<HTML>In a message dated 9/13/02 3:27:52 PM Central Daylight Time, drwoodwind@hotmail.com writes: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">You may be temperament 'morphing' without being aware of the change in the numbers. Thanks for keeping up with the research </BLOCKQUOTE> That's called "aural tuning", Ron.  Surely, when I get to the point where I am satisfied with a set of correction figures for the EBVT, all of the interval data that could be extrapolated from that would produce a list and that list would be like any other. Do you really think that if you used correction figures for any given temperament, then tuned several different kinds of ordinary pianos, (the kind both Ed Foote and Antares called "JUNK" on Pianotech), that you would have all identical charts of interval sizes as the result?  Hardly. One trend in the EBVT which is becoming evident and which I've always known about is the boosting of the sizes through the middle of the temperament.  This is in contrast to the kind of temperament which starts out with a very small amount of tempering at the top of the cycle of 5ths and ends with a very large amount at the bottom.  This can cause both "dead" and harsh sounding intervals. As I've always said though, the Equal Beating effect causes harmonies played at the top of the cycle of 5ths to sound far closer to pure than they really are.  No other historically documented or modern temperament has this feature by design.  It may mean that in some instances, some compromises to the basic temperament scheme have to be made to favor this feature.  Just programming correction figures and accepting the results of that plus not knowing how or why to make any modifications to it is not a goal I would ever pursue.  Yet, this is what Ed Foote tells everybody to do.  The ETD will always provide something better than you can.  I say, Baloney to that, always have, always will. What the EBVT does is produce more consistent and even sounding resonances, something which Ed Foote would never acknowledge because it does not support his agenda.  I'd rather produce those even sounding chords any day and have the most "inconsistent" looking sets of figures rather than simply copy numbers out of a book and say that is what I do and recommend. Ed Foote also says that I am just making up this Reverse Well stuff.  Well, at my pro bono tuning this afternoon, on a Yamaha P-22 (a piano Ed Foote calls "JUNK") I found Reverse Well again and documented it.  The piano is tuned by different people but often and was right on pitch.  Incidentally, I saw that Yamaha was giving factory tours to technicians at the Georgia plant where they build what Ed Foote calls "JUNK".  Our local school system buys this JUNK for all of our schools and I tune that JUNK in "very poor harmonic balance" and ":octaves that don't make sense at all".  I've been victimizing the local children and the entire community with this for 10 years, at least if you believe what Ed Foote says. Yamaha P-22 M3rds:             Eb3  E3  F3  F#3  G3  G#3  A3   A#3  B3  C4   C#4 D4 Reverse Well:     n/r  n/r 17.1 9.2  20.3  10.6 16.3 14.5  6.6 20.2  4.8 n/r EBVT:            14.6 16.2 10.5 16.9 9.1 16.9 11.6 12.6 16.4  7.1 16.7 12.6 "Sideways Well":  the pit Ed Foote dug for himself to wallow in the day he knowingly published false data for the EBVT on Pianotech. 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>