was accu-tuner now tuning question

[Doug Hershberger]

Hi Jim,
   thank you for responding. I am familiar with your articles on altering
the stretch numbers. In fact I have often used your pure fifths temperament
with good success. I am grateful to you for your tireless efforts on
educating us. I guess I was just testing  my own aural skills against the
SAT because I respect the machine so much but I also have the desire to
improve my aural skills. I am the type of personality that has to continue
to work on aural skills because as I use the machine my aural skills seem to
atrophy even though I started as an aural tuner. What amazes me is the many
ways an octave can be tuned and still not be wrong. I'm talking about that
area between pure and beating to objectionably.
Doug Hershberger,RPT
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Coleman, Sr. <pianotoo@imap2.asu.edu>
To: Doug Hershberger <dbhersh@home.com>
Cc: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 1999 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: was accu-tuner now tuning question


> Hi Doug:
>
> In your comments below, you mentioned that it might be easier to use a
> different machine where there are several selections about the stretch of
> the octaves. As a matter of fact, the SAT I, SAT II and SAT III have
> unlimited variations available in any part of the scale, and the changes
> can be made "on the fly".
>
> I wrote about a year ago on how to alter the stretch numbers on a SAT I
> or II to give the middle more stretch as well as the entire piano, or to
> curtail the stretch in the Bass as well as in the high treble. This mostly
> involves altering the A4 stretch number one way or the other. If you
> want more information on this, I can look up the Journal articles for you.
>
> You mentioned the Third-Tenth test intervals. Sometimes the 10th will
> beat slower than the 3rd. This is due not to poor FAC work, but to the
> way the inharmonicity curve of the piano is laid out. I wrote an email
> article some time back where I drew some ascii curves showing what happens
> in this case and how adding to the A4 stretch number will clear this up.
> Whenever you find a case like this, you can increase the A4 stretch number
> by .5 cents and it will usually clear up the problem.
>
> From this discovery Dr. Sanderson took it a step farther and included the
> Double Octave Beat Control in the new SAT III so that one can make any
> kind of change he desires without recomputing a scale as some of the
> other machines need to do.
>
> I will be demonstrating some of this stuff in KC this next week.
>
> Jim Coleman, Sr.
>
> On Thu, 15 Jul 1999, Doug  Hershberger wrote:
>
> > List and accu-tuner experts,
> >    I have a question about  octave stretch when using the accu-tuner.In
the
> > area of the piano we generally use 4:2 octaves such as the mid range, I
> > sometimes  will tune the octaves aurally and then check to see what the
> > accu-tuner says about it using a FAC tuning on a page of memory. I am
> > talking about a well scaled piano and a FAC that fits pretty well. What
> > seems to be the case with me is that no matter how conservatively I try
to
> > make the octave stretch the accu-tuner still says the octave is
sharp(I'm
> > tuning the upper note to the lower) using the third tenth test listening
to
> > fourths and fifths as well. When I set the octave to the machine and
then do
> > the tests the octave sounds kind of flat or at the very most pure. I'm
> > wondering if others have observed this or I have just been pushing the
> > envelope of stretch so long that I'm used to this more aggressive style.
It
> > is most noticeable on low inharmonicity pianos. It seems like with a
> > Steinway there is more room to customize the octaves and the accu-tuner
> > seems to agree with that.
> >    I would think the different octave choices on the Cyber-Tuner would
be a
> > great advantage to electronic tuning. Even though I have been tuning for
> > years, the above question is kind of a beginner question and I believe
in my
> > own case that using an electronic device for tuning has hurt my aural
skills
> > alot. Does anyone have thoughts on these items?
> > Doug Hershberger, RPT
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <A440A@AOL.COM>
> > To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 1999 8:39 PM
> > Subject: Re: Accutuner
> >
> >
> > >
> > > >I'm thinking about upgrading from a SAT II to a SAT III but I'm a
little
> > > >leary about the automatic note stepper feature.  A friend of mine
said
> > > >it
> > > >can cause
> > > >confusion.  Can it be de-activated if I desired?  Is it really a
problem?
> > >
> > > Greetings,
> > >      I have, several times, found myself tuning to the wrong note.
This
> > > happens when I go back and check something and the machine
automatically
> > > hears a target partial and changes to it.  Minor thirds below will
often
> > > occur.  This is not a problem once you get the discipline down.  You
can
> > omit
> > > the function and use a switch if you desire.
> > >     One big thing about the III for me is the temperament selection.
It
> > > makes it easy to load 14 temperamenti, which are easily applied to any
FAC
> > at
> > > the touch of a button.  Also, You can place a + 8 cent correction in
each
> > > note of a temperament page, and instantly have a442 that you can use
the
> > > pitch raise function with.
> > >      The octave stretch change is also very useful in tailoring
tunings to
> > > specific venues, ( compressed for studio recording work, and expanded
for
> > > jazz club etc.)
> > > Regards,
> > > Ed Foote
> >
> >