Kent S and Bill B, Bill wrote: >Your idea of using a minimally stretched octave when tuning a high >inharmonicity scale on a spinet seems contradictory to logic at first >consideration...> Kent wrote: <<It is interesting that you see minimum stretch in high inharmonicity situations as counter-intuitive.>> Bill wrote: <<Well, ahem, yes, or at least that is what I have consistently learned in PTG tuning classes and publications. It was always presented as the reason you *must* stretch the octaves. Inharmonicity dictates that you *must* make the octave wider than is theoretical. The very idea of deliberately making the octave narrow, even if it is not a perceptible or a barely perceptible amount, would not have occurred to me as ever being correct.>> OK, this is all very interesting. Regardless of which temperament gets used, the octave stretching should be the same, right? So, by how little is the octave stretched when tuning the Acrosonic? I'm not using my SAT anymore, so how about some clues for aural tuners? Are the 3rd, 10ths, 17ths all the same...slower, or what? What about octave-fifths, and double octaves? Equal beating? Narrower octave-fifths than normal? Do you do 2:1 octaves up from the temperament octave? This concept is all new to me, so I need some specifics to have any idea of what you guys are doing. John Formsma Blue Mountain, MS
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC