P12 in Tunelab Pro

[Bernhard Stopper]

Ric wrote:

> I think also, if you look closely enough at both this simple and
> straightforward rendering of a P-12ths tuning concept, and for that
> matter Dr. Colemans far more well founded and theoretically based P-5ths
> temperament have significant differences then the <<originals>>  you cite.

What now? simple and straightforward? or need to be well founded and
theoretically based?
significant differences to what? have you ever read the book of Serge
Cordier or my article?

For me an equal tempered tuning is enoughly described when referring it to
an equal spaced pure interval like a pure 12th or pure 5th or pure 8th.
Inharmonicity is an instrument immanent relativity offset factor that pushes
every tuning described by its
generating formula together with the instrument specific inharmonicity curve
to the individual absolute frequencies.

Ok you could "reinvent" also all historic tunings by calculating them on an
Excel table or ETD with all inharmonicity related to every
existing instrument. Nice work and a lot of merits to gain here... ;)

>jason wrote:

>I would think the Stopper Perfect 12th Tuning would insist on pure 3:1
matches right down to A0. Does your system address >the peculiarities of
inharmonicity in the piano?

Since i am primarly an aural tuner (i use ETD very rarely because i also
find that P12th is very
very easy to do and really straightforward since a systematic octave stretch
is reached as easy as it could be), i surely contributed my P12th approach
to inharmonicity. For eyxample if i tune a pure 3/1 aurally the result is
not a mathematical 3/1 ratio, it will be the ratio of the 3rd harmonic of
the lower key tuned to the first harmonic of the upper key and that includes
the offset caused by inharmonicity. What i don´t include is any offset in
the higher partials, since we loose the beat structure net what is produced
by the M6ths and the Double 8ths+M3rds (what i use for checking the P12ths)
and M 3rd + m3rd (i use for fifths) and m3rd and M6th (i use for tuning down
the bass, m3rd about 10% faster than the M6th) if we would consider matches
like 6/2 or 9/3. (I also don´t find it helpful to discuss about octaves to
be 2/1 4/2 or 6/3 since at that point we are leaving the beat structure net
caused by the main fundamentals) In fact i described the tuning as 19th root
of the 3rd harmonic and not as 19th root of a mathematical 3/1 ratio.

For the rest of your arguments i agree with you Ric, and i appreciate every
further development in piano tuning/making.
Sorry for any sarcasm in the first lines of this post, i like your pianotech
posting very much and i don´t want to hassle with you.

Jennettha wrote:

>You don't happen to hold any patents on the 3:1 Octave, by any
>chance? Someone with 15 years of using them would probably have
>accumulated a large arrears in royalty fees.
we don´t talk about a 3/1 octave. Octave is 2/1. Or do you mean splitting
the 3/1 down into 12 steps. This is not my P12th appproach, this is the so
called Bohlen-Pierce scale.
i never asked for any royalty fees relating the Stopper P12th tuning. It is
"public domain" ;).

good night

Bernhard


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard Brekne" <Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no>
To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2004 4:16 AM
Subject: Re: P12 in Tunelab Pro


> Bernard.
>
> I am sure we are all willing to acknowledge your original contribution
> and obvious far more developed and all rounded system for both tuning
> and music then my own humble contrivance some 20 years after the fact.
>
> That said, Jason was indeed referring to a very specific (and totally
> independently arrived upon I might add) tuning scheme worked out by
> myself on Tunelab 97, and as such there is no reason for Jason to have
> thought to call it anything else but the what he did.
>
> I think also, if you look closely enough at both this simple and
> straightforward rendering of a P-12ths tuning concept, and for that
> matter Dr. Colemans far more well founded and theoretically based P-5ths
> temperament have significant differences then the <<originals>>  you cite.
>
> I think, for my own part. I have gone out of my way to acknowledge any
> prior arts and credits due. It is a fact however, that individuals
> around the world strike often on similar tracks independently of one
> another and each in their own way could be said to deserve some form of
> credit for the ideas they present. That said.. I personally dont give a
> hoot about all that as I believe the collective knowledge base is far
> more important then the <<who thought of what first>> mentality.
>
> Cheers
> RicB
>
>
> Bernard Stopper wrote.
>
> Jason,
>
> I published the perfect 12th tuning in euro piano 3/1988 as "Stopper
> tuning - equal temperament on the base of pure dudecimos".20 The base
> for this tuning is a 12 pure 12th circle closing with 19  Octaves plus
> pythagorean comma what itself describes a new musical  system.
>
> I did not found any earlier publications relating to this
> tuning/musical  system.
>
> BTW it may also be said that the pure fifth tuning was invented by the
> french Serge Cordier and not by Mr. Coleman as often stated here and on
> many internet sources.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives