This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment Jim, Well, I'll hesitatingly take my foot out of my mouth long enough to say something and probably fit that foot right back again. Jim asked to find out what the "experts" are doing, but I'll answer anyway, Jim. Real experts are working too hard at it to write E-mail much <g> I've been doing quite a bit of thinking and non-scientific testing of tuning methods and tuning sounds. Of those few musicians outside of Kawai whom I tune for, I have asked them the questions "Do you hear differences in tone quality from one tuner to the next" and "How would you characterize this tuning." (meaning the one I just did) This is a little bit of a loaded question, as the musician tends to want to give a favorable review with me right in front of them, but the general trend of the answers is that this tuning is "warm and sweet." I'm not sure I know what that means exactly, but I have a few ideas based on recent comparisons with stored electronic tunings from other technicians which I have looked at and tried out a little. Jim - you have an idea how I tune (at least how I tune under duress!) from the PTG convention last year (to the list - I pre-tuned the 4 RX-5 pianos before Jim and Virgil got to them for the tune-off) Virgil's comments were that my tuning was very similar to his, which I took as a complement although I certainly don't think I tune in he same way he does. So Jim, what was your take on my tunings? The Kawai pianos I tune most of the time are well suited to my tuning style, I think, because they have relatively low inharmonicity and work well with clean sounding octaves and slightly slow beating temperament intervals. However, some of my private clients have Steinway and Mason & Hamlin pianos and they still feel my tunings are warm and sweet sounding. I haven't taken the time to analyze my tunings on those pianos, because I am there to provide service and can't spend time on my own pursuits. My conclusion is probably totally erroneous, so please comment. But here is my tentative take on what makes some tunings sound sweet and others more bright, or perhaps "aggressive" is a good term: - 3rd beat rates somewhat slow in the temperament section, - 5ths even but not necessarily all that slow. - Octaves between 2:1 and 4:2 in the middle of the piano. - Treble octaves tuned as clean as possible between 2:1 and 4:1 double octaves - High treble tuned 2:1 - I find this is extremely rare in other tuners, and I haven't decided why exactly. It seems most tune this area using a sense of pitch as much as anything, but I can't get a handle on being consistent using this method. - Low bass clean (somewhere between 4:2 and 6:3 octaves), but wowing wide conservatively in the lowest octave, with the wow being with the loudest beat - not to a specific type of octave. My gut feeling is that the treble cleanness is beneficial to the sustain of the notes, giving the sweetness to the tone. I don't have time to think up and carry out a proper test of this, though. Maybe some day. BTW, I always strive for the cleanest unisons possible, and I am a hard beater of the keys with frequent test blows, but I tune on consistent mf - f(forte) playing usually. I also much prefer the sound of the tuning when tuned with full muting of the piano with temperament strips and the rear duplex muted off. I find I can really hear all the beats best this way, and I know what I am doing. When I tune with an ETD, my tuning definitely measures as more accurate and consistent note to note, but it doesn't sound better because of this, to my ear anyway. This is even when I have set the EDT to match my octave stretch preferences - the end result still sounds different from the aural tuning. I have experimented a little with customizing the Reyburn Cybertuner's tunings to match my own as closely as possible, and so far I am still not satisfied - I need to tune many more pianos with it to be able to say for sure if this can truly create an "Aural" tuning, as I'd like it to. I suspect that the small unevenness of the aural tuning one can measure is demonstrating that the ear is adjusting to the unevenness of the piano. There is also undeniably a larger margin of error in the ear tunings, but the results seem to fit the sound of the piano, rather than the calculation of what the piano scale should sound like. Let me restate something, though. The differences between my own tunings (aural or EDT) are miniscule, are only audible to me and some pianists (and probably some other technicians, though technicians tend to listen differently than musicians), and probably don't matter a lick in the real world of banging in pitch raises and tunings on average pianos. Even the audibility of the "Sweetness factor" may not stand up to a careful double-blind listening test. As you have discovered, Jim, such tests are extremely difficult to carry out with pianos, so we will probably have to continue with anecdotal evidence. I've probably said too much, and now everyone will flame me. Don Mannino > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Coleman, Sr. [SMTP:pianotoo@IMAP2.ASU.EDU] > Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 1998 8:42 AM > To: pianotech@ptg.org > Subject: Sweet Sound > > To the entire list: > > During the aural/visual tuning discussions, we saw the term sweet > sound > as a description of fine aural tuning. Could we have some more comment > on what makes the aural tuning have its distinctive character? Such > things > as how you prove the octaves, double octaves, tolerance of interval > progression, cleanliness of unisons (there was some discussion about > having > not such antiseptic type unisons) and any other specifics which would > be > of interest. I'm not setting anyone up for criticism, but rather to > get > some specifics to be able to better teach aural tuning. I actually > teach > aural tuning more than I do visual tuning (strange as that may seem to > > some, since I am an AccuTuner dealer). If I can figure out what the > real > experts are really doing, I might become a better all around aural > tuner > and hence be able to teach others also. > > Jim Coleman, Sr. ---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 7222 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/b0/a4/01/a6/attachment.bin ---------------------- multipart/mixed attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC