<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; = charset=us-ascii"> <TITLE>Message</TITLE> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2769" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY> <DIV>Back in my youth when I was a recording = engineer I frequently found the studios having to accommodate for tunings to A441. = It was ALWAYS the string players that forced this. Woodwinds, brass, rhythm, = they pretty much didn't care as long as the piano was actually in tune. It = got to the point that when a producer was booking time at the studio the studio = manager would ask if this was a date that needed to accommodate strings, and = would automatically have the piano tuned accordingly. (Our after-the-fact fix = was to speed the tape machine up by approximately that same amount. Seemed to = work.) I think many of us thought the string players were making this demand simply because they = could. I don't mean to dis string players, but as a rule the more we accommodated = their needs the more they found stuff to complain about. These were the "A" = studio session players in Los Angeles in the 70's. (And I don't mean to = include all of them. It only took a few, ya know?) The tuner didn't seem to = mind, and it wasn't really a huge inconvenience. And I was too naive about the = subject to know, or care, about what may really have been going on. All I saw was a = bunch of string players that couldn't be satisfied, but played extraordinarily = well.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>-- Geoff = Sykes</DIV> <DIV>-- Assoc. Los Angeles.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Happy T-day everyone. Thanks to all for = making this list available and for sharing knowledge and experiences.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV>-----Original = Message----- From: pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] On = Behalf Of Horace Greeley Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 8:52 PM To: Pianotech Subject: Re: A-435 - strings and winds </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> Israel, Comments interspersed: At 08:22 PM 11/23/2005, you wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite">At 04:13 PM = 11/23/2005, Stan Ryberg wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite">This is a most informative posting, wrapping up = a number of threads that have appeared periodically.  I would like to = suggest an alternative theory concerning the rise of orchestral pitch (a = fact, not a theory...it's been 442 in Chicago for years  at Orchestra = Hall). </BLOCKQUOTE> Same at Symphony Hall in Boston. </BLOCKQUOTE> And, in nearly 45% of all major venues in the = U.S.. <BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite"> <BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite"> After years of playing in a variety of = orchestras, I've seen wind players having to scramble to reach the pitch level = of the strings...the manufacturers are only responding to what the = players have reported that they need on the job.  Having played on...uh..."outdated" equipment myself, I've found it necessary to = have the instruments cut to reach modern pitch levels.  Violinists, in = particular, strive for the brilliance that a "slightly" raised = pitch level affords...but in old violins especially, that can eventually lead = to the instrument going "dead" as it accustoms itself to the higher tension.  Solution?  Raise the ! pitch again!  = (Until the instrument implodes...)  These are very small increments, to = be sure, but they add up to as high as 444 in some orchestras...and MOST = wind players will have difficulty with their equipment at that = level!  Cause and effect, yes, but I'm not convinced the cause began with = the wind instruments.</BLOCKQUOTE> You are absolutely correct = about pitch being constantly pushed up by the string players - and wind = instrument manufacturers merely following the trend. I believe several major = makers are now pitching their instruments at A=442 precisely for that reason. = The only reason I mentioned wind instruments in my previous post was because = that's what affected me personally in my professional life... We were doing = fine at A=440 until the clarinettists squawked. The string players in the = program haven't yet reached the prima-donna stage where they can throw their = weight around, but if the clarinet can't tune down to the piano - well, = that's a problem that I am expected to address...</BLOCKQUOTE> Sorry - I respectfully disagree. If one listens very carefully to just = about any orchestral recording, what one finds is that it is consistently the = second chair woodwinds, especially second clarinet and bassoon which are the culprits.  They are followed, depending on the band and the = orchestration in use at the time by various brass, most notably second and fourth = horn, and first and second trombone.  One of my personal favorites is the needle-brained oboist who plays one pitch while staring fixedly at = some electronic device or other and then plays at a different pitch level = once the music starts. Where this argument really fails on its premise = is specifically with the clarinet, by the way.  Clarinet = manufacturers use the same bores for A, Bb and C instruments.  By the time you get = to the C, the scale is so much shorter that (assuming that you are using = Boehm, not Wurlitzer, Mazzeo or Albert key systems and therefore tunings) the = instrument is hopeless out of tune with itself.  If used with a piano, the = piano really needs to be no higher than 440 (or, 442, depending on what the instrument is built for), or playing "in tune" (whatever that means to = begin with) is simply impossible...and, for that matter, the C instruments I = have worked with really only sound "in tune" if the piano is under = 440.  Same for another anachronism, the "C Melody" Saxophone.  On the other = hand, if you are using Wurlitzer, Mazzeo or Albert system clarinets, then all = of this goes out the window. The strings, while certainly not perfect, = take it in the neck all the time on this and they simply are not the ones = causing the problem.  The root of the problem is very clearly back in the = wind section...and, very consistently traceable to the folks playing in = first inversion...they are still listening for ET thirds, and that forces = everything above them up in pitch to compensate. All of this said, the = biggest thing affecting orchestral pitch is the set of ears in front of the band.  If the conductor cannot/will not work with pitch problems, = they are simply not going to get solved no matter who is "right" or = "wrong".  Pick your favorite group and then listen to it under different = batons.  While no longer as clearly discernable as it once was, you will be = able to distinguish differences of tuning in direct relation to the competency = of the conductor. For a very long time, the tuners at a very well = known concert hall in the East were known to simply move the A from 440 to 442/whatever and back as necessary, leaving the rest of the instrument = alone...I'm not suggesting something that inane and unscrupulous...I = am suggesting being reasonable; and fighting over stuff like this with groups/halls/artists just isn't. It really is all a tempest in = a teapot anyway.  Figure out where the orchestra you tune for plays, and = tune the piano accordingly.  Either that, or don't, and then don't be = surprised if someone else winds up with your gig. Hope everyone has a truly wonderful Thanksgiving Holiday.  Take a break - we've all earned it! Best. Horace </BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>