Mike and Jane Spalding wrote: >Ric, > >I've been trying to figure out if your 12th tuning is more stretched or >less stretched than what I am accustomed to doing. I think it must be >less. In RCT 3.5, you can go to the Interval Preview Graph to see what >the width of various intervals will be. I tried, and failed, to get a >straight line pure 12th, but I got real close. Had to select OTS 1 or 2, >then tweak several octaves narrower with the Custom Equalizer. Haven't >had a chance yet to tune a piano to see how it sounds. I don't get many >opportunities to experiment on S&S D's or similar concert grands, either. >How does your perfect 12th tuning sound on a typical home piano? > >Mike > Actually, I think the overall stretch is a bit less then most of the RCT stretches... but the stretch seems just a bit different as well. Especially the linear spaced temperament 12th is going to result in different beat relationships. Tho I suppose the exponetial spacing I posted yesterday would also show the same tendencies relative to octave types. This despite the fact that no notes are really very far off from an RCT OTS 3 or 4. Did you look at the graph I sent with that old Sanderson data and compare that to the same kind of graph that Bradley posted ? Interesting comparison really. In the Sanderson data I graphed only the Octave type data, and there the 4:2 was tuned at a constant +0.3 or so BPS through the range. This results in the lower order 2:1 becoming slowly wider the higher up one progresses, while causing the higher order 6:3 and 8:4's to become narrow... and quickly so after a bit. But Bradleys graph shows what happens when something other then an Octave type is held at a constant beat rate.. in this case a beatless 3:1 fith type. I havent gotten so far as to know what to expect ... or how to relate higher or lower order ratio octave types to fith types like this, but thats one of the things I want to get started on this summer. In anycase, had I included the fiths data in the Sanderson graph you would have seen a similiar reversal as is found in the 6:3's and 4:2's in Bradleys graphing of the perfect 12th tuning. Otherwise.... Getting RCT to do this kind of thing is a chore as far as I can see, so I simply do it in Tunelab, and when I want a comparsion I just sample the finished tuning and run a note for note check to see where RCT is and isnt in aggreement. What suprises me is that despite the obvious differences in the graphs, RCT seems to like this tuning fairly well. Personally, I wish these two ETD authors would move towards providing multi partials information, and develope further those aspects of the programs that lend themselves to this kind of research / learning about tunings and piano acoustics. It seems to me its already easy enough to execute a decent tuning with ETD's.. There are some really neat things we (who like this kind of thing) could be doing if the tools were better developed along those lines. Softeware based ETD's have this potential advantage over the competition. :) As far as how it sounds on a typical home piano. I put it on a FAZER 110 cm the other day... and it sounds fine, and with very much the same kind of affect that it does on bigger pianos. Tho a little upright remains a little upright for sure :) If you dont have TL97, try and download it and give it a try. RicB Richard Brekne RPT NPTF Griegakadamiet UiB
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC