Hi David The verituner listens to up to 6 or 8 Joe Goss imatunr@srvinet.com www.mothergoosetools.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Ilvedson" <ilvey@sbcglobal.net> To: <pianotech@ptg.org> Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 3:12 PM Subject: Re: E.T.D. > Ron, > > I don't believe the SAT, Verituner listen to lower partials/fundemental at all do they? I believe they are using upper partials for all measuring...? > > David I. > > > > ----- Original message ----------------------------------------> > From: Ron Koval <drwoodwind@hotmail.com> > To: <pianotech@ptg.org> > Received: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 19:20:44 +0000 > Subject: Re: E.T.D. > > >Some random thoughts about the "tuning calculators" > > >I see three basic types of tuning machines out there. > > >1. flat liners: most of the needle-type, along with the basic strobe > >tuners. These (mostly) will read in equal temperament only and have varying > >precision, listening to the fundamental. There is no provision for > >inharmonicity and stretch. (Though they can be used for piano work, even a > >cheap one has value for a beginning aural tuner to avoid major blunders in > >the temperament octave.) > > >2. Template tuners: Korg Mt-1200, Yamaha tuner, the new Peterson strobe.. > >These tuners have various piano stretches loaded in. Pretty much a > >crapshoot if the generic curve will fit the piano. Still of value in piano > >work, used everyday by many, though set-up to read the fundamental only. > >(Not sure about the Yamaha) > > > >3. Sampling tuners: SAT, Tunelab, RCT, Verituner. All have some ablility > >to "listen" to sample notes and extrapolate a tuning, filling in the blanks > >using math. Different partials are chosen to read for different parts of the > >piano. (Verituner uses many at once) > > >Here's where it gets interesting. I've been doing a bunch of inharmonicity > >research. It's not the upper partials that get wilder, it's the lower ones, > >as you progress down into the wound strings that get unpredictable. So, > >depending on which partial is chosen to be tuned to a smooth curve, the > >resultant tuning will be different with each machine. I'm always amazed > >that people say there isn't any difference between the tunings calculated by > >the different machines. In the tests I've done, there are many different > >tuning curves generated by these machines. Maybe people mean that the end > >result sounds ok using the different gear. (allright, that's something > >different) Using the fundamental only pretty much forces the upper partials > >into a randomized mess, so with the more basic tuners, it's important to > >know how to check the upper partials. > > >I guess it really comes down to what you expect from a machine. If you want > >the best tuning possible generated, you'd be best off with a sampling > >machine. With the amound of non-linear partial stuff in the wound strings > >I've been measuring, I'd go with the one that samples the most notes. If, > >however, you're just looking for something to get the temperament close, get > >a needle tuner (or the new mini-strobe). Like research? One of the > >computer-based ones can be informative, with graphs, charts and things. > >Looking for maximum battery life with a proven track record- then go with a > >SAT. > > >These ramblings help any? > > >Ron Koval > >Chicagoland > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________ > >Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. > >http://www.hotmail.com > >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC