<HTML>List, While Ed Foote is out killing defenseless waterfowl with his high powered rifle, (BANG!!!!...QUAAAAACK!!!), I decided to measure the intervals of the EBVT scale so that everyone can know what they really are and not what Ed says they are.  (I wonder what he does with those ducks once they're are dead?)  Would YOU want a guy who kills ducks to tune YOUR piano? Today, I tuned my own piano the way I usually do and measured the intervals with my Sanderson Accutuner.   It will be helpful to know that in ET on a piano tuned to compensate for Inharmonicity, all M3rds would be about 14.2 to nearly 15.0.  All 5ths would be  -1.5 to -1.8.  The minus sign (-) indicates a narrowed interval.  With M3ds, anything more than 14.2 or so will sound brighter and more vibrant than in ET.  Anything less will sound sweeter, more mellow.  With 5ths, anything more negative than  -1.8 will be more noticeably tempered.   0.0 indicates a perfectly pure 5th.  Anything between 0.0 and -1.8 will sound almost pure too.   In the minor 3rds, anything less tempered than  -16.0 will sound milder, a sad sound but not too sad.  Anything more negative than -16.0 will have a darker, more troubled sound. Clearly, the EBVT is not the same or even nearly the same as ET in the sounds it produces. In point of fact (as the British say), each and every Major and minor triad is constructed differently from the way it is in ET, even if in many cases, only very slightly so.  One thing Ed Foote apparently hasn't learned yet is that Interval Size (cents deviation from Just or "pure" intonation) and Beats per Second are not equivalent.  (It is one of the first questions on the Written Exam but of course, you only need to get 80/100 to pass).  So, even though the Eb and E major triads are showing the largest sized Major 3rds, that does not mean that they have the widest, most rapidly beating 3rds.   Werkmeister did not know anything about cents deviation.  He only knew about beat speeds to which the EBVT does conform to the rules Werkmeister set forth.  What this means is that a larger sized interval of a 3rd with 3 or 4 accidentals in the key signature, in the middle of the scale, can still be slower beating than 3rds of a slightly smaller interval size and still having 4 or 5 accidentals in the key signature found higher in the scale.  Therefore, the EBVT does correctly interpret music from the 17th, 18th and 19th Centuries, as it does music of the 20th and 21st Centuries, all the while having the piano sound to a general audience the way it *expects*, much to Ed Foote's dismay and complete lack of understanding. Here are the results: Bottom Note       M3rd            5th             mi3rd C3           8.5             -2.0            -19.5 C#3         15.6             0.0            -16.6 D3           10.5            -4.1            -15.1 D#3         16.9            -3.3            -18.8 E3           17.5            -3.6            -13.0    F3           10.0             0.0            -17.3 F#3         16.0             0.0            -15.0 G3            8.3            -3.6            -18.8 G#3         15.2           -2.2             -19.5 A3           14.2           -3.3             -12.7 A#3         13.6            0.0             -16.7 B3           16.6           -0.8             -12.9 As an added note and possibly benefit, I compared the way I tuned to an FAC program which I dialed up with the greatest of reluctance.  Here are the results.  Please compare them to any and all other attempts at finding the so called "correction figures" for the EBVT.  After using this most dubious way of constructing a temperament, ask yourself it was really worth the trouble to make all of those calculations, dial in all of those numbers and still have the whole temperament idea be skewed and all of the octaves be incorrect just so you wouldn't really have to listen to the piano? C +3.3 C#  -0.4 D  +1.3 D#  +1.3 E  -2.1 F  +3.3 F#  -1.4 G  3.7 G#  1.7 A    0.0 A#  0.7 B  -2.0 As you can see from the above numbers, the differences from the EBVT and ET are very small but are also very specific.  They result in putting the "color" back into the tuning of the modern piano without it becoming incompatible with the way we expect the piano to sound today. Ed Foote only offers you numbers copied out of a book and the insistence that what anybody does other than what I do must somehow be better.  I'm telling you that what I do is consistently better, always has been and always will be better than what Ed Foote does, plain and simple, done by ear, making the piano sound in tune with itself and with all other music, not dialing for dollars. Bill Bremmer RPT Madison, Wisconsin <A HREF="http://www.billbremmer.com/">Click here: -=w w w . b i l l b r e m m e r . c o m =-</A> </HTML>