> From: Billbrpt <Billbrpt@aol.com> > Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 09:19:55 EDT > To: pianotech@ptg.org > Cc: CajunduTX@aol.com > Subject: Re: Perfect pitch... > Reply-to: pianotech@ptg.org I agree with Bill and lets stop this nonsense about perfect fifths also... David Ilvedson, RPT Pacifica, CA > In a message dated 4/24/98 12:09:37 AM Central Daylight Time, > dpitsch@ix.netcom.com writes: > > << What exactly does having perfect pitch mean? > >> > > One of the most respected piano technicians in the industry, Franz Mohr (whom > I admire and respect greatly), the late Vladimir Horowitz's personal > technician and friend wrote a book called, "My Life with the Great PIanists". > In it, he wrote a whole chapter which refutes the very notion of "perfect > pitch". He is often known to say, "There is nothing perfect in this world > this side of Glory". > > I do not think anyone will be able to find a quote from a well-stablished > reference book that defines "perfect pitch". It is simply something that > people say. There may be some concensus of opinion about what it means but > the idea that anyone's brain is infallibly tuned to a certain frequency is > pure nonsense. > > If you carry this idea forward, so it mean that each note of the scale must > infallibly equal the frequencies that Helmholtz defined? If so, then one > should tune a piano with a Strobe Tuner and be done with it for then that > piano will have "perfect pitch". If you accept that the piano's tuning must > have small deviations in order to compensate for inharmonicity (which it must) > and that these deviations are different from piano to piano, where is there > "perfection" in the pitch? > > Now what about these Historical Temperaments? Their intervals are all > different than Helmholtz' scheme which purports to "solve the problem". No > musicians or singers ever have a problem playing in tune with a piano tuned > this way, those kinds of intervals were what was common practice until > relatively recently. They are natural to music. If different kinds of > intervals can all be musically acceptable, where is the "perfection" in the > pitch? > > Some singers and other musicians claim to have "perfect pitch". Yet any good > modern performer uses vibrato and portamento to make the musical phrasing > sound pleasing to modern musical taste. If every musical instrument or voice > were tuned to only the frequencies that Helmholtz came up with and were not > allowed any bending of these frequencies with vibrato or portamento, all music > would indeed sound uninteresting and dull. > > Just last weekend, I saw a touring company production of Rogers & > Hammerstein's Carousel. One might have said that it was a "perfect" > performance. There was not a single flaw. It was over in exactly 2 1/2 > hours. Instead of a full orchestra, there were a few instruments and a couple > of synthesizers (tuned in ET, of course). There was no "milking" of phrases. > All tempos were strictly held. There were no pauses for sustained applause. > Nothing sounded the least bit out of tune but there was also none of the very > special quality that an orchestra pit full of real professional musicians has > either. In my opinion, it was an extremely lifeless and uninteresting > interpretation of the music, but it was "perfect". > > >From the time I was a child, I could recognize which note was being played on > our piano at home even though the instrument was never tuned from the time it > was delivered until 8 years later. I still remember the man who tuned it > telling me that it had drifted flat from "about 1/4 step in the middle to 1/2 > step in the treble". People had told me back then that I had "perfect pitch" > but when I realized that I could tell one note from the other whether or not > the piano were tuned, I realized there was nothing perfect about anything. I > found the work of a piano technician so fascinating that I became one later > on. Today, I can tell which note is which, which chord is which, which key is > being played in whether the piano is tuned or not, no matter what the pitch is > and regardless of temperament. There is nothing "perfect" about any of that > and so I do not claim to have "perfect" pitch, I merely have a "good ear" or > natural aptitude music. > > Franz Mohr said in part, "Over the years, quite a number of people have > claimed to me that they have perfect pitch. (snip) [This] would mean being > able to say, without any reference point, that middle A is vibrating at 442 > cps, or that it is vibrating at 438. (snip) No one with their natural sense > of hearing can differentiate..." > > I do hear stories of people whose sensitivity to whether an A4 is really 440 > or not seems to be amazingly accurate. Tuning to A440 consistently is > important for many reasons. If we, as musicians always hear A4 at 440, we may > well be able to recognize a very slight deviation from it when tuning. If we > hear something different every time, how could we know the difference? > > Franz Mohr goes on to give a number of anecdotes about standard versus non > standard pitch and people who claim to have "perfect pitch". While there may > be some people with a very good sense of pitch, I have never seen any > scientific study where any individual has been proven to have an infallible > sense of pitch. All reports are always anecdotal. Even if someone were to > prove that a certain individual could consistently and without error detect > more than a 1¢ deviation of 440 with no pitch reference, my reaction would be, > "so what?". Does that make that person a better musician? What particular > advantage is there to that? > > For the sake of those who are outsiders who may read this List for research > and information purposes, let's please not have professional piano technicians > using the term, "perfect pitch". It is not a valid concept, it is just a > popular notion. > > Bill Bremmer RPT > Madison, Wisconsin > > > >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC