etd's and ears

[RicB]

Hi Les

Being an avid ETD user myself I refuse to acknowledge the idea that 
ETD's are of little or no value to the ear tuner. That said it should be 
well known to most longtimers here I have reservations to their use. I'm 
in reality quite disspassionate about the whole thing so the flame suit 
thingy seems kind of unnecessary to me.. or should be anyways. Before 
going on let me say that in the hands of someone knowing what they are 
doing... an ETD tuning is bound to be quite good. THAT said... an 
accepted that we are really talking about things on an advanced 
level..... let me continue.

Lets get a couple things clear. This Tune-off that Coleman and others 
did. I personally throw that kind of <<test>> in the box of "Interesting 
but basically worthless" information. All that was proved was that when 
two tunings done by these two fellows were finished, a group of tuners 
listening to both instruments played couldnt discern any significant 
difference. I think its important to remember that a similiar 
<<experiement>> was carried out by Ed Foote a while back concerning 
Historical Tunings. Two instruments were tuned, one HT and one ET... and 
very few technicians sitting in a small auditorium could hear the 
difference.

What these things say most about is what we as tuners and what pianists 
as listeners have not learned to listen too.

Another point to make about the tune-off. Coleman used his ears. There 
has yet to be done a tuneoff between someone like Virgil and someone who 
is essentially deaf using an ETD only.

Jason Kantors article on single partial ETD,s also shows some holes in 
the whole single partial ETD approach. Unexpected inharmonicity... that 
what has been often termed para-inharmonicity is more significant over 
the entire range of the piano then we've been led to believe. Its a 
natural born fact that any in successive chromatic series of 4:2:1 
coincidents you are going to find a couple double octaves that simply do 
not, can not allign themselves in consistant stretch degree... because 
somewhere there is going to be a few partials that are a couple three - 
four hz off where they <<should be>>. That yeilds an audible effect that 
we CAN learn to hear and react to. Just like voicing... if you let 
yourself start paying that close attention you will start hearing 
differences you didnt think were there.

Before anyone starts getting all hmmd and hawwd now... lets be clear. 
The level we are on here is quite a bit beyond what is needed to satisfy 
Les's two symphony orchestra, or the Vienna boys choir. There are only a 
handfull of pianists in the world that have so refined and defined 
preferences that an well executed ETD tuning wont <<do>> nicely. That 
said.... lets remember some of David Andersens fine comments on the 
subject of ear tunings. His approach is Virgil Smiths approach. And if 
you stop to think about it... it is bound to give a different overall 
affect then any different approach.... including an ETD approach. Over 
simplified... I am sure you will agree that different stretch degrees 
yeild different results. My perfect 12ths approach for example (which 
rightly enough is not something I was the first to think of... just so 
Bernnie is happy if hes out there), pushes the stretch curve outwards in 
the C5-C6 area yet otherwise yeilds overall very mild stretch numbers. 
I'm never above 35 cents at C8. The tuning is more tense in the pushed 
area to a slight degree... but overall very sonorous and soothing. Where 
as guys who stretch out the bass to get that rumble and the entire 
treble to get that triple / quadruple octave matching are going to make 
you freeze when you hear 3rds, 10ths and other fast beating 
intervals.... and you might even get a bit sea sick listening to that 3 
meter high sea in the bass if you get my meaning.

ETD's are not capable of tuning effects like this beyond what their 
programming allows for. Cybertuner allows for some customization of the 
curve to be sure... but in the end.... note to note divergence from any 
theoretical curve is not covered ... not even by Verituner completely.

On one point does the machine far outshine the ear. Dead on target 
frequency accuracy... if thats what you are after. This is why in the 
highest ranges and lowest the average ETD tuner will be more consistant 
then the average ear tuner. But to use your own example of symphonies... 
I know a guy who regularly tunes for a quality symphony who is wild as 
hell from F7 up and has no real concert level controll from D1 down.... 
yet his tunings are accepted as good enough. He does quite nicely 
relative to an ETD measurment in the rest of the piano. Again... we get 
into what tuners, pianists, and the general public have learned to hear. 
Another old timer around here I know who used to have the same job is 
unbelievably <<on target>> everywhere.

What does all this mean in terms of practicalities ? I think you've said 
it already yourself.... And ETD in the hands of someone who knows what 
they are doing, has years of experience comparing on some level what 
he/she hears with what the ETD says is going to be able to tune a very 
nice tuning on any instrument.

Is it superiour / inferiour to an equally finely executed aural tuning 
?.... No. Those words have no meaning in reality in this discussion. 
They will be different tunings to be sure... and you can learn to hear 
the results if you go down that road. But its far from necessary. When 
in any art, artists transcend that level of ability that marks 
expertise.... there is no longer any meaning in the use of words like 
<<better>> or <<worse>>. What differences we create on this level are 
simply ... well.. part of the beauty of it all.

Below this level... and particularly at the beginning level of tuning... 
the whole ETD discussion is all about completely different things.

Cheers
RicB





    Now being in hearing aids, I think more and more about the values of
    ETD's
    yet hear the ramblings about all their limitations, and the power of the
    aural tuner. What puzzles me is this. Two tune-offs at two national
    conventions with Virgil Smith and Jim Coleman proved pretty well that "a
    good tuner is a good tuner whether he uses an ETD or tunes aurally". I
    think it was Mr. Coleman who said, "The closer in value of the piano to
    $100,000, the better the machine tuning." Well my strict reliance on
    an ETD
    has been adequate for two symphony orchestras, Vienna Boy's choir,
    numerous
    other concert venues and several recordings, my aural tuning
    considered ,
    as well, "completely fine" in another of the major halls in this
    city when I
    had to wing it because of a time crunch. It has long seemed to me as I
    have followed aural tuner after aural tuner with really messy top
    and bottom
    octaves that the ETD wins hands down over the "average aural tuner". Yet
    there is still an aura of the ETD tuner as somehow inferior. Every
    tuning
    is a compromise at many points along the way, and my experience has
    indicated that aural tuners are very often entirely too proud of their
    product, thei " compromises" being far far from reasonable or accurate.
    As the tuning public grows more and more grey, hearing issues are
    going to
    become more serious, and I can pretty much tell on first pass if the
    tuner
    before has been aural, and generally know if he or she is suffering from
    some kind of hearing limitation..

    I can't be considered a total schlock as I passed my tuning test
    above CTE
    requirements in all but one area strictly aurally. So, I've paid my
    dues.
    But I don't tune aurally unless I can't avoid it these days, and private
    clients, academicians, concert and recording artists have all
    complimented
    my pretty much strict machine tunings (yes I do listen carefully
    afterwards
    as I check things for smoothness without the program running). On junk,
    where no tuner can hear amidst the false beats, I again think the
    machine
    wins, because it gives consistency and at least a reasonable target
    at notes
    which otherwise often vary as much as 50-cents or more from what aural
    tuners have done. I will never throw away my aural skills, but more and
    more I trust my ETD and my intuitions as I manipulate the program to
    present
    what I think will be a reasonable tuning for a particular instrument.

    Flame suit at the ready, I think more and more the standard for
    "accurate"
    is going to become the standard created by electronic devices. After all
    I've been part of testing teams, and have seen how the examiners
    rely on the
    machine to make an accurate master tuning. So, why not learn to
    manipulate
    the electronic programs through experience and then trust with wise
    use they
    will perform at or above the average tuner, and compete very well
    with the
    "good" tuners……… Even Avery Todd, I suspect, made great use of his
    SAT when
    he tuned for Olga Kern last week, and it was a very solid tuning,
    though she
    did do some damage with her massive strength. So, I'm all for
    stirring the
    pot on this one and seeing what kind of "soup" comes out.
    les bartlett