[pianotech] Aurally pure octaves

Nick Gravagne gravagnegang at att.net
Fri Mar 13 19:26:26 PDT 2009


Ed,

 

HA! -- "not a member of Mensa and basically having an animal's experience of
life." 

 

Where did you come up with that? :-) I can assure you that members of Mensa
are also "having an animal's experience of life", but many of them just
don't know it.

 

As to whether or not the grasp of the concepts of my post will make you hear
better and make you a better tuner, my answer is a resounding NO! Let's face
it, don't we all know tuners who tune exclusively with ETDs, or without
ETDs, or who insist on whole tone, or else partials, or the use of
temperament strips as opposed to mutes only. All these and more have tuned
successfully for the most elite players, recording sessions, sound stages,
recitals, and the like. When it comes to tuning, the proof is in the
pudding. 

 

I say this with my flame suit securely zipped up. When I hear a really fine
tuning I couldn't care less about how it was achieved. Well, all right, I
would be curious, but in the final analysis any number of reasons might be
put forward: "I use an ETD, but I have a special stretch worked out"; "I use
whole tone - absolutely the only way to go!"; "Strictly by ear."  What
matters is the effect, not how it was achieved. I am a baseball fan and am
always amazed at the various styles batters use to hit the ball. True, they
all have some fundamentals in common, but the differences define them, too.
Two extremes come to mind: Kevin Youkilis and Craig Counsel; ditto in spades
for pitchers.

 

Now having said that, recent posts praise the superior effect of tuning
whole tone; using a single mute ala Virgil Smith (or other practitioners). I
don't argue for or against the superiority of any approach to listening or
technique to attain same.  

 

The main point of the post is to outline that so-called whole tone listening
is not simply a psycho-acoustic phenomenon, a trick of the ear to fill in
the blanks. The sensation of hearing beats at their pitch frequencies is
real. 

 

Ciao for now.

 

Nick Gravagne, RPT

Piano Technicians Guild

Member Society Manufacturing Engineers

Voice Mail 928-476-4143

 

  _____  

From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of Ed Sutton
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 6:26 PM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Aurally pure octaves

 

Nick-

 

Thank you for the explanation.

I'm sure it makes plenty of sense.

Is there some way it can help me to hear better or tune better?

 

Ed Sutton (not a member of Mensa and basically having an animal's experience
of life)

----- Original Message ----- 

From: Nick Gravagne 

To: pianotech at ptg.org 

Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 9:01 PM

Subject: Re: [pianotech] Aurally pure octaves

 

William et al,

 

I remember a tuning class held at a large chapter meeting. Intervals were
played and the beats were obvious to both newbies and veterans. Adjustments
were made and we could all hear the beats speeding up and slowing down. A
fine temperament was set by adjusting the beat rates for even thirds and
sixths, and "quiet" fourths and fifths. A young man asked about coincident
partials: "where exactly do they line up?" 

 

The instructor said he used to know but wasn't sure; there was some
head-scratching in the room of 35 attendees, but a few had the answers.
"You've been reading Braid White's book, haven't you?" Virtually all the
veteran tuners adamantly opined that it is best to listen to the "obvious"
beats, those we had been listening to during the demonstration. These
obvious beats "sounding" at the fundamentals are what this list is now
calling "whole tone" or "whole sound" listening or tuning.

 

That chapter meeting was held in New Jersey in 1973 and I was among the
newbies. I learned to tune by hearing the whole package, although later on I
was pleased to isolate the partials. Tuning then became a balancing act of
checking the whole sound with the partials of choice.

 

Virgil Smith is not a mathematician, but he had latched onto the concept of
resultant forces. Ten forces of different magnitudes pulling an object in
many opposing directions can all be reduced to one significant force --- the
resultant force. And the object will move steadily in one direction and at
one speed. The energy force in a vibrating string divides itself up among
the multitude of partials; many sine waves superimpose themselves. The
famous French mathematician J. Fourier (1768 - 1830) analyzed this
phenomenon and gave us the famous Fourier curve, the single resultant
curve/force that essentially represented the integral (the whole) of the
many constituent superimposing partials, including the fundamental.  The
single curve does not look like a simple sine wave; rather it is bumpy and
strange yet periodic.

 

For fun, go to
http://id.mind.net/~zona/mstm/physics/waves/standingWaves/standingWaves1/Sta
ndingWaves1.html and see a violin string animation of the Fourier curve as
the resultant wave (the white wave) of partials. You have to build the
Fourier pulse by clicking on the partial selections.  

 

These curves do not simply exist for the convenience of study, they point to
the reality of our physical universe. The simple act of standing up amounts
to the resultant force of a multitude of smaller forces, equilibriums and
gravity. Fortunately, we do not need to analyze these to simply stand up.
What is true of physical mechanics is true of sound. 

 

Now if the temperament note F exists as a single resultant curve, and A
above it the same, then the superimposing of these two single waves running
along a time plot will indicate an interference of 7 bps, and all this will
be experienced by the ear at the fundamental level. Even more fascinating,
the F and A will coalesce into its own single resultant curve, also periodic
in nature. The relatively small energies that exist at the higher coincident
partials could not possibly affect the intensity of the beating effect we
have at the pitch frequencies unless the whole tone resultants are
interacting. 

 

And yet more mind boggling is that a single resultant curve exists for a
sustaining chord played in different positions up the keyboard. There comes
a whole brilliant swirling and shimmering sound, but shot through with tiny
laser beams. Only piano tuners and certain musicians can surgically dissect
these. It seems to me there must be a study or lab experiment that
demonstrates this reality.  

 

RicB: it is not a stretch to borrow from the world of higher mathematics and
refer to partials as "derivatives" and to the combining of all these
derivatives as the "integral". Math purists might balk due to the implied
functions, but relative to our discussion, we would then have Derivative
tuning as partial-focused, and Integral tuning as whole tone, Fourier
tuning. These sterile terms lack warmth, but they point theoretically in the
right direction.

 

Regards,

 

Nick Gravagne, RPT

Piano Technicians Guild

Member Society Manufacturing Engineers

Voice Mail 928-476-4143

 


  _____  


From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of William Monroe
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 7:13 PM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Aurally pure octaves

 

SNIP

 

I was drawn to the idea that tuners need not listen to beats at their
specific pitch levels, since I am one the tuners who has never heard
coincident partials at a their actual pitches.

 

Whole sound tuning is where it's at. It is not secret knowledge. I'll be
attempting to demonstrate next week at the Central-West Regional Seminar in
Wichita.

 

Kent


Kent,

Can you explain this more clearly?  I know it's been (re)hashed many times
and, recently, but, where DO you hear the coincident partials if not at
their specific pitches?  I'm more than open to learning/experiencing this
technique, and I've no doubt standing behind you (Virgil, DA, etc.) would be
far more instructive, and I intend to do that at GR if DA gets it going; but
for now, are you just listening to "everything presented" at once?  Or is it
something different, specific to partials, but with a slightly different
focus?
 
William R. Monroe

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech_ptg.org/attachments/20090313/42ccfce5/attachment.html>


More information about the pianotech mailing list

This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC