Tuning Acrosonics

[Richard Brekne]

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
Well David... grin.. I actually never said there was any such difference. Having newly
embarked on this particular direction on our common journey into the world of piano
acoustics... I am not sure I am the one to directly answer your question, but I imagine
any answer would have to include perspectives.

On the one hand, due to the basic imperfectness of scales, strings, etc.. no "ideal" for
a temperament can exist in any perfect sense. We can only have the "ideal" and our
attempt to employ this ideal on any given piano.

On the other hand, there is the "spirit" of the ideal, which more or less takes into
account the fact that the ideal cant exist in real day to day tuning. It is indeed this
"spirit" or essence tuners work with daily. And in that work, the best tuners can do
amazing things to approximate the ideal.

As I said in my last post, I am just now, after nigh 25 years of tuning just beginning
to realize the possibilities in this regard, and the reason for this is that it is only
now I have taken the time to start really looking hard at partials and inharmonicity and
what these imply for our work. A strong working knowledge of these issues is indeed a
powerful tool to carry in your minds tool box.. grin..

Richard Brekne
I.C.P.T.G.  N.P.T.F.
Bergen, Norway

David ilvedson wrote:

> If there isn't really equal temperment what about the other
> temperments?  Is there more leeway in tuning a Victorian and
> still calling it a Victorian?  Why would HT's be any different in
> that fashion that ET?
>
> David I.
>
> Date sent:              Mon, 06 Dec 1999 22:24:01 +0100
> From:                   Richard Brekne <richardb@c2i.net>
> To:                     pianotech@ptg.org
> Subject:                Re: Tuning Acrosonics
> Send reply to:          pianotech@ptg.org
>
> >
> >
> > Billbrpt@AOL.COM wrote:
> >
> > > In a message dated 12/5/99 8:19:34 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> > > kswafford@earthlink.net (Kent Swafford) writes:
> > >
> > > << My personal preference when dealing with a
> > >  large difference in inharmonicity at the tenor break is to give up on
> > >  smooth beat rates in the 3rds in favor of smooth beat rates in the 4ths,
> > >  5ths, and octaves. >>
> > >
> >
> > Hmmm.. An interesting thread really... Actually I'd like to point out that in a
> > sense the whole point is really that there is no such thing as ET at all. At very
> > best one can equally space only one and the same one partial for every string on
> > the piano. This is illustrated by the fact that a perfectly equal spaceing of say
> > the 4th partial for all 88 notes, is no guarantee that any other partial will be
> > equally spaced. In fact it is more like a guarantee that all other partials will
> > be unevenly spaced. Such an perfectly even spaceing of the 4th partial then would
> > automatically lead to some degree of uneven thirds, fourths, fiths,, all intervals
> > for that matter. So we are left to some degree with a comprimise situation.
> >
> > One can force a pretty even progression of major thirds... or one can go with 4ths
> > and 5ths. In good pianos you can get both to work out quite nicely. Which one you
> > choose in a challanging piano is in the end a matter of taste... within certain
> > rather vaguely defined parameters of acceptability.
> >
> > Add different stretchs into the equation and the "unequalness" of all partials and
> > coincidents outside of the present control or determinant set, can become quite
> > significant if you want to get picky enough to measure it all out.
> >
> > Jim Coleman got me started on this buisness with Baldersins book about six months
> > ago. We use octave types, 5th types and other types all the time without even
> > knowing it. In fact I am convince that most aural tuners dont really know
> > (conciously and easy to fetch from the back of the mind) much about these "types"
> > formally at all. I am also convinced that the more familiar one is with them, (on
> > a very concious and active level) the more powerful a tuning tool it becomes. I
> > find myself more and more being able to sit down and quickly discern another
> > tuners style because of an accute and increasing awareness of these types. In the
> > process I have begun to think less of different tuning styles and stretches as
> > right or wrong.. rather as one or another set of priorities from the tuner. Its
> > actually quite facinating.
> >
> > Richard Brekne
> > I.C.P.T.G.  N.P.T.F.
> > Bergen, Norway
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> David Ilvedson, RPT
> Pacifica, CA
> ilvey@jps.net

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/46/8c/73/28/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--