<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)"> <o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PersonName"/>  <style>  </style>  </head> <body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue> <div class=Section1> Is inharmonicity caused by stiffness, or by the fact the string has mass, and the sound waves cannot create mathematical perfection because the thickness of the string makes it impossible to perfectly bisect the speaking length of the string, or perfectly create any of the segements’ partials?<o:p></o:p> Les bartlett<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <div> <div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'> <hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1> </div> From: pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] On Behalf Of Mark Schecter Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 8:16 PM To: <st1:PersonName w:st="on">pianotech@ptg.org</st1:PersonName> Cc: <<st1:PersonName w:st="on">pianotech@ptg.org</st1:PersonName>> Subject: Re: [pianotech] theory question<o:p></o:p> </div> <o:p> </o:p> <div> I figure it's worth making the distinction to nip confusion in the bud, since the words only differ by their first letters, and many people here might know either term but not the other. Anyway, happy to help.  -- Mark Schecter<o:p></o:p> <div> <o:p> </o:p> <div> <o:p> </o:p> </div> </div> </div> <div> On Sep 27, 2011, at 3:35 PM, "Tom Rhea, Jr." <<a href="mailto:rheapiano@cox.net">rheapiano@cox.net</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p> </div> <blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt' type=cite> <div><u1:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PersonName"> My range of music theory is not as wide as most of the members of the List so you’re right in my inappropriate use of the two terms.  Thanks for the illumination.<u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> <u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p> Tom<u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> <u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p> <div> <div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'> <hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1> </div> From: <a href="mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org">pianotech-bounces@ptg.org</a> [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] On Behalf Of Mark Schecter Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 5:51 PM To: <st1:personname u4:st="on"><a href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</a></st1:personname> Cc: <<st1:personname u4:st="on"><a href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</a></st1:personname>> Subject: Re: [pianotech] theory question<u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> <u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p> <div> Tom,<u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> <div> <u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> <div> I think you are conflating two terms, and along with them, the concepts to which they refer. <u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> <div> <u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> <div> Inharmonicity is the non-harmonic frequency of a partial (which would otherwise be called a harmonic) due to, in the case of the piano, the stiffness of the wire. <u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> <div> <u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> <div> When the same note is spelled differently depending on the harmonic context, the change is called enharmonic. <u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> <div> <u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> <div> It is arguable whether a singer or instrumentalist would have to change their intonation when the spelling changes - if the harmonic context were provided by a fixed-pitch instrument that was tuned in equal temperament, no change would be required at all. <u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> <div> <u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> <div> But a chord does not contain inharmonicity, unless the instrument(s) playing the chord have inharmonic partials, as the piano does. <u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> <div> <u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> <div> An ensemble of non-fixed-pitch instruments such as a string quartet may well adjust their tuning toward greater consonance when not constrained by fixed pitch instruments like keyboards and lutes. But that goes more to the question of temperaments than to the spelling of enharmonic equivalents such as G#-Ab. Hope this helps. <u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> <div> <div> <u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p> <div> <u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> </div> </div> <div> On Sep 27, 2011, at 1:00 PM, "Tom Rhea, Jr." <<a href="mailto:rheapiano@cox.net"></a><a href="mailto:rheapiano@cox.net">rheapiano@cox.net</a>> wrote:<u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> <blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt' type=cite> <div><u5:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PersonName"> Hi Paul,<u5:p></u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> <u5:p> </u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> An instrumentalist generally only plays one note at a time but all of the notes of the score must be harmonically related.  That’s true even with a vocalist.  If you look at a score (piano, orchestral, choral, etc) and analyze each chord, you’ll find that they can be broken down into a very logical, though sometimes extremely complex, structure.  What confuses me at times, is a note (G# for instance) that crosses a bar line and becomes an A flat.  Musically, they’re the same note but harmonically they’re not because the other notes in the chord have changed, making the entire structure into something different, even though the two notes (G# and A flat) sound the same to the ear.  Instrumentalists, but especially vocalists, have to be aware that the A flat must be tuned slightly when going from a G# because of the inharmonicity within the chord structure.  As piano technicians, we have to be aware of the same inharmonicity when tuning since some of the intervals need to be stretched or compressed slightly to match the temperament.  The same occurs in instrumental or vocal music, too, especially with string instrumentalists and vocalists.<u5:p></u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> <u5:p> </u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> I hope this hasn’t been too long-winded and makes some sort of sense.<u5:p></u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> <u5:p> </u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> Regards,<u5:p></u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> Tom<u5:p></u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> <u5:p> </u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> <u5:p> </u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> <div> <div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'> <hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1> </div> From: <a href="mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org"></a><a href="mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org">pianotech-bounces@ptg.org</a> [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] On Behalf Of Paul T Williams Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 3:30 PM To: <st1:personname u2:st="on"><a href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org"></a><a href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</a></st1:personname> Subject: Re: [pianotech] theory question<u5:p></u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </div> <u5:p> </u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> Ahhh!   Makes sense to me. Thanks for clarifying this.  I always wondered that, too.  But;  why do this, when the notes are just written in the score?  Would a bassist wonder why he/she is playing an E or G when it's a C chord?  I've always just played what's written. Am I missing something? Best, Paul <o:p></o:p> <u1:p></u1:p> <table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellpadding=0 width="100%" style='width:100.0%'> <tr> <td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'> <u5:p></u5:p>From: <u5:p></u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </td> <td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'> "Tom Rhea, Jr." <<a href="mailto:rheapiano@cox.net"></a><a href="mailto:rheapiano@cox.net">rheapiano@cox.net</a>> <u5:p></u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'> To: <u5:p></u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </td> <td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'> <<st1:personname u2:st="on"><a href="mailto:joegarrett@earthlink.net"></a><a href="mailto:joegarrett@earthlink.net">joegarrett@earthlink.net</a></st1:personname>>, <<st1:personname u2:st="on"><a href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org"></a><a href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</a></st1:personname>> <u5:p></u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'> Date: <u5:p></u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </td> <td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'> 09/27/2011 02:04 PM <u5:p></u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'> Subject: <u5:p></u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </td> <td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'> Re: [pianotech] theory question<u5:p></u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> </td> </tr> </table> <u5:p> </u5:p><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p> <div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'> <hr size=2 width="100%" noshade color="#aca899" align=center> </div> <tt>Hi Joe, et al,</tt> <tt>The actual theory behind this convention is this:</tt> <tt>Consider the CEG major chord and the note positions when being played.  All</tt> <tt>the notes are said to be in their root positions.</tt> <tt>When a first inversion of the CEG chord is being played, the E and G are in</tt> <tt>their root positions but the C has been moved up an octave and is now a 4th</tt> <tt>interval above the highest adjacent root note, the G.  This position, EGC,</tt> <tt>is said to be a C Major 4 or first inversion of the C Major chord.</tt> <tt>In the second inversion of the CEG chord, the only note still in its root</tt> <tt>position is the G.  The C and E are moved an octave above their root</tt> <tt>positions, such that the E is a 6th interval above the G (in its root</tt> <tt>position) and the C is a 4th interval from the G (in its root position),</tt> <tt>hence a C Major 6/4.</tt> <tt>All of the chords are spelled from the bottom.  However, the intervals which</tt> <tt>comprise the inversions are labeled from the highest note still in its root</tt> <tt>position to the one or two notes that have been moved up an octave from</tt> <tt>their root positions, either a 4th interval for a first inversion or a 6th</tt> <tt>and a 4th interval for a second inversion.  The labeling of the inversion</tt> <tt>intervals is always from the highest interval first.</tt> <tt>I hope this helps with understanding the theory question.</tt> <tt>Regards,</tt> <tt>Tom</tt> <tt>-----Original Message-----</tt> <tt>From: <a href="mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org"></a><a href="mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org">pianotech-bounces@ptg.org</a> [</tt><a href="mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org"><tt>mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org</tt></a><tt>] On Behalf</tt> <tt>Of Joseph Garrett</tt> <tt>Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 2:26 PM</tt> <tt>To: pianotech</tt> <tt>Subject: Re: [pianotech] theory question</tt> <tt>Ken said: "I concur with Tom. You count from the bottom up. A "6" is the</tt> <tt>interval between the E and the C when in first inversion. In second</tt> <tt>inversion, G, C, E, there is a 4th between the G-C and an "6" between the</tt> <tt>G-E."</tt> <tt>Ken Gerler (I was a theory major in college)</tt> <tt>Hmmm? if that were the case, then the later would be a 4/6 rather than a</tt> <tt>6/4. Right?<G> Personally, I prefer the Jazz Musicians way of saying</tt> <tt>something like "the C chord with a G in the bass.<G></tt> <tt>That's my take on that.</tt> <tt>Joe</tt> <tt>Joe Garrett, R.P.T.</tt> <tt>Captain of the Tool Police</tt> <tt>Squares R I</tt> <o:p></o:p> </div> </blockquote> </div> </blockquote> <u1:p></u1:p> <div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'></u5:smarttagtype> <hr<u5:p></u5:p></u1:smarttagtype> size=1 width="100%" noshade color=gray align=center> </div> No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - <a href="http://www.avg.com">www.avg.com</a> Version: 10.0.1410 / Virus Database: 1520/3923 - Release Date: 09/27/11<o:p></o:p> </div> </body> </html>