic Tuning,
We relied on the playing and listening tests. After all, "the proof
of the pudding etc.....".  There was no attempt at quantifying the
tunings. For those in attendance, there was not major changing of
the tuning of the previous tuner during the second round.

While Virgil was tuning during the second round, the audience
could clearly hear all of his test intervals, and it was pleasing
to hear that he was very consistent in what he was doing.  His
approach at Artistic tuning was a joy to behold.  Whereas, when I
was tuning, there was not a lot to enjoy since I was largely tuning
unisons as I went upward from the break.  I always sounded the
complete unison before going on just as a double check for myself.
Every so often I would stop and run a few 10th or 17th just to
show off a bit. However, in the extreme high treble, I did utilize
the octav-fifths and double octave fifths to assure myself that my
program was indeed giving me the stretch that I wanted.

I tuned each piano with the same program which I originally setup
using the CyberTuner and MIDI-ING it to the SAT. It was interesting
to note that there wasn't a dime's worth of difference in the
readings of the SAT as compared to the Cybertuner. Actually, for
me, reading the SAT was easier, because at that time I was not as
proficient with the CyberTuner as I am now.  If I had tried to
be as refined with the CyberTuner as I was accustomed to being with
the SAT, I would never have finished in a reasonable time.  That is
not to say that the Cybertuner was poorer or better, but my best
expertise was with the SAT.  I'm doing better with the CyberTuner
and it has been improved by Dean in several ways since then. I
might really get to liking it someday.

There was just slight difference in the voicing of the two pianos.
This would contribute to preferences some had for one piano over
the other, but the selections being played also determined how
the voicing played out.  It went both ways depending on the
selections.  Another thing we learned was that the placement of
the pianos in the room had an affect.  Also the seating position
of individual audience members caused some changes in preferences
as we discovered in our discussions afterwards.  Some of these
things will be given more attention in Orlando.  It would be nice
to try this type of test using disklavier diskettes to do the
playing.  This way we could better control the playing and the
shortness of the selections.  Another ideal situation would be to
have a revolving stage so that as each piano is played, it is in
exactly the same position.  This is a little much to ask for at
this time, but if these kinds of tests becaome more popular, then
it might be worth the extra effort to make it even more scientific.

When you ask about more accurate measuring tools, I'll just say
this much at this time.  I find it very difficult to tune more
accurately than about .2 cents.  It is definitely difficult to
read much more accurately than .2 to .3 cents since piano tones
are so transient. I know that the Cybertuner has 1/100 cents
readings in the listening mode, but without a consistent striking
force, and consistent duration in laboratory conditions, you just
can't get that kind of accuracy. And besides, who is going to be
able to hear it?

I think that before we do statistical analysis, we need to have
some consensus in general as to what a good tuning is.  Right now,
Virgil and I are both pushing the envelope in a direction which is
not generally conceded as the normal tuning curve. We hope to
establish it more firmly as a result of these tests. Actually, I'm
kinda' following Virgil's lead on this.  I have deliberately
tried to emulate his tuning style in order to eliminate another
variable in the contest between aural tuning and electronic tuning.

I hope this helps.  I plan to be in Austin, Tx on May 31st for a
one day seminar.  We will demonstrate some of this stuff along with
other things.  Check with the Austin chapter or Charles Ball at the
University there.

Jim Coleman, Sr.