Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 2.5 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers (it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

SEARCH
Piano Forums & Piano World
What's Hot!!
Posting Pictures on the Forums
-------------------
Forums RULES & HELP
-------------------
ADVERTISE on Piano World
(ad)
Piano Tuning
How to Tune Pianos
(125ad)
Piano Life Saver - Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
(ad)
Piano Buyer Guide
Piano Buyer Spring 2017
(ad)
4th Finger Enigma Resolved!
Schumann's 4th Finger Enigma Resolved!
Who's Online Now
128 registered members (amad23, andrea monza, anotherscott, AZNpiano, aswanson82, 33 invisible), 1,992 guests, and 3 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
(ad)
Estonia Pianos
Estonia Pianos
Quick Links to Useful Piano & Music Resources
Our Classified Ads
Find Piano Professionals-

*Piano Dealers - Piano Stores
*Piano Tuners
*Piano Teachers
*Piano Movers
*Piano Restorations
*Piano Manufacturers

Quick Links:
*Advertise On Piano World
*Free Piano Newsletter
*Online Piano Recitals
*Piano Recitals Index
*Piano & Music Accessories
*Live Piano Venues
*Music School Listings
* Buying a Piano
*Buying A Acoustic Piano
*Buying a Digital Piano
*Pianos for Sale
*Sell Your Piano
*How Old is My Piano?
*Directory/Site Map
*Virtual Piano
*Music Word Search
*Piano Videos
*Virtual Piano Chords & Scales
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 14 of 18 1 2 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
#2203051 - 12/26/13 10:56 AM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,524
rXd Online happy
2000 Post Club Member
rXd  Online Happy
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,524
Alfredo, again, you lift my post out of one thread and put it in another with a different context.

Anybody with the least intelligence will plainly see this.

The context of the thread that you quote me from is about temperament only and I try to stick to the topic.

All to resurect a thread that all have lost interest in since your last posting eight months ago. That sounds desperate.

There have been times I have thought of writing about how each move in the temperament affects the whole piano but that was not the topic.

You have tried many times to involve me in this thread. I don't know what your obsession is.

You seem to be attempting to recruit people for your "cause" and you are being publically rebuffed by all but the most impressionable.



Amanda Reckonwith
Concert & Recording tuner-tech, London, England.
"in theory, practice and theory are the same thing. In practice, they're not." - Lawrence P. 'Yogi' Berra.


(ad 800)
PTG Journal
PTG Journal
#2203080 - 12/26/13 12:05 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: rXd]  
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member
alfredo capurso  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
Sicily - Italy

rxd,

Let me quote my post:

Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

Hi All,

Not long ago, someone was asking indirectly what pre-tuning meant, and I think I owe the answer: it means preparatory tuning and it refers to this thread and to a part of its contents.

Below, I am tracing a post by rxd, which I think is worth a comment, for better or worse:

Re: Up a 3rd, Up a 3rd, Down a 5th vs 4ths and 5ths Sequences [Re: UnrightTooner]
#2201636 - December 23, 2013 03:11 AM

Originally Posted by rxd
The trouble with using SBI's is that nobody, but nobody, even those who stake their reputations on tuning by fifths, ever sustains the notes for five seconds while waiting patiently for three beats (or whatever it is) to present themselves. Only to tediously repeat those five seconds with each and every fifth however many times it takes to get it right.

Fifths and octaves or the more compact fifths and fourths was intended for musicians who probably couldn't hear the subtleties of thirds to roughly tune their own instruments before the main event of practicing.

The more sophisticated methods were developed by tuners for whom tuning is the main event.

An RBI can be tuned 'on the fly' with the beat rate established and the pin set with one blow lasting a second or less.

It is transpiring that while most tuners can now hear major thirds, there may be many who cannot hear, or have never thought of using or referencing minor thirds in tuning.

{{At this stage, I had thought that contiguous minor thirds may be too complex but, just spur of the moment, I thought of using A-F# then A-C-D#, then using D#-F# Maj sixth as a check then refining the C but this still will always have one note tuned vicariously}}.

As I said about twelve posts ago, before that memorable graph debacle, it is possible to tune more than half of the temperament octave with direct reference to only the starting note.
If there is a mistake, it can not possibly be cumulative and there are more than enough cross checks between the first half dozen or so notes to ensure complete accuracy and cohesiveness.
Yes, it requires tuners to have a comprehensive knowledge of the temperament scale on decent pianos to accomplish it and it might not be a good teaching method.

Alrhough i don't always use it, this method has seemed to me to be the most logical answer to the age old problem of cumulative errors and the tedious backtracking to correct them.

It was thought necessary, in WT's to use a cumulative series of fifths and octaves to arrive at a progressive harmonic relative purity of the major and minor keys towards the tonal centre. It works well that way but such a progression is totally unnecessary in ET.

I find it incongruous that a proponent of WT's has abandoned tuning exclusively by fourths and fifths whereas at least one of the main voices opposing WT's still argues for this now archaic and unreliable system of fourths and fifths.


By reading that Topic and the above post I get the idea that RBI's and SBI's are still considered separately, as if we could tune "ET" with a sequence that uses either RBI's or SBI's.

If that was the case, if the attempt was to define the single type of interval that - on its own - can avoid cumulative errors... I would not agree, as I would find that approach to be wrong.

And there, about "cumulative errors", I find one more wrong suggestion, namely that a 12_notes "temperament sequence" enables to achieve "ET" across the whole keyboard, as if there was no need to check 10ths, 12ths, 15ths and 17ths.

If it is true that some of us have understood the relevance of 12ths and how significant 15ths and the "expansion" of the first octave will be, does not the one_octave_temperament sound like an "archaic and unreliable system" to your ears?

And, before I forget, in light of some recent comments and video offerings, there are two more issues I would like to deepen on, hopefuly together with you: how the hammer technique (and string's tension) might affect the position/output of partials, and consequently all matchings; secondly, those cases when the pitch/frequency drops, after unisons.

Grandpianoman, probably you will be "recruited" :-)

To All, enjoy these Holydays.

Regards, a.c.
.


And here is your reply:

Originally Posted by rxd
Alfredo, again, you lift a thread out of one context and put it in another to gain brownie points for your own ends.

Anybody with the least intelligence will plainly see this.

The context of the thread that you quote me from is about temperament only and I try to stick to the topic.

There have been times I have thought of writing about how each move in the temperament affects the whole piano but that was not the topic.

You have tried many times to involve me in this thread and I am still resisting. I don't know what your obsession is.

You seem to be trying to recruit people for your "cause" and you are being publically rebuffed by all but the most impressionable.



I hope you re-read the above and understand that:

a) I have already got my "points" and do not need to gain anymore (here);
b) I never think I should evaluate other readers' intelligence, as that (for me) it is simply arrogant;
c) I do understand what the thread I quoted above is about, as well as what you wrote;
d) Times may come, when we manage to focus on theoretical and practical issue as one, despite (or aside) the Topic;
e) You, like any other poster, may be involved in this thread (or any other) on the basis of what you write, provided you can manage your own obsession and be respectful;

f) That's true, it might look like I am recruiting "...people" for a "...cause" of mine; actually, I am peacefully trying to share my experience and some results that may concern the "cause" of ours;

..."...publically rebuffed by all but the most impressionable."

Well, rxd, you decide, but (as mentioned) try to take it easy, nobody here is undermining your authority.

My point: does not the one_octave_temperament sound like an "archaic and unreliable system" to your ears?

Regards, a.c.
.







alfredo
#2203176 - 12/26/13 04:50 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,524
rXd Online happy
2000 Post Club Member
rXd  Online Happy
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,524
Dearest Alfredo.

I have answered the questions in your latest post in my post immediately before it. But I will expand on it. Expand being a poor choice of words as will soon transpire. .

Much of my work consists of tuning the same 15-20 9' grands. Sometimes it is my lot to tune the same 9' piano 12 times in four days. Now, the accepted way to tune a piano is from the middle outwards.

I can choose, for the last 8-9 of those tunings to check the piano from the outer octaves inwards towards the middle. Or to see how it works out from the fifth or sixth octave outwards and inwards

For some kinds of musical situations I will begin with a narrow third octave and tune both ways out from there. I never put in an interval in the temperament range, however large I want make it or whichever range I want to tune it, without considering how it will invert or transfer into all different parts of the instrument.

I have thus luxury. I can either do a touch up tuning or a refinement tuning starting wherever I feel appropriate. If I am on attendance, I can hear how the piano is being used. If I am only called for the tunings, I arrive early so that I can hear a few playbacks. I prefer to call it refinement rather than touch up.

After so long doing this class of work, beatrate memory has to kick in. I would be a fool to ignore it and not use it as another tool.

No tuning is ever scheduled for any more than an hour and sometimes some of the initial tuning is cut short waiting for the piano to arrive, traffic being the way it is. They always arrive reasonably in tune and within pitch parameters, Often coming direct from another engagement or having been properly tuned before despatch from the basement.
An accurate beat rate memory and the ability to work from the most in tune sections of the piano is very helpful when time is limited.

I have never been the sort of person who blindly follows rules so I can't possibly ever get bored with my lot. But I do know that not considering the whole piano when setting the temperament area will slow down the tuning.

What's this to do with other tuners? Most tuners have access to a 48" uprite that has standard beat rates (or a 6' grand) that they can give a half hours attention a few times over a week to practice making refinements to a piano that is already, to all intents and purposes, in tune. Get away from the idea of touch up tuning and think refinement. The more refined the tuning, the more upkeep it takes.

We're talking about fast beating minor thirds being difficult to hear and so many don't use them in tuning but fast beating major thirds in the fifth and sixth octaves should be concentrated on because the are almost always ignored. Perceptive people and fine microphones perceive too fast a M3 in the fifth and sixth and seventh octaves as a screaming in the tone. Most all regular tuners ignore these.

Of course, anything too fast in the upper octaves has its genesis in the temperament octaves so any unevenness there will become intolerable to the finer ear higher into the treble. Any tendency to over stretch will soon be exposed with this test. of course, 17ths must conform and pianos can be very accommodating with the twelfths in the treble. Fifths, of course, definitely tempered but sounding cleaner with all six strings.
My colleagues seem to prefer the single octave purity over the double octave purity whenever there is a choice.
I prefer just a liitle warmth toward the bass but only if I'm scheduled to see the piano again in a few hours.

Tone regulation in the middle octaves is very important. It is harshness there that can give the perception of flatness in the treble. As can habitually listening to over stretched pianos. This can come from early efforts in tuning that are not controlled by a mentor who is not also caught up in over stretching.

If a piano screams out to be stretched!!! it can be done if all the aforementioned parameters are met.


Amanda Reckonwith
Concert & Recording tuner-tech, London, England.
"in theory, practice and theory are the same thing. In practice, they're not." - Lawrence P. 'Yogi' Berra.


#2203606 - 12/27/13 03:33 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member
alfredo capurso  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
Sicily - Italy

Hi,

Thank you, rxd, for expanding on your practice, I hope that other readers will find that stimulating as I do.

Also in my case, here in London, the time window I am given is one hour and, as you say, many times it gets even less... Anyway, back to my point, it is my opinion that a 12-tones temperament (ET or WT) cannot describe our tunings, for reasons that are mainly related to having/wanting to tune the whole piano.

Leave theoretical issues aside, it is (also) for practical purposes that I would suggest to enlarge the usual "temperament" (and beat-references) to (at least) 19-tones, so including 12ths, and even better if young tuners could have double-octaves as a "check"... Don't you (and All) think that this would be more adherent to our modern practice, that this would enable to keep control of intervals (including 17ths) into all different parts of the instrument?

Regards, a.c.

Last edited by alfredo capurso; 12/27/13 05:29 PM. Reason: spelling

alfredo
(ad)
Piano & Music Accessories
piano accessories music gifts tuning and moving equipment
#2264668 - 04/20/14 06:28 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member
alfredo capurso  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
Sicily - Italy

Hi All,

I would like to address a special acknowledgment to Grandpianoman. With his 'amateur' dedication and will to improve his expertize, GP has been able to point out a dynamic issue, something that (IMO) all professional Piano Tuners should be aware of:

http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/2259968/1/What_causes_3_strings_to_be_fl.html

To All, Happy Easter. a.c.
.



alfredo
#2265154 - 04/22/14 12:42 AM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,726
Grandpianoman Offline
2000 Post Club Member
Grandpianoman  Offline
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,726
Portland, Oregon
Well thank you Alfredo.

I could not help but think if one were to have many of these 'flat' notes after tuning, it would not sound ideal.

Next time I tune my pianos, I am going to pay particular attention to this phenomenon, and try to minimize it with the suggestions in that posting.



#2386580 - 02/15/15 11:15 AM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member
alfredo capurso  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
Sicily - Italy

Hi All,

For some time I have been thinking of asking for your help in order to make 'objective' something I can observe. Considering a string and the tone it produces, I observe that partials can be spaced, and intervals can be better related to each other, depending on the tuning-hammer technique.

In other words, what I believe is that the original scaling of a piano can be somehow re-adjusted, meaning that there is a leeway, some 'room for manoeuvre' (is this idiom correct?) we can use, in a way re-ruling the relations amongst partial sounds of different strings.

What makes the difference would be how I/we get to the 'spot', whether we get there from a lower or a higher, or a much higher pitch.

No doubt, other colleagues may experience this. Actually, if you know of any research on this, or available data, please let me know.

I do not have the necessary equipment. Would any of you (pro or non-pro) like to get involved in this experimentation?

What might be needed is:

- some tuning-hammer skill, enough to be able to get to the spot;
- an ETD that indicates the spot;
- a reliable device that can record and analyze individual partial frequencies.

Comments, questions, suggestions and corrections are welcome.

Regards, a.c.
.








alfredo
#2386799 - 02/15/15 10:15 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,524
rXd Online happy
2000 Post Club Member
rXd  Online Happy
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,524
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

...............
My point: does not the one_octave_temperament sound like an "archaic and unreliable system" to your ears?

Regards, a.c.


Alfredo, this is what we call a loaded question. I can hear barrister Rumpole standing on his hind legs and saying, sotto voce; "Oh, don't lead, old darlin'". It's a bit like asking "when did you stop beating your wife?". Sort of damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Many of your questions are of this nature.

It would be most unkind but it could be read as a reflex question or even a silly question but there are no stupid questions- only stupid answers.

However. I will answer it from the point of view of someone who is currently tuning a two octave temperament with;

"Quite frankly, in a word,... No!".

Doesn't it depend on who tuned it and how and with what intention for the rest of the piano?
An electronically set 5 adjacent notes can offer the greatest flexibility for the whole piano. Anybody ever tried that? Hybrid temperament sets all the typical tuning notes at their stated pitches (A,Bb&C. If anyone measures it, everything will be precise. Free Tuning apps are common these days. Often incorrectly read but commonly used by anybody, nonetheless. (with a well laid temperament this happens anyway).

I experiment all the time. I don't think I have ever tuned a temperament of any size the same way twice. All of it within the description of a darned good tuning. I often move a note to where it makes a difference to all the intervals involved but when I put the unison in there has been hardly any movement from where it was previously. Perhaps the whole thin is too subtle for practical purposes.

I can stretch to the max. Any fool can do that, most fools do as somebody has said. I can make a cogent argument that it might be best ( more reliably?) done by machine.

I have been elevated and called an ivory tower tuner but doesn't the tuner of domestic pianos have a duty get to know how to tune different ways when members of a musical family play other instruments that may be used in collaboration with the piano and still be within the bounds of ET.

I still want all my options open. Fortunately, for solo piano, big, vulgar romantic stuff, I can tune for max resonance but when other instruments are involved in ensemble, I don't need nor want all that resonance and can tune in a way that automatically does that by accommodating the intonation and far less stretch that is typical of all the other orchestral instruments. not many seem to understand that.

This week, I attended four masterclasses over the past two days given by principal players of the Berlin Phil. So I am highly elated. I attend orchestralasterclasses regularly, have done ever since I was involved with high level music education. mostly given by principals of international orchestras but this was something special.

Because of the last minute fly in fly out nature of these classes and the constant room usage, we had to use week old tunings with ten minute refinements on each at 440. Whenever the brass players demonstrated on their own instruments fresh out of their cases, they were beautifully in tune with the piano but when I heard them on TV tonight I didn't catch the tuning note but they were an average of 15c sharp which indicates 444-operating pitch,( rarely the same as tuning pitch in any orchestra). I had to leave early in each case do I didn't get a chance to talk.

I am continually immersed in collaborative music making with the piano. I briefly checked the 10ths and 17's on a professionally tuned harp today by a top flight orchestral harpist. They were almost exactly the same size that I aim for in piano collaborative work. That is as narrow as practicable . I was there to refine the piano it was being used with and I had permission to check pitch. Normally it's the other way round, the piano is tuned before the harpists come in.

My point is, there is no one way to tune a piano. To attempt to condemn one method as archaic is to attempt to call what the Berlin Phil is doing as archaic. The principles are still the same as when I was studying music full time. In fact my joy today comes from that. (OK, there are those who condemn the whole concept of a symphony orchestra as archaic)

Beethoven to Wagner articulation for trumpets is tha same with the Berlin as I was taught fifty years ago. Most trumpet players currently adopt a sloppy imprecise style, even with major orchestras. I had a long discussion about this with a well known conductor, being careful not to reference a recent recording where this was evident.

Thats what makes the Berlin so great. Calling something archaic in this way is a perjorative use of the word that can easily be overlooked when answering. Same with unreliable. Unreliable for what? As I have said and you have quoted, a temperament is set with forethought to how it works with the rest of the piano. It helps to be familiar with the make and model of the piano and even the idiosyncracies of a particular piano such as the winding tensions of a particular set of bass strings. These things are noticed when tuning the same make and model every time and hopefully rembered for each piano.

Having said that, larger pianos are more similar fhan different and smaller pianos will develop this own optimum tuning If tuned regularly by the same conciencious tuner.

There. Another long post. Sorry. It wasn't a simple question



Amanda Reckonwith
Concert & Recording tuner-tech, London, England.
"in theory, practice and theory are the same thing. In practice, they're not." - Lawrence P. 'Yogi' Berra.


#2387211 - 02/17/15 12:08 AM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,524
rXd Online happy
2000 Post Club Member
rXd  Online Happy
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,524
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

Hi All,

For some time I have been thinking of asking for your help in order to make 'objective' something I can observe. Considering a string and the tone it produces, I observe that partials can be spaced, and intervals can be better related to each other, depending on the tuning-hammer technique.

In other words, what I believe is that the original scaling of a piano can be somehow re-adjusted, meaning that there is a leeway, some 'room for manoeuvre' (is this idiom correct?) we can use, in a way re-ruling the relations amongst partial sounds of different strings.

What makes the difference would be how I/we get to the 'spot', whether we get there from a lower or a higher, or a much higher pitch.

No doubt, other colleagues may experience this. Actually, if you know of any research on this, or available data, please let me know.

I do not have the necessary equipment. Would any of you (pro or non-pro) like to get involved in this experimentation?

What might be needed is:

- some tuning-hammer skill, enough to be able to get to the spot;
- an ETD that indicates the spot;
- a reliable device that can record and analyze individual partial frequencies.

Comments, questions, suggestions and corrections are welcome.

Regards, a.c.
.

This attention to distance between partials may not be as spaced out as it seems at first glimpse. There is certainly a difference in perception for me that does depend on which direction I approach 'in tune' from. There was some work done in the 70's that was reported in the American PTG magazine that gave measured numerical evidence of a physical change in the pitch of the partials caused through hammer voicing. these experiments are worth replicating, both in voicing and directional approach in tuning if anyone has the time, equipment and skills.

The difference I have perceived in whence I approach 'in tune' from are now incorporated into my tuning habits. I habitually set pins downwards when going out of the standard temperament area and stop at the first hint of smoothness in the octave then check the thirds and fifth for acceptability. This will put me where I want to be first time. If it doesn't, a little resetting. This works for me and i haven't noticed a difference whether the long steels are very sharp and the lowering distance is long or if they are not and I might need to bring the pitch 1Hz. Or so above and drop down onto pitch. I will certainly look for a difference in the future. Anyway, This gives me the narrowest octaves that I want in that area in a default general purpose tuning. Pin setting direction takes priority with any covered strings in that section.

Covered strings take a similar approach but the pin setting and NSL take priority over the direction of approach. I find here an upward setting is safer, particularly on uprights where the angles tend to be more acute.

The treble I often tune by tenths and seventeenths and check by octaves and fifths, etc. the direction of set varies greatly between the three pins of each unison but I generally feel much safer with an upward spring set of the pins are tight enough or an upward turned set with thumb pressure on tje lever at twelve o'clock.

The general principal in all this is to use as few moves as possible both for efficiency and to avoid heating up the string at the friction points. (part of the problem with a pitch raise, even of just a couple of Hz. Is the heat generated by the initial pull and so working too quickly can be disadvantageous. A leisurely pull is more efficient in the long run because there are fewer corrections for drift to make as the heat dissipates. I am always surprised how much less time a more leisurely general approach to a time limited pitch raise takes.

Now, would the heat generated at one end of the string cause a temporary physical difference in the partials? Worth taking into account in the experiment?

In the final analysis, it makes no difference to my methods whether the slight changes in perception have a physical cause or a psychological cause, it's the end result that matters.

Like the other discussions in this forum, while it may seem unnecessarily nitpicking, is worthwhile for the discoveries made that we can incorporate into our general tuning habits.

I always tune so that I'm making the next tuning easier and so that any pianist in the meantime can do their damnedest and it makes no difference. I remember walking off a stage after tuning and the pianist playfully said, as he walked on that he would knock it out again to which I replied, "I defy you!". I should start taking bets.

Addendum.
This localised heat generation and it's dissipation really brought itself to my attention after a student had spent a long time trying to get one string in tune and remembered about the friction and found the heat generated was tangible. I could feel it with my finger on the string and on the pressure bar. Finer degrees of this have to affect the ultra finesse that is part of tuning. It is for this reason that I object to unnecessary movement of the string, including the relatively recent ritual of lowering the string, sometimes by an alarming amount in the hope of preventing string breakage. I could make a case that excessive lowering or any extra movement of the string may be a major cause for at risk strings to break.

I might flex the pin in a downward direction but this is more to check the set of the pin. Certainly no turning is involved, but a well set pin will not release the string when flexed in this way but the flex has to be accompanied by a flex in the other direction even if the string didn't move and I didn't feel the pin string back. Either by a pull or a slap on the lever handle.


Amanda Reckonwith
Concert & Recording tuner-tech, London, England.
"in theory, practice and theory are the same thing. In practice, they're not." - Lawrence P. 'Yogi' Berra.


#2387618 - 02/17/15 07:23 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: rXd]  
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member
alfredo capurso  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
Sicily - Italy
Originally Posted by rXd
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

...............
My point: does not the one_octave_temperament sound like an "archaic and unreliable system" to your ears?

Regards, a.c.


Alfredo, this is what we call a loaded question. I can hear barrister Rumpole standing on his hind legs and saying, sotto voce; "Oh, don't lead, old darlin'". It's a bit like asking "when did you stop beating your wife?". Sort of damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Many of your questions are of this nature.

It would be most unkind but it could be read as a reflex question or even a silly question but there are no stupid questions- only stupid answers.

However. I will answer it from the point of view of someone who is currently tuning a two octave temperament with;

"Quite frankly, in a word,... No!".

Doesn't it depend on who tuned it and how and with what intention for the rest of the piano?
An electronically set 5 adjacent notes can offer the greatest flexibility for the whole piano. Anybody ever tried that? Hybrid temperament sets all the typical tuning notes at their stated pitches (A,Bb&C. If anyone measures it, everything will be precise. Free Tuning apps are common these days. Often incorrectly read but commonly used by anybody, nonetheless. (with a well laid temperament this happens anyway).

I experiment all the time. I don't think I have ever tuned a temperament of any size the same way twice. All of it within the description of a darned good tuning. I often move a note to where it makes a difference to all the intervals involved but when I put the unison in there has been hardly any movement from where it was previously. Perhaps the whole thin is too subtle for practical purposes.

I can stretch to the max. Any fool can do that, most fools do as somebody has said. I can make a cogent argument that it might be best ( more reliably?) done by machine.

I have been elevated and called an ivory tower tuner but doesn't the tuner of domestic pianos have a duty get to know how to tune different ways when members of a musical family play other instruments that may be used in collaboration with the piano and still be within the bounds of ET.

I still want all my options open. Fortunately, for solo piano, big, vulgar romantic stuff, I can tune for max resonance but when other instruments are involved in ensemble, I don't need nor want all that resonance and can tune in a way that automatically does that by accommodating the intonation and far less stretch that is typical of all the other orchestral instruments. not many seem to understand that.

This week, I attended four masterclasses over the past two days given by principal players of the Berlin Phil. So I am highly elated. I attend orchestralasterclasses regularly, have done ever since I was involved with high level music education. mostly given by principals of international orchestras but this was something special.

Because of the last minute fly in fly out nature of these classes and the constant room usage, we had to use week old tunings with ten minute refinements on each at 440. Whenever the brass players demonstrated on their own instruments fresh out of their cases, they were beautifully in tune with the piano but when I heard them on TV tonight I didn't catch the tuning note but they were an average of 15c sharp which indicates 444-operating pitch,( rarely the same as tuning pitch in any orchestra). I had to leave early in each case do I didn't get a chance to talk.

I am continually immersed in collaborative music making with the piano. I briefly checked the 10ths and 17's on a professionally tuned harp today by a top flight orchestral harpist. They were almost exactly the same size that I aim for in piano collaborative work. That is as narrow as practicable . I was there to refine the piano it was being used with and I had permission to check pitch. Normally it's the other way round, the piano is tuned before the harpists come in.

My point is, there is no one way to tune a piano. To attempt to condemn one method as archaic is to attempt to call what the Berlin Phil is doing as archaic. The principles are still the same as when I was studying music full time. In fact my joy today comes from that. (OK, there are those who condemn the whole concept of a symphony orchestra as archaic)

Beethoven to Wagner articulation for trumpets is tha same with the Berlin as I was taught fifty years ago. Most trumpet players currently adopt a sloppy imprecise style, even with major orchestras. I had a long discussion about this with a well known conductor, being careful not to reference a recent recording where this was evident.

Thats what makes the Berlin so great. Calling something archaic in this way is a perjorative use of the word that can easily be overlooked when answering. Same with unreliable. Unreliable for what? As I have said and you have quoted, a temperament is set with forethought to how it works with the rest of the piano. It helps to be familiar with the make and model of the piano and even the idiosyncracies of a particular piano such as the winding tensions of a particular set of bass strings. These things are noticed when tuning the same make and model every time and hopefully rembered for each piano.

Having said that, larger pianos are more similar fhan different and smaller pianos will develop this own optimum tuning If tuned regularly by the same conciencious tuner.

There. Another long post. Sorry. It wasn't a simple question



Hi rXd,

Thank you for your posts, I read them with care and could see myself in some of the things you said. In a way you have been reassuring, as I can share a fair part of the sceneries you describe,.. does getting old make us well experienced or, it is experience that makes us old? :-) I am joking.

Say the truth, you do not like the word 'archaic'. :-)

I used it with the meaning of "marked by the characteristics of an earlier period; no longer applicable", in light of temperament models of these days and addressing an issue that too often is put aside: we need to temper the whole piano. In our case, the 'principle' is not the same as it was in the past, temper an octave and expand by copying octaves, the principle now is different: temper the whole piano and use larger intervals (x,y) as a reference. I have nothing against traditions, be it music, dance, etc., though now we are experiencing a different concept: also intervals larger than an octave need to be tempered, and perhaps the octave does not need to be 2:1.

You may be right though, that question of mine was perhaps 'loaded', maybe I should have said "I think that a one_octave_temperament is archaic and unreliable nowadays, what do you think?".

You wrote:..."I don't think I have ever tuned a temperament of any size the same way twice. All of it within the description of a darned good tuning. I often move a note to where it makes a difference to all the intervals involved but when I put the unison in there has been hardly any movement from where it was previously. Perhaps the whole thin is too subtle for practical purposes."...

Hmm..., that is you today, but... what was it like when you started tuning? I hope we can help beginners and young tuners, those who are going through what we had to go through, help them with the right information, considered that perhaps a whole life (in this field) is not enough.

You wrote:..."Fortunately, for solo piano, big, vulgar romantic stuff, I can tune for max resonance but when other instruments are involved in ensemble, I don't need nor want all that resonance and can tune in a way that automatically does that by accommodating the intonation and far less stretch that is typical of all the other orchestral instruments. not many seem to understand that."...

I would have a question there, :-) am I allowed? I will be back and comment also your other post. Thank you for describing so many details.

Best Regards, a.c.
.

Last edited by alfredo capurso; 02/17/15 07:25 PM.

alfredo
#2387725 - 02/18/15 01:03 AM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,524
rXd Online happy
2000 Post Club Member
rXd  Online Happy
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,524
I love all words. I love the word archaic in all it's connotations. How do you get these ideas on the likes and dislikes of another?

Again, you make inferences and then ask questions based on your inference or interpretation. What you are doing is questioning your own inferences. Those are questions nobody can answer. Only you can.

Your after the fact explanation of how you used archaic is not convincing because you coupled it with the words "and unreliable".

"Archaic" coupled with the words "and unreliable"? You rephrased your question but still coupled these two words.

I write in long and hopefully coherent thoughts. You take one sentence out of context and question your inference from it. Since when have tenths and sevemteenths, implying ther connection to the third, of course, automatically form a 2-1 octave? Yet that is what you infer. Are you not denying your own knowledge and intelligence in order to make the is outrageous assumption?

I just got thru saying that there are many options yet you attempt to pin me down to just one while you attempt to promote your one way. This is classic projection.

My advocacy of a complete and thorough familiarity with all the interactions within a chosen temperament range you challenge as somehow not helping students. Would you teach chess without advocacy of mastering all the interconnected moves?

Every statement you make is of this nature. My words are taken with no thought to earlier contexts. Is it your memory, your comprehension or, maybe your agenda is overriding your intelligence. Why else would you attempt to revive your own dead or dormant thread in this deceitful and devious way if it weren't to keep your pet project alive when all others have long ago lost interest and abandoned it?

My posts from other threads have been used many times now in this abusive way to resurrect your capital threads from twelve months of obscurity . I notice nobody else has responded to your attempts at resurrection. Only I feel the need to correct your glaring misapprehensions. Only because it is exclusively my posts that you are taking, literally, out of context. To put it plainly, taking my post from another thread (context) and using them in each case, to bring back "life" your own agenda. By the notable absence of other posters here, nobody is interested. Least of all me. Let these posts die peacefully. As of right now.

I have been very patient with you, even overlooked your abusive and puerile name calling.

If this happens again, I shall refer the matter directly to the moderators for some sort of action. It is patently an abuse of the forums. Not only what you do but the way in which you repeatedly do it.

Maybe I should be flattered by the attention but I find it quite creepy.

I am grateful for the experience in dealing with cybercreepies on line in preparation for if I ever meet them in real life. So far I've managed to avoid them.

If other aspects of your life include stalking like this, it certainly adds credence to the option on these forums to be and remain anonymous.

Now. Either present your own fresh approach to keep your threads alive or let them die peacefully before I lose my patience.


Amanda Reckonwith
Concert & Recording tuner-tech, London, England.
"in theory, practice and theory are the same thing. In practice, they're not." - Lawrence P. 'Yogi' Berra.


#2387976 - 02/18/15 02:54 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member
alfredo capurso  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
Sicily - Italy

Hi,

Back to what I would like to investigate, about which I wrote three days ago.

Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

Hi All,

For some time I have been thinking of asking for your help in order to make 'objective' something I can observe. Considering a string and the tone it produces, I observe that partials can be spaced, and intervals can be better related to each other, depending on the tuning-hammer technique.

In other words, what I believe is that the original scaling of a piano can be somehow re-adjusted, meaning that there is a leeway, some 'room for manoeuvre' (is this idiom correct?) we can use, in a way re-ruling the relations amongst partial sounds of different strings.

What makes the difference would be how I/we get to the 'spot', whether we get there from a lower or a higher, or a much higher pitch.

No doubt, other colleagues may experience this. Actually, if you know of any research on this, or available data, please let me know.

I do not have the necessary equipment. Would any of you (pro or non-pro) like to get involved in this experimentation?

What might be needed is:

- some tuning-hammer skill, enough to be able to get to the spot;
- an ETD that indicates the spot;
- a reliable device that can record and analyze individual partial frequencies.

Comments, questions, suggestions and corrections are welcome.

Regards, a.c.
.


I got some help and hope to be able to share some progress.

Regards, a.c.
.


alfredo
#2388020 - 02/18/15 04:50 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,462
Chris Leslie Offline
1000 Post Club Member
Chris Leslie  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,462
Canberra, ACT, Australia
Do you mean, for example:

Tune A5 to A4 coming from above and stopping when the octave first sounds beatless. Then measure the pitch A at A5.
Tune A5 to A4 coming from below and stopping when the octave first sounds beatless. Then measure the pitch B at A5.
What is the difference between pitch A and pitch B?


Chris Leslie ARPT
Piano technician
http://www.chrisleslie.com.au
#2388041 - 02/18/15 06:31 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: Chris Leslie]  
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member
alfredo capurso  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
Sicily - Italy
Originally Posted by Chris Leslie
Do you mean, for example:

Tune A5 to A4 coming from above and stopping when the octave first sounds beatless. Then measure the pitch A at A5.
Tune A5 to A4 coming from below and stopping when the octave first sounds beatless. Then measure the pitch B at A5.
What is the difference between pitch A and pitch B?


Yes, Chris, that is one type of test we could do, although we might be exposed to a variable, i.e. "when the octave first sounds beatless". That is why I was mentioning a non-aural device.

In the above case, we would then compare two pitches, pitch A and pitch B.

A second test might focus onto the partials, measuring how the individual tone's partials end up being spaced.

In this second case, together with A4(-A5), we may consider one more 'bottom pitch', say F4(-A5), or a note further down for a wider interval, like D4 or F3, and perhaps test the 'above/below' combinations between three pitchs and their partials' configuration?

Please, consider that I am in the "I wonder.." zone.

Regards, a.c.
.


alfredo
#2658332 - 07/02/17 10:20 AM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member
alfredo capurso  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
Sicily - Italy
Originally Posted by P W Grey
Alfredo,

Yes, I would like you to try putting it into words. I'm not sure I can change habits that have been developed over 40 years (and that seem to work reasonably well) but it is always good to expand one's base of understanding.

Pwg


Hi,

the post above comes from this thread:

http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads.php/topics/2644274/11.html

I am posting my reply here in order to keep some information together.

We were talking about "pin setting", Peter. Perhaps you have already found some info in this thread or elsewhere, in any case I will expand further and.. keep my word.

My experience started on very very old pianos, they were ready for refurbishing and then I could only deal with very loose pins. There I needed to rely on some forces that could be left onto the pin, and the feeling that the foot of the pin was in the ideal position.

The principle is different then, you do not move the pin to find the correct pitch, you actually pull the string to "set the pin". Reading/feeling the occurring forces while you are pulling the string, allows you to set the pin and, as a result, get the pitch you wanted.

The execution is fairly straightforward, in the best case - nice pin-pin-block-string rendering - it is one move only CW, one move CCW.

You can start pulling the pin where you find it, or loose the pin CCW and zero old tensions.
Start pulling the string CW, feel the torsion and the bending taking place while you figure out where the spot is. That is all the information you need and you can now over-pull the string CW.

The latter move refers to a precise amount of forces that you will have read/felt - pin bending, torsion and rotation + string rendering - and that now you want to invert.

We may say that the above sequence is "tuning the pin", what comes next is "setting the pin-string system".

You go CCW, perhaps putting the hammer in a different angle, do not rush and consider that matter adjusts in time, release all the CW forces and "charge" or load the pin with CCW forces, enough to re-find the spot you heard before, making sure that the pin and the string are now pulling each other in opposite direction, making a tight-united system, where the pin is more willing to pull the string - check that a tiny CW force would raise the pitch - than ready to give.

As mentioned, make sure that about 3/10 points of force CW would sharpen the pitch, against about 7/10 points of CCW forces for lowering the pitch.

Let me know if that makes sense.

Kind regards,

a.c.
.

Last edited by alfredo capurso; 07/02/17 10:40 AM.

alfredo
#2676140 - 09/18/17 06:41 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member
alfredo capurso  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
Sicily - Italy
Originally Posted by Bernhard Stopper
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso
Kees,

There must be a misunderstanding somewhere. I am not addressing basic notions, whole tone octave purity, or iH as it is understood. I was trying to reason on beat perception in order to understand whether Bernhard, while mentioning pure 12ths, is actually achieving close to pure 12ths.

This interest of mine comes from a recent conversation I had with Kent where, mentioning pure 12ths, he would suggest to call them "clean" 12ths.

And because Bernhard has mentioned "minimum_overall beating", I wonder how that beating sounds to him, if wide or narrow.

Perhaps some differences in our practice become significant, for instance tuning mid-strings first on a wide range, which allows the tuning of perfectly still/beat-less 12ths (as demonstrated recently at a convention in Canada) or unisons as you go, but beyond that, I wonder what is left there of an original (edit: theoretical) pure-interval strech scheme.

Apologies for some background noise.
.


Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

for instance tuning mid-strings first on a wide range, which allows the tuning of perfectly still/beat-less 12ths (as demonstrated recently at a convention in Canada)


Dear Alfredo,

this is the goal with pure twelfths.

Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

And because Bernhard has mentioned "minimum_overall beating", I wonder how that beating sounds to him, if wide or narrow.
Minimal overall beating means clean to me. I use that description (minimum overall beating) to make clear that if speaking of a pure or clear interval on a piano, there are generally all but at LEAST one partial pair that have not the same frequency, but are tuned to a target, where they sound perfectly clean, still, beat-less, same as you possibly demonstrated successfully in Canada.

Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

Perhaps some differences in our practice become significant, for instance tuning mid-strings first on a wide range, which allows the tuning of perfectly still/beat-less 12ths (as demonstrated recently at a convention in Canada) or unisons as you go, but beyond that, I wonder what is left there of an original (edit: theoretical) pure-interval strech scheme.


I see a serious gap between what you do in practice (essentially a pure twelfths temperament) and what you have theoretically build around about that as Chas theory:

You tune pure twelfths on the middle string over a vast part of the piano (pure twelfths equal temperament).

On a second step you tune unisons and claim by pitch sagging or coupling of the tree strings the pitch drops exactly for the specific amount that after tuning the unisons, the resulting twelfths are exactly of Chas twelfths size.

This contradicts my understanding of the physical relativity principle.

- Think about the lower note when tuning the unison, it drops too, right? If the dropping is the same, is the resulting twelfth logically not of the same size as before? Are you aware that pitch dropping from coupling does not occur on every note? How can you expect then that the resulting twelfth will land exactly on the Chas size twelfth, with your own claimed precision of 0.01 cts over an octave, that is required to be classified as a Chas interval?

- Let´s assume ideally that exactly the required pitch drop occurs from whatever effect, when starting with unison tuning : What will happen when tuning the unisons downward from the temperament region where the unisons are already tuned (and thus do not drop anymore): must not the lower note stay exactly where it was to obtain a Chas size twelfth? Or let´s assume the upper note dropped only half the amount required to obtain a Chas size twelfth: Must not climb the lower note toward the upper note then?

- Let´s proceed with finishing unisons upwards from the temperament region in the treble on the first twelfth above the temperament twelfth (i.e. D3-A4), AFTER completing the unisons over the temperament twelfth. If the pitch dropped over all notes by unison tuning in the temperament twelfth, all twelfths of the middle string in the second twelfth section above the temperament are wider of pure of an amount of the pitch drop of the notes of the temperament twelfth. Must not the notes drop then two times the pitch drop of the temperament twelfth to obtain a Chas size twelfth? And must not the notes in the twelfth above the second twelfth above the temperament twelfth drop three times the amount of the drop in the middle region?

Frankly, to me your concept of obtaining a Chas tuning by tuning unisons from pure twelfths temperament on the middle string is wishful thinking. What you get after tuning unisons after a pure twelfth temperament on the middle strings instead is more or less a pure twelfths temperament (which as a result sound wise is not wrong at all wink.

If you want a Chas tuning, you may preferrably do something Bill Bremmer does with mindless octaves, what would probably represent more a Chas tuning than your actual approach.


Hi,

A few considerations based on Bernhard’s recent comments. Hope this can clarify some points, also for other colleagues, before it gets… confusing. I have moved this reply from Toni's thread for obvious reasons. The original thread is here:

http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads.php/topics/2670882/10.html

I wrote…”Perhaps some differences in our practice become significant, for instance tuning mid-strings first on a wide range, which allows the tuning of perfectly still/beat-less 12ths”…

Bernhard, you replied: “..this is the goal with pure twelfths.” …

Now, the goal for you, correct me if I am wrong, seems to be “minimum overall beating” 12ths all across the keyboard. My own goal, Bernhard, is to tune a beat-curve that may anticipate any pitch drop. We may have to tune pure 12ths or pure 5ths at some points, that - for me - depends on the individual piano.

I believe that our experience takes us onto different observations. Depending on the piano, I may decide to tune pure or close_to_pure 12ths in some ranges and compensate for a possible pitch sagging. Considering that, every time I need to tune pure 12ths on middle strings, the end result is what I like, i.e. 12ths with a minimum narrow beating. Later on you will understand how.

I wrote: ..” And because Bernhard has mentioned "minimum_overall beating", I wonder how that beating sounds to him, if wide or narrow.”

You replied: ..” Minimal overall beating means clean to me.”…

Also to me, though “clean” simply does not mean “pure” (to me). And it is not clear whether you hear narrow-beating or wide-beating. Perhaps for you that does not really matter?

… ”I use that description (minimum overall beating) to make clear that if speaking of a pure or clear interval on a piano, there are generally all but at LEAST one partial pair that have not the same frequency, but are tuned to a target, where they sound perfectly clean, still, beat-less, same as you possibly demonstrated successfully in Canada.”…

For me “minimum overall beating” cannot be represented by a “pure” stretch scheme. Strange how you do not get this contradiction in terms, and when we say "clean" it sounds so vague, to the point that an "overall beating" might sound "clean" subjectively, without being objectively "minimum".

For me there is a difference that can be heard distinctly on centre strings, pure is pure, i.e. still, perfectly beat-less, something I demonstrate on centre strings; “clean” meaning “minimum overall beating”, think of it, could also apply to the pure 5ths stretch scheme, in fact aren’t “clean” 5ths nice as well? Aren't we all targeting "clean" octaves, clean 5ths and clean 12ths? Can they all be " pure" at once?

Hence my question, if there is “..at LEAST one partial pair that have not the same frequency..”, why talking about pure intervals? Wasn’t it understood that any “pure” interval would go to the detriment of all the other intervals?

In my practice, very luckily 12ths will be as I like them after unisons - and other intervals will not sound sour (hopefully) – “clean” 12ths, sure, on the narrow side, and clean 5ths too. If I demonstrate (and mention) pure 12ths on middle strings in a specific range, it is in order to show how we can use that check and have control over the tuning curve and settlings.

You wrote: … ”I see a serious gap between what you do in practice (essentially a pure twelfths temperament) and what you have theoretically build around about that as Chas theory:.”...

Let’s see.

…” You tune pure twelfths on the middle string over a vast part of the piano (pure twelfths equal temperament).” …

The part of the piano is not really vast, and the tuning curve will be a bit steeper of some degree for all intervals, not only 12ths. In proximity of / in the range C5-C6 we may need to tune 12ths very “clean” or even pure, as I say, depending on the piano.

… “On a second step you tune unisons and claim by pitch sagging or coupling of the tree strings the pitch drops exactly for the specific amount that after tuning the unisons, the resulting twelfths are exactly of Chas twelfths size.” …

The end_tuning_beats for all intervals need to be anticipated, and of course this requires some experience. But it is handy: while we do unisons we have plenty of intervals that we can check and that actually tell us how the individual piano is reacting, as we go. Then we can still adjust the tuning curve and make sure that our target is always in the viewfinder.

What is weird for me, in these days, is the idea of tuning “clean” 12ths with a spanner, for instance, and expect that - at the end of the tuning - all the intervals progress harmoniously. I would see no point in gaining one single “pure” interval out of “brute force”, octaves, 12ths or whatever, for how important it is to interlace all intervals, as in a whole. You can surely tune with a spanner but the progressions, in my experience, will all be broken.

You mention “whole tone purity”, you go for “clean” 12ths but you support a “pure” scheme. Isn’t this a bit odd?

… “Frankly, to me your concept of obtaining a Chas tuning by tuning unisons from pure twelfths temperament on the middle string is wishful thinking.” …

Yes, it would be, I agree, if things were as you describe them, but they are not. I thank you for being frank, this is how we can progress faster.

12ths can well serve as a reference when we expand the temperament, as much as many other intervals, I hope they will never get "unapproachable" wink

… “What you get after tuning unisons after a pure twelfth temperament on the middle strings instead is more or less a pure twelfths temperament (which as a result sound wise is not wrong at all smile .” …

Please note, I speak about 12ths that are really pure, when and where it is the case. In my experience, what we get at the end of our tuning does not depend on one single interval (how strange that I have to say this here), it will depend on how carefully we temper the first octave, on how carefully we expand the temperament, and on how carefully we check the “temporary” results, while tempering, while expanding and while we execute the unisons.

On Chas theory, as soon as I have some time.

Bernhard (and All) please do not hesitate to let me know if you would like me to expand further.

Kind regards, a.c.
.

Last edited by alfredo capurso; 09/18/17 07:08 PM.

alfredo
#2676209 - 09/19/17 04:48 AM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,524
rXd Online happy
2000 Post Club Member
rXd  Online Happy
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,524
Again this talk of sagging pitches.

If you are referring to the so called wenreich effect, this can so easily be dealt with as, when and if it appears by simply tuning from completed unisons. 3-10-17 as you go becomes second nature, particularly when, as all pro tuners have to occasionally, you are in a noisy environment . You will soon spot anything and everything that is the least suspect usually in the tenth as you are comparing the 3rd and the 17th.

Not "clever" enough for you?

Twelfths will either look after themselves if the fifths are secure or, since you tell us that you, personally, can't tell whether they are wide or narrow, (you could if you used the external checks) what's this whole thing about if you aren't at some level projecting your own problems onto others?

If, as some would have it, the resonance is increased with puréed 12ths. Why doesn't the increased resonance tell you how accurate the twelfth is? It just might when you stop worrying it. Dogs have been shot for less.

Of course you do know that worrying a string will heat up the bearing points and also destabilise it.





Amanda Reckonwith
Concert & Recording tuner-tech, London, England.
"in theory, practice and theory are the same thing. In practice, they're not." - Lawrence P. 'Yogi' Berra.


#2676218 - 09/19/17 07:24 AM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 276
Bernhard Stopper Offline
Full Member
Bernhard Stopper  Offline
Full Member

Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 276
Germany
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso


You mention “whole tone purity”, you go for “clean” 12ths but you support a “pure” scheme. Isn’t this a bit odd?


I find it odd to find this odd.

Originally Posted by DoelKees
Originally Posted by rXd
I had thought when this stuff first started that it was harmless crackpot stuff ..

In my opinion C.HA.S.^(R) theory is total nonsense, based on a lack of understanding of basic piano physics, in particular inharmonicity.

Kees


Not only inharmonicity. There seems to be a lack of understanding of the basics of interval beating in different ET sizes as well. ET´s without iH (s=0 as Alfredo says) progress with all intervals perfectly, no matter what ET-size is choosen (except if a pure interval was selected as base interval where this interval would be beatless throughout the scale.) I figured out already in a review of Alfredo´s paper when he came up with his theory some years ago here, that he did not understand this basic principle, as he claimed that only in Chas ET all intervals do progress. Seems he refused to understand these basics within the time that has gone since.

Last edited by Bernhard Stopper; 09/19/17 08:48 AM.
#2676224 - 09/19/17 08:58 AM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: Bernhard Stopper]  
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member
alfredo capurso  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
Sicily - Italy
Originally Posted by rXd

Again this talk of sagging pitches.

If you are referring to the so called wenreich effect, this can so easily be dealt with as, when and if it appears by simply tuning from completed unisons. 3-10-17 as you go becomes second nature, particularly when, as all pro tuners have to occasionally, you are in a noisy environment . You will soon spot anything and everything that is the least suspect usually in the tenth as you are comparing the 3rd and the 17th.

Not "clever" enough for you?

Twelfths will either look after themselves if the fifths are secure or, since you tell us that you, personally, can't tell whether they are wide or narrow, (you could if you knew the external checks) what's this whole thing about if you aren't at some level projecting your own problems onto others?

If, as some would have it, the resonance is increased with puréed 12ths. Why doesn't the increased resonance tell you how accurate the twelfth is? It just might when you stop worrying it. Dogs have been shot for less.

Of course you do know that worrying a string will heat up the bearing points and also destabilise it.





Rxd, I do not have any problem with 12ths, accuracy, interval checks, resonance or else. Thanks for checking.

..."..since you tell us that you, personally, can't tell whether they are wide or narrow..."...

You misunderstood. In Toni's thread I was actually asking Bernhard if he could tell us anything about the "minimum overall beating" he was talking about, whether it would be heard as narrow beating or wide. We got no reply on that, he just said that there will be ..."..at LEAST one partial pair that have not the same frequency..".

Originally Posted by Bernhard Stopper
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso


You mention “whole tone purity”, you go for “clean” 12ths but you support a “pure” scheme. Isn’t this a bit odd?


I find it odd to find this odd.

Originally Posted by DoelKees
Originally Posted by rXd
I had thought when this stuff first started that it was harmless crackpot stuff ..

In my opinion C.HA.S.^(R) theory is total nonsense, based on a lack of understanding of basic piano physics, in particular inharmonicity.

Kees


Not only inharmonicity. There seems to be a lack of understanding of the basics of interval beating in different ET sizes as well. ET´s without iH (s=0 as Alfredo says) progress with all intervals perfectly, no matter what ET-size is choosen. I figured out already in a review of Alfredo´s paper when he came up with his theory some years ago here, that he did not understand this basic principle, as he claimed that only in Chas ET all intervals do progress. Seems he refused to understand these basics within the time that has gone since.


I do not think I have ever stated that "..only in Chas ET all intervals do progress".

Oh, Bernhard, the basic Chas algorithm version is with s = 1

Time has passed, this is true, apparently you need some more.

Arguments, gentlemen. Otherwise, you could start your own thread and denigrate as much as you like.

Regards, a.c.

G.R.I.M. - Università di Palermo (2009)
http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Quaderno19_Capurso_09_engl.pdf

PRISTEM - Università Bocconi (2010)
Italiano - http://matematica.unibocconi.it/articoli/relazioni-armoniche-un-pianoforte
English version - http://www.pdf-archive.com/2013/04/10/chas-prof-chiriano-english/

Università di Cagliari - Tesi di Laurea (2011)
http://www.luciocadeddu.com/tesi/Cannas_triennale.pdf

Haye Hinrichsen - University of Wurzburg - Revising the musical equal temperament (2015):
http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbef/v38n1/1806-9126-rbef-38-01-S1806-11173812105.pdf
.

Last edited by alfredo capurso; 09/19/17 09:10 AM.

alfredo
#2676234 - 09/19/17 09:57 AM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 276
Bernhard Stopper Offline
Full Member
Bernhard Stopper  Offline
Full Member

Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 276
Germany
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

Oh, Bernhard, the basic Chas algorithm version is with s = 1


typo, sorry.

Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

I do not think I have ever stated that "..only in Chas ET all intervals do progress".



Ok i see a need to precise this. You stated that in Chas ET intervals progress.
In your tractat you presented some other ET then, where fifths or other intervals invert at some point.
This is factually wrong with no iH or s=1

My guess is, that this misunderstanding (that intervals do invert in some ETs which are not Chas) leads you the interpretation, that after tuning pure twelfths on the middle string, they get progressively smaller after tuning the unisons.


Last edited by Bernhard Stopper; 09/19/17 10:31 AM.
#2676303 - 09/19/17 02:49 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: Bernhard Stopper]  
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member
alfredo capurso  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
Sicily - Italy
Originally Posted by Bernhard Stopper
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

Oh, Bernhard, the basic Chas algorithm version is with s = 1


typo, sorry.

Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

I do not think I have ever stated that "..only in Chas ET all intervals do progress".



Ok i see a need to precise this. You stated that in Chas ET intervals progress.
In your tractat you presented some other ET then, where fifths or other intervals invert at some point.
This is factually wrong with no iH or s=1

My guess is, that this misunderstanding (that intervals do invert in some ETs which are not Chas) leads you the interpretation, that after tuning pure twelfths on the middle string, they get progressively smaller after tuning the unisons.



No other ET was discussed, if not marginally, in the Chas paper, I would then say that your guess is wrong.

G.R.I.M. - Università di Palermo (2009)
http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Quaderno19_Capurso_09_engl.pdf

PRISTEM - Università Bocconi (2010)
Italiano - http://matematica.unibocconi.it/articoli/relazioni-armoniche-un-pianoforte
English version - http://www.pdf-archive.com/2013/04/10/chas-prof-chiriano-english/

Università di Cagliari - Tesi di Laurea (2011)
http://www.luciocadeddu.com/tesi/Cannas_triennale.pdf

Haye Hinrichsen - University of Wurzburg - Revising the musical equal temperament (2015):
http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbef/v38n1/1806-9126-rbef-38-01-S1806-11173812105.pdf
.

Last edited by alfredo capurso; 09/19/17 04:14 PM.

alfredo
#2676321 - 09/19/17 04:13 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 276
Bernhard Stopper Offline
Full Member
Bernhard Stopper  Offline
Full Member

Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 276
Germany
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso


No other ET were discussed, if not marginally, in the Chas paper, I would then say that your guess is wrong.



I quote from your initial paper page 76 (http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Quaderno19_Capurso_09_engl.pdf
):

"f in a semitonal logarithmic scale we wanted to fa
vour partial 5, we would have to take
value 5 and position 12+12+4 = ordinal 28, so the f
ormula will be
5^(1/28) =
1.059164008
...In this scale, as incremental ratio of degree 9 of
the
scale (element 14),
we find the 5^(1/2) component of the gold section.
In distances of octaves, (5*2)^(1/40),
(10*2)^(1/52) etc. this ratio modifies towards
2^(1/12).

If in a different logarithmic scale, we wanted to f
avour partial 3 we would have to take
value 3 and position 12+7 = ordinal 19, so the form
ula will be
3^(1/19) =
1.059526065
... This ratio, too, in distances of octaves, (3*2)^(
1/31), (6*2)^(1/43) etc,
modifies towards 2^(1/12).
The formula 2^(1/12), at distances of octaves (posi
tion+12) does not change: 4^(1/24) =
8^(1/36) = 16^(1/48) =
1.059463094.."

You mentioned pure twelfth ET explicitely, and claimed that this ratio modifies towards 2^(12) which is pure nonsense. The correct octave in pure twelfth is not (3*2)^(
1/31), (6*2)^(1/43) etc,
but correctly 3^(1/19), 3^(12/19), 3^(24/19) etc.

My guess seems indeed right, just from your misinterpretation of pure twelfth temperament beat rates you falsely came to the conclusion that pure twelfths converges to smaller twelfths when finishing the unisons.

#2676322 - 09/19/17 04:32 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member
alfredo capurso  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
Sicily - Italy

Bernhard,

Frankly, I do not understand what is wrong there. But even if something were wrong, it would have nothing to do with my observations from tuning practice.

In fact, I consider theory and practice separately as much as I can, you may have well noticed that.

Your guess on unisons, again, is banal and simply wrong.

G.R.I.M. - Università di Palermo (2009)
http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Quaderno19_Capurso_09_engl.pdf

PRISTEM - Università Bocconi (2010)
Italiano - http://matematica.unibocconi.it/articoli/relazioni-armoniche-un-pianoforte
English version - http://www.pdf-archive.com/2013/04/10/chas-prof-chiriano-english/

Università di Cagliari - Tesi di Laurea (2011)
http://www.luciocadeddu.com/tesi/Cannas_triennale.pdf

Haye Hinrichsen - University of Wurzburg - Revising the musical equal temperament (2015):
http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbef/v38n1/1806-9126-rbef-38-01-S1806-11173812105.pdf
.

Last edited by alfredo capurso; 09/19/17 04:36 PM.

alfredo
#2676335 - 09/19/17 05:23 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 276
Bernhard Stopper Offline
Full Member
Bernhard Stopper  Offline
Full Member

Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 276
Germany
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

Bernhard,

Frankly, I do not understand what is wrong there. But even if something were wrong, it would have nothing to do with my observations from tuning practice.



If you don´t understand what is wrong there, i can´t help you further. There are serious scientists who noticed what your theory is (many thanks to professor Kees van den Doel).

#2676340 - 09/19/17 05:32 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member
alfredo capurso  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
Sicily - Italy

lol

I see, you were addressing the whole theory, not unisons... lol.
.
G.R.I.M. - Università di Palermo (2009)
http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Quaderno19_Capurso_09_engl.pdf

PRISTEM - Università Bocconi (2010)
Italiano - http://matematica.unibocconi.it/articoli/relazioni-armoniche-un-pianoforte
English version - http://www.pdf-archive.com/2013/04/10/chas-prof-chiriano-english/

Università di Cagliari - Tesi di Laurea (2011)
http://www.luciocadeddu.com/tesi/Cannas_triennale.pdf

Haye Hinrichsen - University of Wurzburg - Revising the musical equal temperament (2015):
http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbef/v38n1/1806-9126-rbef-38-01-S1806-11173812105.pdf
.

Last edited by alfredo capurso; 09/19/17 05:38 PM.

alfredo
#2676350 - 09/19/17 06:24 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 276
Bernhard Stopper Offline
Full Member
Bernhard Stopper  Offline
Full Member

Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 276
Germany
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

lol

I see, you were addressing the whole theory, not unisons... lol.


.


If the frog notice that the water is hot, it is too late to jump out.

#2676397 - 09/19/17 08:54 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,760
UnrightTooner Offline
5000 Post Club Member
UnrightTooner  Offline
5000 Post Club Member

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,760
Bradford County, PA
Since C.H.A.S. isn't really about tuning a real piano, I don't think this link is really OT. Some of you will understand:



Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?
#2676412 - 09/19/17 09:35 PM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: alfredo capurso]  
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,444
DoelKees Offline
2000 Post Club Member
DoelKees  Offline
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,444
Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

Is this supposed to add credibility?

The self-published article "HARMONIOUS PROPORTIONS IN A PIANOFORTE - THE C.HA.S.® TEMPERAMENT" with author listed as "Professor Nicola Chiriano", who is actually a high-school teacher if you Google him, starts off with this first sentence:

"In 1691 the German organist Andreas
Werckmeister discovered an ingenious
way of tuning instruments, the closest
ever achieved to an equal temperament
[1], that is to say, to a tone system where
the distance between semitones (two
successive notes in the chromatic scale)
is constant."

which is nonsense. He then goes on to describe Werckmeister, but gets the number of narrow fifths (4, not 5) wrong, as well as the amount by which they are narrow (1/4 of a Pythagorean comma, not 1/4' of a syntonic comma).

After that it is stated that "Werckmeister’s scale was extremely successful because of J. S. Bach’s use of it in his “Well-tempered Clavichord”" which is also nonsense.

That was just the first paragraph...

Kees

#2676449 - 09/20/17 03:04 AM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: Bernhard Stopper]  
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
alfredo capurso Offline
1000 Post Club Member
alfredo capurso  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,397
Sicily - Italy
Originally Posted by Bernhard Stopper
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

lol

I see, you were addressing the whole theory, not unisons... lol.


.


If the frog notice that the water is hot, it is too late to jump out.


Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

I do not think I have ever stated that "..only in Chas ET all intervals do progress".

Oh, Bernhard, the basic Chas algorithm version is with s = 1

Time has passed, this is true, apparently you need some more.

Arguments, gentlemen. Otherwise, you could start your own thread and denigrate as much as you like.

Regards, a.c.





That saying fits the case: your guess was wrong, so you attack the theory... lol
.


alfredo
#2676452 - 09/20/17 03:17 AM Re: CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING [Re: Bernhard Stopper]  
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 276
Bernhard Stopper Offline
Full Member
Bernhard Stopper  Offline
Full Member

Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 276
Germany
Originally Posted by Bernhard Stopper
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso


No other ET were discussed, if not marginally, in the Chas paper, I would then say that your guess is wrong.



I quote from your initial paper page 76 (http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Quaderno19_Capurso_09_engl.pdf
):
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

"f in a semitonal logarithmic scale we wanted to fa
vour partial 5, we would have to take
value 5 and position 12+12+4 = ordinal 28, so the f
ormula will be
5^(1/28) =
1.059164008
...In this scale, as incremental ratio of degree 9 of
the
scale (element 14),
we find the 5^(1/2) component of the gold section.
In distances of octaves, (5*2)^(1/40),
(10*2)^(1/52) etc. this ratio modifies towards
2^(1/12).

If in a different logarithmic scale, we wanted to f
avour partial 3 we would have to take
value 3 and position 12+7 = ordinal 19, so the form
ula will be
3^(1/19) =
1.059526065
... This ratio, too, in distances of octaves, (3*2)^(
1/31), (6*2)^(1/43) etc,
modifies towards 2^(1/12).
The formula 2^(1/12), at distances of octaves (posi
tion+12) does not change: 4^(1/24) =
8^(1/36) = 16^(1/48) =
1.059463094.."


You mentioned pure twelfth ET explicitely, and claimed that this ratio modifies towards 2^(12) which is pure nonsense. The correct octave in pure twelfth is not (3*2)^(
1/31), (6*2)^(1/43) etc,
but correctly 3^(1/19), 3^(12/19), 3^(24/19) etc.

My guess seems indeed right, just from your misinterpretation of pure twelfth temperament beat rates you falsely came to the conclusion that pure twelfths converges to smaller twelfths when finishing the unisons.


I have to correct a typo in my statement:
Originally Posted by Bernhard Stopper

You mentioned pure twelfth ET explicitely, and claimed that this ratio modifies towards 2^(12) which is pure nonsense. The correct octave in pure twelfth is not (3*2)^(
1/31), (6*2)^(1/43) etc,
but correctly 3^(1/19), 3^(12/19), 3^(24/19) etc.

should be:
"You mentioned pure twelfth ET explicitely, and claimed that this ratio modifies towards 2^(12) which is pure nonsense. The correct octave in pure twelfth is not (3*2)^(1/31), (6*2)^(1/43) etc,
but correctly 3^(12/19), 3^(24/19), 3^(36/19), etc."

So to sum up again: My guess is that exactly this wrong model about pure twelfth ET that you have in mind is what leads you to the wrong guess that a pure twelfth ET over the whole piano can shrink to a Chas ET just by tuning unisons, which is not possible (i second also what Amanda had to say about pitch sagging) if there is no pitch raise, as every twelfth would need to shrink by 1,23 cents (the difference between a pure twelfth ET twelfth and a Chas twelfth), this required shrink would even increase linearly with every stacked twelfth, as i was figuring out with my questions earlier. The truth for me is, that in your tuning practice you are selling something else (a pure 12th ET temperament) under a wrong label (Chas theory).

Last edited by Bernhard Stopper; 09/20/17 03:22 AM.
Page 14 of 18 1 2 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Moderated by  Piano World 

Piano Acc. & Gift Items in
Piano World's Online Store
In PianoSupplies.com ,(a division of Piano World)
our online store for piano and music gifts and accessories, Digital Piano Dolly, party goods, tuning equipment, piano moving equipment, benches, lamps Caster Cups and more.


Free Shipping* on Jansen Artist Piano Benches, Cocoweb Piano Lamps, Hidrau Hydraulic Piano Benches
(*free shipping within contiguous U.S. only)
(ad)
Pearl River & Ritmuller
Ritmuller Pianos
(ad)
Pianoteq
PianoTeq 6 Out now
(ad)
Lindeblad Piano
Lindeblad Piano Restorations and sales
ad
Pierce Piano Atlas


New Topics - Multiple Forums
New 2017. Fazioli Models
by Zedd01. 10/20/17 03:29 PM
New Russian Piano Teacher says my technique is awful
by S'il Vous Plait. 10/20/17 02:39 PM
Piano teacher wants son to skip up a level
by lchenny. 10/20/17 02:38 PM
Can't figure out this christmas song
by Mymy. 10/20/17 02:38 PM
Forum Statistics
Forums44
Topics182,401
Posts2,665,982
Members89,007
Most Online15,252
Mar 21st, 2010
(ad)
Accu-Tuner
Sanderson Accu-Tuner
Check It Out!
There's a lot more to Piano World than just the forums.
Click Here to
Explore The Rest of Piano World!!
Visit our online store for gifts for music lovers


 
Help keep the forums up and running with a donation, any amount is appreciated!
Or by becoming a Subscribing member! Thank-you.
Donate   Subscribe
 
Our Piano Related Classified Ads
| Dealers | Tuners | Lessons | Movers | Restorations | Pianos For Sale | Sell Your Piano |

Advertise on Piano World
| Subscribe | Piano World | PianoSupplies.com | Advertise on Piano World |
| |Contact | Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter |


copyright 1997 - 2017 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0