ETDs & Non-Equal Temperaments

[Farrell]

>      Earlier, someone listed the four ways to use an ETD.

That was me.

>  I would offer a fifth, ie, tune your best aural ET tuning and
> record it into the machine, then don't be shy about refining your page it
> each time you use it, subjecting your tunings to your own critique.
>      Once you are comfortable with an ET for a given piano, as your ears
tell
> you, then you can slam-dunk one of Owen Jorgensen's rows of numbers on top
of
> the ET template and you get very nice results.

Yup, this is what I currently do (or at least what I will admit to doing).
If one is using an ETD and offsets, this is clearly the superior way to do
it. But I am talking about walking into someones home and putting a non-ET
tuning on their piano. I wish to avoid tuning the the whole piano to ET, and
then starting over and tuning it to a non-ET.

>    I temper to divide an octave. I know what kind of octave I like, and I
> don't alter it to suit a tempering scheme.

So is this to say that in a situation where you have never tuned a
particular piano and it is to be tuned in the Valotti temperament, you would
calculate an FAC tuning - do any adjusting to the FAC numbers or Double
Octave Beats, or whatever, to make the ETD spit out an ET tuning that would
meet with your approval (based on how various octaves/double
octaves/whatever octaves sound - and not based on an analysis of progression
of thirds, fifths, etc., etc.) - and then add the appropriate offsets and
tune to what the machine indicates?

>     Isuppose I would ask "Whadda ya mean by 'best'?".

Boy, that IS an elusive term, isn't it. Without starting a furry (given the
current context), by best I simply mean a something that most tuners would
agree is technically a very good tuning.

The reason I ask about this topic is that I don't know how to tune the
Valotti (or any other non-ET) aurally, and I certainly do not know what
aural checks to use or how to use them. I am miles away from anything like
that at this point. But I hope to identify a way to put a good non-ET on a
piano without tuning it first in ET. So I think that means program the SAT
with a good ET tuning for the piano, based soley on FAC measurements and an
analysis of octave characteristics (yes, this will involve tuning a few
strings - but if you do it on the As, you won't have to tune them twice!),
then add the offsets and tune away.

Terry Farrell

----- Original Message -----
From: <A440A@AOL.COM>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 10:21 AM
Subject: Re: ETDs & Non-Equal Temperaments


> Terry asks:
> >What procedures  <snip> do ETD users use when tuning non-equal
temperaments
> to
> >ensure a good tuning for the subject piano (check octaves and let it go
> >at that?)? I know some often tune spinets with various non-ET
temperaments
> >and these especially need proper checks.
>
> Greetings,
>      Earlier, someone listed the four ways to use an ETD.  Based on my
> opinion that ET is a perfect standard from which to base further harmonic
> adventures,  I would offer a fifth, ie, tune your best aural ET tuning and
> record it into the machine, then don't be shy about refining your page it
> each time you use it, subjecting your tunings to your own critique. ( I
> guarantee that you will find things to change the first time you recreate
> your tuning!)   This cumulative refinement is what is denied the strictly
> machine or strictly aural tuner and  I submit it is the superior manner in
> which to use the technology.
>      Once you are comfortable with an ET for a given piano, as your ears
tell
> you, then you can slam-dunk one of Owen Jorgensen's rows of numbers on top
of
> the ET template and you get very nice results.  AT LEAST,  I THINK SO!
>    I temper to divide an octave. I know what kind of octave I like, and I
> don't alter it to suit a tempering scheme.  This is based on the simple
fact
> that above the fifth octave, the tempering  matters very little.   All
thirds
> are way past the point of distinguishable beats (Plomp & Levelt answered
this
> with their research on critical bands).  Playing the first two measures of
> Debussy's "Clare de Lune" on a Victorian tuning demonstrates this
principle.
> (we did this in Reno).
>
> >Aside from learning to tune these
> >non-ET temperaments well by ear (which, of course would be the best way
> >but hey, I'm only human)
>
>     Isuppose I would ask "Whadda ya mean by 'best'?".  Aural training
> certainly deepens ones identity with their work, no question about that,
but
> many don't  feel the need.  These are the techs that tune for a living and
> are looking for the most expeditious way of putting food on the table.
There
> is nothing wrong with this, we ARE working in a trade, so commercial
> considerations must influence what we do.
>     Another way to produce non-ET tunings is to simply take an FAC tuning
off
> a piano and add the temperament alterations that you want.  This is what I
> did in Reno this year,(with only 45 minutes, I couldn't get arty with the
> job).  For any list members that were there and listened to the result,  I
> gladly invite your critique on the tuning.  There is no better way for any
of
> us to progress than to peer review, and I got no thin skin to worry about.
> It sounded like I wanted it to sound, but I would really like to hear if
> others found something lacking.  ??????
> Regards,
> Ed Foote RPT