<HTML>In a message dated 6/3/01 12:34:24 PM Central Daylight Time, hsrosen@gate.net (Howard S. Rosen) writes: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Lately I have been really stretching my octaves to the limit in order to have the melodic aspect of the treble (5th and 6th octave) sound good against the lower areas. That means beating double octaves in order to achieve really good triple octaves. I think that this would be a 'no-no' to many techs and I even question this concept myself. Yet yesterday, after one of these really big stretch tunings, I had the rare privilege of standing back and listening to the customer play music and I must say that I thought it sounded nice. Perhaps a different selection might show the beating double octaves.</BLOCKQUOTE> You have discovered what most people nowadays think makes the piano sound best under most circumstances.  Just as with the temperament issue, it might be said that one way cannot be considered "better" than the other.  If you choose to make really "clean" or "pure" sounding octaves throughout the piano, your upper registers will sound flat and lower, sharp.  The harmony played in the center will be less strained but the melodic aspect of the upper octaves will be dulled. In my view, technicians often have the tendency to dwell too much on the purity of octaves and the equalization of the temperament because, as they lean over the piano, banging on it, it sounds best that way, under *that* circumstance.  Test those 3rds, test those octaves, make everything as smooth and quiet as possible and the piano will sound its best.  Yes, it may under certain circumstances but under most typical conditions when actual music is played, that kind of refinement actually detracts from the pianos overall potential. Consider the fact that most musical contexts are far different from the playing and testing of isolated intervals.  Many, if not most imperfections in purity of octaves and smoothness of temperament are hidden in actual musical renderings.  So, it makes sense to emphasize that which may be better perceived while standing back and really listening to music rather than that which may only be heard in careful, close listening to isolated notes and intervals. I seem often to surprise other technicians with ideas I have made part of what I do decades ago. I attended a class with Virgil Smith teaching the goal of pure triple octaves a good 20 years ago but was doing it before I even saw him demonstrate and advocate it.  I was happy to see that a master of the craft was teaching that which I had decided on my own was best. Nearly anytime I talk about it or demonstrate it myself, however, there usually turns up the *one guy* who gets bent out of shape about it. So, the same goes for what I do with temperament.  I long ago found that a truly *equal* temperament was less satisfying and musical than one which was made purposefully but only slightly unequal in an alignment with the cycle of 5ths.  When I combine this with what I have called "tempered octaves", I get unparalleled balance between close harmony in the middle and soaring melodiousness in the upper octaves. I thoroughly enjoy listening to my customers play, attending a performance where I have tuned and especially singing with a piano I have tuned in my own special way. Bill Bremmer RPT Madison, Wisconsin</HTML>