Aural Pure 5ths Temperament Part III

[Jim]

Hi Jim:

The perception may have something to do with the close unison idea,
but I think it has more to do with the better matching octaves,
especially the wider multiple octaves. The beats in the octaves
are still more than what one would tolerate in a unison that was not
quite perfect. My personal belief is that this is closer to what a
lot or good aural tuners have been doing accidentally for a long time.

I have noticed that I tend to tune sharper when tuning strictly aurally
than when I tune with machine. I think that is because of the perceived
need not to tune on the flat side, so I overdo it a little on the
sharp side. Many years ago I used to hear people say that they liked
my aural tuning better than my machine tuning. I don't hear this anymore.
It may be because my machine tuning style is much better now. However,
now that I can tune the wider octaves more consistently than I did
back then, it may become more popular to tune with the wider octaves.
again.

I have a couple of very keen customers who will give me feedback soon
on this particular idea.

Jim Coleman, Sr.

On Mon, 26 May 1997 JIMRPT@aol.com wrote:

> Dr. JC Sr.;
> In a message dated 5/25/97 1:27:31 AM, you wrote:
> <<"The piano seems to have a
> bigger, fatter sound, I like it.">>
>
> This is in reference to the stretched octaves, relatively pure fifths and
> slightly expanded fourths, tenths, etc.  Correct ?
>   If so, does this kinda reinforce some of the perceptions as expressed by
> various persons in the "unisions" thread ?, i.e.  not quite pure equals
> "bigger, fatter sound"?  Or do you think was some other reason for making
> this comment ?
> Jim Bryant (FL)
>
>
>