ETD Displays

[Richard Brekne]

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment


Kent Swafford wrote:

> oThis might be easy to imagine, but it would be impossible to execute.
>
> How would the ETD differentiate between the upper and lower note that you
> say will be sounding at once with all those (slightly offset) coincident
> partials sounding all at the same time? With all the coincident partials
> going at once, how could one display be assigned to one note and the other
> display assigned to the other note? Solve _that_ problem and I'm sure the
> programmers will be happy to incorporate your idea.
>

Kent, once one references the lower note you dont have to play it again... we do
this all the time on a much simpler level... re-read what I wrote. Then take
tunelab and play A4 at a piano and use the i or o key to stop the display...
then play A5. Do this for any / all relevant partials of A4. The only difference
between doing that and what is presently suggested is to display more then one
partial at a time.

>
> > Again I must say I fail to see why there is so much resistance to
> > multipartial displays amoung ETD authors. Isnt it time we move
> > past the dancing dial ?
>
> I know you don't mean to negatively characterize the state of the art of
> ETD's (but it sure sounds like it).
>
> Multi-partial displays could be developed to read more than one partial of a
> _single_ sounding note, but would you then describe them as the "dancing
> dials", plural? The displays dance because they are more sensitive than
> piano strings are stable. Less sensitive displays could be developed, or in
> the case of RCT, you can just go to the preferences for the spinner and
> decrease the sensitivity, but less sensitivity is a loss not a gain.
>

Not if they did what I describe above. It would simply be a way of comparing how
the partials line up.

>
> Sophisticated use of modern ETD's (with their lone single displays of one
> partial at a time) _can_ in the course of a tuning make use of data from
> more than one partial of individual notes. In other words, the lack of
> multi-partial displays can be ameliorated through good tuning technique.

whats your point... whats your point....??? grin...

>
>
>  Or tuning a note
> at its 3rd partial, who says you can't play the note an octave below and
> check out its 6th partial(s)? Or tuning a treble note at its second partial,
> who says you can't play the note two octaves below to see how the 8th
> partials of the unison check out?

Now think about this statement of yours Kent... and you may see what I am
after... because that is exactly the point. Direct reference of already tuned
notes, compared after reference to notes to be tuned.

>
>
> Its true, there was a time when I thought ETD's needed multi-partial
> displays, and I still look forward to seeing ETD's that incorporate this
> feature. But, I believe existing ETD's can right now provide much of the
> benefit you seem to be seeking.

You misunderstand what I am after if you think this... grin... I CAN force
tunelab to show me what I want it to... but I have to go back and forth
switching partials and re-referenceing them.... takes forever... all because the
display is set up to show only one partial at a time.

> Kent Swafford

--
Richard Brekne
RPT, N.P.T.F.
Bergen, Norway
mailto:Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no


---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/5d/cb/20/83/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--