more on floating pitch

[David Ilvedson]

I'm with Barbara, in that I don't want to make a big change to the bass when it is often in the ballpark and the problem is tenor/treble.   2 quick times through the problem area and you have made a big improvement.   Sounds like a damp-chaser would solve this problem...

David Ilvedson, RPT
Pacifica, CA  94044

----- Original message ----------------------------------------
From: "Porritt, David" <dporritt at mail.smu.edu>
To: "Pianotech List" <pianotech at ptg.org>
Received: 8/21/2008 3:56:29 PM
Subject: RE: more on floating pitch


>I think that by compromising the piano will be marginally more stable.
>I float mine at pretty close to what A4 gives me and in your case that
>would be a raise in the bass and lowering in other areas, but I can live
>with that.  

>dp


>David M. Porritt, RPT
>dporritt at smu.edu

>-----Original Message-----
>From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On
>Behalf Of Mike Spalding
>Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 3:24 PM
>To: Pianotech List
>Subject: Re: more on floating pitch

>I guess I failed to make my point clear.  I am not asking for a tutorial

>on pitch raising - I feel I have a method that works well for me within 
>the amount of time the school is paying for.  The point is, when the 
>humidity increased from 38% to 68%, parts of the piano barely moved, and

>others moved a lot.  This is the way most pianos behave (except perhaps 
>for a Nossamanized concert grand) Suppose I float the pitch at +8c.  I'm

>pitch-raising the bass up to 8c, I'm pitch lowering the tenor up to 16c,

>and the treble up to 27c.  Pick another float frequency, the situation 
>is the same.  The majority of the piano gets a significant pitch 
>correction in order to match any chosen float pitch.  Therefore, there's

>no benefit to floating.  Might as well target 440 every time, it won't 
>be any less work, or any less stable, than floating at some other 
>pitch.  And no matter what pitch the piano gets tuned to, when the 
>weather shifts the piano will go out of tune with itself, whether its 
>drifting towards A440 or away from A440.  So why not target A=440 every 
>time?

>Mike

>Jon Page wrote:
>> >A0 +0, A1 +3, A2 +5, A3 +18, A4 +12, A5 +24, A6 + 35, A7 +20.
>>
>> If being dead on 440 is not important (studio work) I would tune this
>> piano at +8c.   It will be back down to 440 or lower in a few months.
>>
>> Unless you're desperate for work, float the pitch. one pass.
>> -- 
>>   
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Jon Page
>and John Formsma Wrote:

>I would assume the problem came when the piano was tuned to A440 in 
>March.  This would likely be just before the RH begins to rise (at least

>it does here in Mississippi around that time).  If the piano had been 
>tuned to A439 then, it would be closer to A440 now.

>I would agree that a one-pass tuning might not have every note "spot 
>on."  However, one could get the piano in decent musical shape with a 
>one-pass tuning ... even with numbers that you mention below. Since this

>is a school piano, and schools generally won't pay for a pitch 
>correction, I'd do the best I could with a single pass.

>My attempt would be stabilizing the entire middle section to A440 first.

> (By tuning all unisons there.)  Then begin working on the treble, 
>tuning slightly flat octaves, and tuning unisons as you go.  By 
>listening to your progress, it will become evident if you've chosen the 
>right amount of "flatness" to your octaves.  My first try would be 
>tuning the treble so that the octave-fifth has a beat of 1-2 bps.  This 
>would be perhaps even a slightly flat double octave.  But, it usually 
>goes back up when it's that sharp, so you anticipate that.

>If you have to correct some, you have to correct some. <G>  It's not 
>that hard with shimming.  I'd just correct the worst ones in the time 
>that I got paid for.

>-- 
>JF