---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment On 23-okt-04, at 4:53, Bill Ballard wrote: > Both David and Andre have described listening to tuning doe a specific=20= > way, David with respect to the bottom end of the piano and Andre, the=20= > number of partials audible during a unison tuning. I'd like a=20 > clarification in each case, to make sure I understand their experience=20= > (which BTW, I don't doubt for a minute). > > At 8:09 AM -0700 10/20/04, David Andersen wrote: >> Fascinating subject. Again, stretching the bass MUSICALLY, until the >> perception of sound drops in your body from the head and neck to the=20= >> chest >> and stomach,and then, for the last six notes on most pianos, a bit=20 >> lower--- >> So the fourth above is slowly rolling against the note being=20 >> tuned---will >> usually satisfy most people. > > Interesting to have the perception of an octave described in terms the=20= > location inside the body where its perceived. Yogic. Californian. So=20= > what is it that's moving that location downwards? The actual note of=20= > the keyboard as you walk down towards the bottom, or the process of=20 > stretching it wide from its single octave note above? > I think what David means here is that he is capable of hearing with=20 'other senses'. This is not so much Yogic or Californian (although our revered friend=20 is very much Californian (: >))), but is more a holistic approach not=20 everybody is able to understand nor value its worth. (especially=20 American Chevvy drivers have trouble with this concept). (; =20 grinnnn But it is true that we can perceive certain 'values' not just with our=20= regular senses, but also with 'the other senses', senses all people=20 possess, but have lost thru leading a life which causes bluntness or a=20= density/narrowing of the so called "normal senses". Too sharpen those senses, we can train ourselves by doing for instance=20= very simple exercises like : sitting very quiet on a bench in for=20 instance in a big American shopping mall, and doing a seeing/looking=20 exercise. I do this often myself. I sit still, I am wide awake, and I=20= try to see as much as I can see. I am not just looking at pretty girls=20= but I try to take in all there is to see. And, dear colleagues, there is so very much to see if only you 'open'=20 your eyes. You see the texture of the tiles, the different kind of=20 shoes people are wearing, the shoes that fit perfectly with the people=20= who wear them, the profiles of wooden frames around shops, the building=20= structure(s), the single colors of every thing, and especially the=20 combined colors of everything, the plants, the articles displayed in the shop windows, the=20= text and the different type of lettering, the expressions on people's=20 faces, man... I could go on and on. Then there is another sense we mostly use unconsciously : the smell. Same time, same place, this time we focus on smells and odors. A male=20 person strolls by who had just put on his aftershave, a female person=20 enters 'your space' with an incredible perfume aura which lingers after=20= this person for sometimes a hundred yards (!), the smells of the shops,=20= their displayed articles, of all people, of animals, of vehicles, of=20 plants etc. The sense of smell is much stronger than we think, and it may even=20 trigger all kinds of emotions. Then we come to the sense of hearing, which I think is most developed=20 in people. You're still sitting on that bench in that shopping mall. You close=20 your eyes, you breath very deep and calmly for a minute. This in itself=20= will enhance your state of consciousness and relax your body, which is=20= necessary to "sense at all", and then you concentrate on what you=20 actually hear. What do we hear? We first of all hear footsteps and voices. We hear a=20 laugh, a cry, how many feet do we actually hear going by (ever thought=20= of that?), we hear echo's, we hear the reverberation of the space we=20 sit in, we can try to define the bigness of that space, we can try to=20= define how far away the nearest wall is... in other words, we try to=20 "hear" Then, if we think we hear everything, we can try to hear 'more'.=20 Hearing more is a revelation. Generally speaking, people with a musical=20= talent may hear music in sounds, it is an advanced way of listening and=20= a more subtle way of perception. In most big hotel , there are air=20 vents in the bath rooms. If you sit very quiet on the toilet, you may=20 be able to hear sounds from outside through the little air hole, you=20 may hear very fine high sounds of the air that is being blown through=20 the air channels... and there is so much to listen to in all of the=20 world. Now we come to 'listening' to a piano : if you strike a key, you will=20 hear that note. But did you hear the impact of the hammer against the=20 string? did you hear the impact of the key hitting the bottom of the=20 keybed? did you hear the combined metal of strings, bolts and frame?=20 Did you already find out what 'the tone' is of the instrument? which=20 tone sounds best? Which register sounds best? Did you hear that the key=20= frame rattles? Did you hear that part the key frame is not in contact=20 with the keybed? Then we come to the strings: we always listen for the moment when the=20 beats of two strings come together, but do we actually try to listen to=20= the ''quality' of that sound? What kind of sound is it really? Is it=20 easy to hear partials? Which partials are we able to distinguish? Do we=20= ever take the time to listen to as many partials as we can? And then : when we strike a note, can we in some way feel the=20 vibrations of that sound? can we feel those vibes with our fingers on=20 the key (very important for voicing!)? Can we feel the vibrations with=20= our feet? You see, these things David Andersen senses, are not funny, they are=20 dead serious and they are very important to 'sensitive' persons. If I=20 lie down in my bed, I always concentrate first on my breathing. I=20 inhale slowly, my belly stretches upward, I exhale, my belly goes down.=20= My state of consciousness slowly changes from all day nervousness to=20 the mental and physical relaxation required for a healthy sleep. I then=20= listen to my heart beat, uh-uhh, uh-uhh. I feel the blood streaming=20 through my veins, I sense the arteries pulsing in my neck. Then I try=20 to feel the heart beat in my right big toe, and after only a few=20 seconds, my right big toe is already throbbing haha! I tell you these things to show to you that much more is possible than=20= we think, than we can imagine even. This is not hocus pocus but the=20 result of training, consciously or unconsciously, of our senses. The=20 result of such a training is that we 1. make optimal use of our brain=20 capacity and senses, and 2. that our perception of 'things' alters and=20= that because of this, we live a life in a state of being more aware.=20 It is an enrichment. Many people have lost this 'awareness'. They live=20= their life in a dream state, in a dumbing down. I am not doing any Yoga, I am not religious in any way, I am not=20 Californian. I am just trying to learn and to become aware of=20 especially things related to the things I live with every day : piano's=20= and their beautiful sounds. > > At 11:49 PM +0200 10/18/04, antares wrote: >> Let me then tell you again about that lessons I once had : my=20 >> Japanese teacher once told me that my tuning that day had come out=20 >> very nice, but he told me that I used too much force in striking the=20= >> keys. >> So he ordered me to re-tune one octave by keeping the middle strings=20= >> intact and re-tune the left and right string of each unison in that=20= >> octave. >> So I did, and he once more corrected me. saying that I was still=20 >> banging too hard. >> I then banged a little less, and finished the octave. >> Then he asked me to listen to that very octave and compare it with=20 >> the neighboring octaves. >> I went out of my mind! that one specific octave was so much more=20 >> beautiful than the others! > > That's the sound of the unisons which was being listened to after=20 > having been redone quietly, right? Right. > >> It has to do with the way we (unconsciously) listen to overtones :=20 >> you strike hard, you create an abundance of higher partials, you=20 >> strike less hard, you create a mix of lower partilas and higher=20 >> partials. > > Agreed the mix of lower and higher partials is determined by how hard=20= > we strike, but on a hard blow, the lower partials are no less obvious=20= > (and as measured by a sophisticated spectrum analyzer, no smaller in=20= > comparison to the higher partials) than on a soft blow. What changes=20= > in the sound from soft blow to hard, is the emergence of the higher=20 > partials which feed on the extra strength of the blow. Well, I do not entirely agree with you here. I have tested this partial stuff myself with the aid of the spectrum=20 analysis, built within my VT. The VT works up to, I think, A5 with 8=20 partials, then with 4. 2 and 1 partial. If you strike very hard, we see that the emphasis lies indeed much=20 stronger on the higher partials. Where the lowest partials react less=20 strongly, the highest partials visibly react much more. But there is another phenomenon at hand here : if you strike really=20 hard, the tone gets distorted and so does your hearing. With a really=20 hard bang, there is a tendency for the higher partials to overrule,=20 probably in combination with other physical factors I am not familiar=20 with. It may also be that our ears react in a much different way then we=20 think to a violent sound. > >> The result is a coarse and wide sounding tone, very rich in overtones=20= >> and very long sounding. >> That tone is a complimentary quality an experienced and musical tuner=20= >> can use. >> If a given tuning is not really perfect (and I am convinced that at=20= >> least 95% of all tunings in the world are not 100% perfect) than we=20= >> can make up for the hopefully small errors by at least creating a=20 >> very rich tone. > > This may be true, but, being the aural tuner which I still am after=20 > all of these years, I'm using the higher partials as a vernier fine=20 > adjustment on the fundamental during unison tuning. In some PTJ=20 > article it was mentioned that a "dead unison" is best done by=20 > zero-beating the highest partial we can hear. If a 7th partial (my=20 > favorite) beats at 1bps, I know the 1st is on a slow roll one beat=20 > every 7 seconds. (And the 2d every 3.5 secs, and so on.) If I slow the=20= > 7th beat rate down to 0.5bps, the period of the 1st partial's beat=20 > rate would stretch to 14 sec., and the slope of its rise and fall=20 > would be so mild as to be unusable in zero-beating that 1st partial.=20= > Much easier to slow the 7th partial beat rate from 1/2 bps to zero,=20 > rather than the 1st partial from 1/14 bps to zero. > > So it's this fine tuning knob that I would have to do without, by=20 > tuning with a soft blow. Not that I bang my way through a tuning. But=20= > I would have to be playing very quietly not to hear the 7th partial=20 > even up into the 5th octave. > > So, Andre, a clarification: were the unisons with the softer blow,=20 > done listening to individual partials although no higher than the 4th,=20= > or were they done on the basis of the "whole sound", ie, the wave=20 > envelope of the entire sound regardless of what partials may be=20 > contributing beat rates? The notes were retuned on the basis of the "whole" sound. There was no=20= need to really pick out this or that partial. btw, I never really consciously tune with the aid of partials. I just=20 tune, I just use my basic musical talent which defines my "ear/tone=20 print". My musical talent and my trained ears tell me exactly when the=20= combination of the two or three strings is at its most beautiful=20 (according to my frayed nerve endings hehe). I am convinced that our eyes work the same : it is a matter of 1. the technical/physical situation with your eyes i.e. are they=20 healthy, are they functioning well enough? 2. How do our eyes and optical nerves perceive and especially=20 'translate' the spectrum of light beams. So it must be that my green resembles your green, but is probably=20 fractionally different. That's why I state that all tuners have a different way of creating=20 unisons. I am not talking here about counting beats or creating a=20 temperament etc. no, this is purely related to the way we can perceive=20= and process sound and the combination of two or three sounds, coming=20 from the unisons. That is most fascinating stuff and tuners with under developed 'ears'=20 could highly benefit from a 'unison seminar' of maybe 1 hour. As I told before : the best example I heard of this was at the Yamaha=20 Academy in Japan, where a number of 'developed' students in my class=20 (Concert course) had to do a tuning test every day at 8 a.m. My instructor secretly invited me to compare their unisons, and Bill...=20= It was a total and complete "ear opener". And then there was in particular this one Japanese lady tuner who made=20= the ultimate tuning, by which I mean that she was able to tune every=20 note on the tuning curve. It was absolutely amazing, and she performed=20= this incredible work of precision every day. She was almost like a=20 tuning machine, and a very good one too Her unisons however were of very very poor 'tonal' quality. The best=20 tuning maybe on Earth, but the ugliest CFIII-S I ever heard (and it was=20= a rather new one, with new hammers). btw... the same applies to the quality of voicing. If one doesn't have=20= the "right" ear, it would be better to....... dadadada (fill in=20 yourself) (; >)) > > If the latter, then we are back again to the discussion of whether a=20= > breathless unison is a dead tone. If the former, it's simply a matter=20= > of whether a breathless unison can be efficiently achieved, listening=20= > to and working with the 1st 4 partials only. > > Thanks for the clarification, guys. I only "partially hear" you. Well Bill, I think I could describe this unison stuff best by comparing a very=20 rich and coarse sounding unison with a train track of which the rails=20 lie very wide. The louder you strike, the smaller the gauge of the tracks. That's I=20 think a good comparison. The best thing of course is to try this out for yourself. Most people=20 do not believe this story and as I told here before I once told a=20 famous pianist about it and he said "rubbish" don't tell me BS stories=20= (all this in a blunt way, so much for famous pianists). I remained calm=20= and polite and offered to prove it. After I had tuned a few unisons=20 with tremendous blows, he had to admit that those few notes sounded=20 very different indeed. For punishment, I should have tuned his battered=20= Steinway in my most favorite tuning, called Freud 2, where all fourths=20= are tuned into pure fifths. This is btw a tuning, which, if not=20 performed with vast experience and total dedication, will drive you=20 completely nuts and bonkers, the tech usually ending up in a very tight=20= straight jacket, hence the name : Freud nr 2) There is also another one=20= I like very much called Jung, number 7, but that is for advanced=20 nuts..... Bill, I hope that "my partials" are by now a very open book to you... (; > friendly greetings from Andr=E9 Oorebeek "where Music is, no harm can be" ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 15182 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/ce/50/a8/fb/attachment.bin ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC