Twangy pianos + stringing

[Ron Nossaman]

>On the low side, I rarely tune high C at less than about 4245 cps, and on
>the high side, I rarely tune high C at more than about 4295 cps.  (I'm using
>figures from TuneLab, which you probably have too.  Most of my tunings will
>fall within that range.

Yep, I have it, but I don't have anything tuned around at the moment to
check with it, and I don't use it for tuning, so I'd have to tune something
aurally and measure. Also, I thought if I could get a few generous souls
out there to supply a few quick numbers for me then I wouldn't have to
figure it out myself. Besides, my point may have more credibility if
someone elses data makes it. In any case, using Sanderson's formulas, a
50mm C-8 with #13 (0.031") wire at 4160cps will be at 150lb @ 62%. At
4245cps, it will be @155lb @64%, and at 4245cps, it will be @ 158lb @65%.
That's with just the expected deviation from theoretical pitch to a ( I
presume ) mildly stretched average tuning. Throw in some wild humidity
fluctuations, and someone who stretches the last six notes a half semitone
sharp of pure, and we begin to see what kind of over pull tolerance we're
dealing with here.


>Do the usual scaling programs try to accommodate any of the variations in
>pitch that might be 'common' with a real world type tuning (stretch factor),
>or do they just ignore that all together?

Mine doesn't, but it's a heavily mutated version of a more straightforward
scaling Excel worksheet that I was mercifully given to get me started
without hurting myself. That being the case, I suppose I could add a
stretch factor pretty easily, but it's not that big a deal. The numbers
generated are close enough for scaling, unless of course you want to make
an annoying point in group discussion. I don't know about other scaling
software, but I suspect it's the same fixed pitch scale in them too. 


>(on a more personal note,...)
>Glad to hear you had a good Thanksgiving.  I did too.  This being the first
>major holiday without 'significant other', I was wondering how things might
>go emotionally, but there was no problem at all. 
>
>Brian Trout

I bet that's not how the turkey saw it! Be that as it may, I'm happy to see
you hanging in. Happy digestion, and thanks for the numbers.

Regards, 
Ron N