<!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><SPAN class=843553422-24112005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff =
size=2>Horace
--</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=843553422-24112005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff =
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=843553422-24112005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff =
size=2>For
the most part I agree with you. I was at Kendun Recorders, in Burbank. =
Much
smaller rooms than the ones you mention, and doing mostly session work. =
Lots of
Motown stuff kept so many studios alive back then. Like I said, I was =
young and
naive. Steel A and E strings on the violins, eh. I had no
idea.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=843553422-24112005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff =
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=843553422-24112005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff =
size=2>--
Geoff</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr =
align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org] <B>On =
Behalf Of
</B>Horace Greeley<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, November 24, 2005 1:12
AM<BR><B>To:</B> Pianotech<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: A-435 - strings and
winds<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><BR>Geoff,<BR><BR>Yes - been there, done =
that; and,
did a huge amount of studio work in LA during the same period. =
Again,
listening carefully to what was recorded, it was the winds which drove =
the
pitch up.<BR><BR>On top of that, think about the atmosphere in most =
studios,
particularly as to temperature. Under the lights, it can get =
very warm;
and a couple of feet away, the HVAC could have the temperature down in =
the 60s
(especially in TV land). Think about the drop in pitch of a =
piano under
similar circumstances and apply the same logic to strings. If =
they do
not start "sharp", they have no hope of keeping up with what is going =
on
around them. This doesn't mean that there were folks who were =
obnoxious
about this kind of thing and took advantage, of course there =
were. There
were also a fair number of fiddle players who used steel A strings (as =
well as
E) so that their sound would cut. Not all the studios had =
Neumann,
B&K and Schoeps mics yet that would replace the older condenser =
and carbon
ribbon mics (which are finally making a real comeback).<BR><BR>Studio =
tuning
was different then, too, for that matter. The standard fee =
ranged
between $20 and $25 for most places, $35 - $40 for upper-end or solo =
piano
work. The tuner's day often started around 6 a.m.. One =
very
well-known tuner in the period used to boast about doing 4 - 5 =
"tunings"
before 8:30 a.m.. Most of the pianos were pretty nasty, =
too. For
every good one, there were five or six dogs.<BR><BR>It is important, =
too, to
remember that, being realistic, this is now a couple of generations =
ago.
In general, what passed for a "tuning" under most circumstances =
wouldn't get
through the day in a college practice room today, to say nothing of
temperament. What consistently mattered most was unisons that =
held
through a session without needing a touch up. Considering that =
one often
had 30 minutes or less to "tune" (and, oh, by the way, "touch up" the =
voicing
and regulation...for no additional charge), the most that "normally" =
got done
was fixing bad unisons. Were there exceptions, of course. =
Group
IV, Capital/Decca, Fox, MGM (later Sony), and A&M to name just a =
few took
pretty good care of their instruments and their tuners. They =
were in the
minority. As for the rest, there is no need to make any of this
up. The evidence is there in thousands of movies and TV
shows.<BR><BR>Actually, the evidence is there for all of this whole
thread. Just shut your eyes and listen carefully to the music =
tracks,
filtering out the sound effects and dialogue when there is
any.<BR><BR>Cheers.<BR><BR>Horace<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>At 09:27 =
PM
11/23/2005, you wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite"><FONT color=#0000ff =
size=2>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.<BR></FONT> <BR><FONT =
color=#0000ff
size=2>-- Geoff Sykes<BR>-- Assoc. Los =
Angeles.<BR></FONT> <BR><FONT
color=#0000ff size=2>Happy T-day everyone. Thanks to all for =
making this
list available and for sharing knowledge and
experiences.<BR></FONT> <BR> <BR><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> =
pianotech-bounces@ptg.org
[<A href="mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org" eudora="autourl">
mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org</A>] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Horace
Greeley<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, November 23, 2005 8:52 =
PM<BR><B>To:</B>
Pianotech<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: A-435 - strings and =
winds<BR><BR></FONT>
<DL><BR>
<DD>Israel,<BR><BR>
<DD>Comments interspersed:<BR><BR>
<DD>At 08:22 PM 11/23/2005, you wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite">
<DD>At 04:13 PM 11/23/2005, Stan Ryberg wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite">
<DD><FONT face="comic sans ms" color=#c00000>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).
</B></FONT></DD></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<DD>Same at Symphony Hall in Boston. </DD></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<DD>And, in nearly 45% of all major venues in the U.S..<BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite">
<BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite">
<DD><FONT face="comic sans ms" color=#c00000> 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.</B></FONT></DD></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<DD>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...</DD></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<DD>Sorry - I respectfully disagree.<BR><BR>
<DD>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.<BR><BR>
<DD>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.<BR><BR>
<DD>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.<BR><BR>
<DD>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.<BR><BR>
<DD>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.<BR><BR>
<DD>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.<BR><BR>
<DD>Hope everyone has a truly wonderful Thanksgiving =
Holiday. Take a
break - we've all earned it!<BR><BR>
<DD>Best.<BR><BR>
<DD>Horace<BR></DD></DL></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>