Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum Hysterical tunings etc...

Sorry I was not talking about you in particular, but just what I seem to understand from why those high 3ds tend to raise in speed too fast.

I mismatched in English it is not as simple.

If you raise the F4 the fourth will be faster so you cant, better lower the F3 if the octave is the problem, or change the division.
I find it very difficult to have a nice progression of 3ds between FA4 and till F5 or so (hence checking the 6ths is helpful,as you say and even better the 10th).

And I noticed that some tuning models proposed by EDT give a raise in 3ds speed which is faster than I like - while I am unsure where it comes from.

I am not talking of anyone specifically and certainly not you, but not all tuners are musicians, it may be difficult for a beginner that dont play piano or have little education in music. also because one feel unsecure with string/pin settling he tend to add stretch as a "security".

Does it relate to "Reverse well" , I dont know.

when I look at the graphs I see the 5ths that are tuned pure at the beginning of the sequence, if it begins with C and it is a huge mistake for a tuner so I dont really get it.

No offense taken here, Isaac, I just wanted to point out that I've experienced it myself as a novice, I still struggle with it every now and then as an intermediate tuner, and I've heard it from a lot of experienced professionals!


I agree! But for some reason, when the temperament F3-F4 works in its most basic way, that is, when the 3rds and 6ths speed up, many tuners just more or less leave it like that and go compensating the top notes instead, thus giving the situation i described.


I agree completely. It took me a long time to become secure enough not to overcompensate trying to avoid too low notes because of mediocre pinsetting, and thus I left the notes a little bit higher.


Well, I'd be curious about this sequence too, so let's hope that Bill and Jeff gets together in the new post that has been discussed recently!

Thank you for this thoughtful post, BDB. It is the kind I like to see you write. I have seen the "neutral pallet" idea before and it does have some merit. However, when you consider what I wrote to Patrick on his EBVT III trial thread, there is no way to find the kind of expression that is inherent with a well temperament by varying the tempo and the dynamics when playing ET. You can get some of it, yes but not all of it.

I recall the remarks of the German student pianist who played a Mason & Hamlin BB which I tuned in the EBVT III at the 2007 convention in Rochester, NY. He had played the Beethoven Waldstein Sonata. When asked for his reaction to the way the piano was tuned, he said, "It is remarkable. I found that when I wanted to make a certain expression, it was already there from the piano. I did not have to work so hard for it."

The more harmonious sound found in the simple keys of any well temperament is well understood by all. However, contrary to what most technicians suppose about the remote keys, that they would simply sound out of tune, I have found that pianists perceive that as power and energy.

Once, after a recital played in 1/7 comma meantone, the Czech artist told me, "In all my life, I have never dared to play a piano so softly. If I had tried that with any other piano, there would have been nothing musical about it. Yet, with this piano, I felt a force beneath my hands which I could control as I never could before. It was some kind of magic, the way this piano spoke to me!"

The issue about transposing for a vocalist is well taken. However, I have two comments about that and the EBVT III. I am a vocalist, so I am familiar with the need for transposing at times so that a particular selection will better fit my voice type or what I want to do with my voice at the moment.

For example, I use the Vaccai book of Italian songs for warm up. I use the edition for medium high voice. The other editions for low voice or high voice do not have all of those selections transposed by only a half step. They are at least a full step or a M3 up or down, one from the other. If a vocalist is at or near the limit of usable range, a half step is usually not enough of a transposition to make a difference. Therefore, if a transposition is needed, one may easily find another key with a similar character either a full step higher or lower. A M3 or 4th or 5th up or down could also be chosen for that matter. How much would a mere half step really help in most cases?

Now, considering the EBVT III, it does provide for a different character for each key but the differences as they follow the cycle of 5ths are very slight from one key to the next. The remote keys do have their energetic character but they are not so energetic as to be unusable.

For example, I have the score to "Oh Holy Night" which I often sing at Christmas time. I have the edition written in C Major and the accompaniment recorded on my player piano. I can and have transposed the key to D-flat and sung it that way. Transposing did give the accompaniment a different character but it was not so different that it was unusable or completely destructive to the music.

I have done that with the Vaccai Italian songs too. I may sometimes, actually want that slight "edge" that a half step transposition would provide. It would not be for the purpose of suiting my vocal range but in fact for the slightly different character and the energy that using a remote key would afford.

Here's another scenario: A group of people are having fun singing a song with many verses in the key of F Major tuned in the EBVT III. The choice of key is appropriate for that song. At the final verse, the pianist moves up a half step to F# Major for a little more energy during that final verse. This would often be done in ET and the increase in energy would be there both in pitch and a very slight increase in the beat rates of the M3's yes. If the piano is tuned in the EBVT III, there is simply an enhancement of that effect but not such a difference that it destroys the music.

One of the consequences of a temperament other than equal temperament is that the tuning sequence becomes more of an issue. If you are tuning equal temperament and using a different reference, you can use the same steps from your reference and the result should be the same. This is why when you are tuning major thirds right off the back as part of the sequence that you are using, if your reference is A, the thirds should be C# and F, while if it is C, they should be E and G#. As you are tuning all intervals equally, the results will be the same.

However, if you are tuning an unequal temperament, the steps that make C the "calmest" key starting with an A fork will make D# the calmest if you use the same sequence starting with a C fork.

It takes a fair bit of work to make this correction. You could start from the point at which C is tuned using the sequence from A, working both forwards and backwards. However, if you have a test or reference from a note which should have been tuned before C, that will not work. You need to ignore the reference, perhaps finding a new one, and you will need different tests.

Alfredo, you are always so full of questions, I can hardly attempt to answer them all. The reason why reverse well exists is because of incomplete understanding of ET. You will have to read the new thread I will write about reverse well to understand everything.

Yes, the EBVT is actually easier to tune perfectly than it is to tune ET perfectly, much easier, in fact but it is not the principle reason for me to use it or to offer the instructions to other technicians who may be interested in it. I do not view what I do as a kind of "promotion". That word implies selling or marketing which I have never done.

Yes.

Yes.

Any piano sounds good when tuned in true ET with good octaves and unisons. We all agree with that. However, I find that a piano tuned in the EBVT and some other non-ET's sounds more interesting to me. I realize that not everyone would have the same opinion as I do on that. Every person has the right to their opinion and the right to express why that opinion is held, how it came to be, etc. No one has the right to insult another person because of disagreements regarding beliefs and opinions. What I find to be the most disturbing and irritating are insulting remarks made by people who have little or no knowledge and experience with the subject they ridicule.
We did not compare our tunings side by side. Herr Stopper met me in public and introduced himself. He was very friendly and affable. He attended a class I presented on how to tune the EBVT and I attended a session where he presented a piano tuned in his way. His piano sounded remarkably good and I was quite impressed with it.

Herr Stopper did find that there was at least some similarity to the way we both treated the octaves. His tuning did have some of the "pipe organ effect" which I know from mine. However, Herr Stopper's tuning is clearly ET and mine is clearly not ET. He believes in what he does and I believe in what I do, so we have a friendly mutual respect for each other which is the way it should be. What purpose would be served if we each mocked and ridiculed each other because we each have different opinions?

Herr Stopper is a very fine and exacting tuner (as well as a thoroughly versed technician)who believes in his ideas and puts them to work. His ideas work for him. His clients like the way he tunes and therefore he is successful.

My clients like the way I tune as well. In the area where I live, the use of non-ET's has been a long tradition. It works for me and my clients where I live. That is in spite of hearing and reading two decades worth of ridicule, mockery and criticism.

One could easily take the comment I had above that the EBVT is easier to tune than ET and make the comment that I "get away with tuning a sloppy temperament and pass it off to an unsuspecting public" and proceed to call it "unethical". I have received that very criticism now for 20 years but I have consistently ignored it. Ignoring those kind of remarks or answering them with my own opinion has generally only made those who criticize me angrier but I honestly don't care what they think.
It depends on how the ETD is used. I know how to use my ETD to get exactly what I want. ETD users who know how to custom program their ETD's can get the finest of ET tunings. Using the EBVT correction figures and default programming of an ETD will produce some measure of the sound which I like to create but it is not as perfected as what I do using the direct interval approach to ETD tuning. Using that approach, I can get a better tuning than I could by ear alone because I have more control in achieving exactly what I want. My opinion is that there is no significant difference. Some people seem to think that I believe the EBVT stays sounding good longer than ET does and some people seem to believe that ET would last longer than any WT would but I don't believe either is really true.

BDB: Yes, the "kick-off" (reference point) becomes more important.

I am pondering a Bb-centered EBVT (a whole step down from the original EBVT). Would be a blast to experiment with tuning that way for jazz venues. Just have to get there from an A fork...

For my first try-out, I will use ET via M to get the wholesteps F-G-A-B-C#-D#-F work progressively, then treat G as my reference and build EBVT a whole step down from the original sequence instructions.

I think horn players would love a temperament that is custom made for them - centered around Bb, with 'temperament wings' Eb-Ab and F-C. If this sounds insane, and if the originator of this post gets even more irritated, I really couldn't care less. It's not like there is a world-wide patent on tunings. I will probably not get sued. And I didn't sign any papers when I started tuning, either.

The idea of not being honest to (or cheating on) the customers when you don't tune ET is most amusing to me. For those of you who haven't been involved in piano teaching, I can say that the same type of discussion (right vs. wrong) is much harsher in that field.

For every given piano technique, there are several others condemning it. Even worse, they blame the inventors for spoiling young peoples lives. Compared to that, an UT tuning for a concert really don't seem like a big thing. And - in a worst-case conservative scenario - what about if it even sounded good... better than ET? Should I still tune ET then, just to be proper and polite?

I very much like Jerry Groot's philosophy on this: "Whatever blows your hair back" . "Whatever rocks your boat". Leave people be, and get better on what you sincerely believe in.

BDB, The EBVT or EBVT III can be tuned just as easily from a C fork as from A. The four initial equal beating intervals serve as a "foundation" the same way CM3s do it ET.

Virtually all of the HT's are tuned from a C fork but many of them can be transposed easily to be tuned from an A fork much the same way as Braide-White's original C fork sequence is often transposed to A.

Hello Bill,

you write:...“The more harmonious sound found in the simple keys of any well temperament is well understood by all. However, contrary to what most technicians suppose about the remote keys, that they would simply sound out of tune, I have found that pianists perceive that as power and energy.”...

My impression was that, also in the simple keys, harmoniousness may depend on the type of chord, am I wrong?

...“Once, after a recital played in 1/7 comma meantone, the Czech artist told me, "In all my life, I have never dared to play a piano so softly. If I had tried that with any other piano, there would have been nothing musical about it. Yet, with this piano, I felt a force beneath my hands which I could control as I never could before. It was some kind of magic, the way this piano spoke to me!"...

So, 1/7 comma meantone, in your opinion, is more musical than any other piano tuned how? And “musical” (for you) means what, precisely? With a selection of keys "in tuning"?

...“Now, considering the EBVT III, it does provide for a different character for each key but the differences as they follow the cycle of 5ths are very slight from one key to the next. The remote keys do have their energetic character but they are not so energetic as to be unusable.”...

So, the differences in character are there, but very slight, and “the remote do have their energetic character but they are not so energetic as to be unusable.” May I ask: when is this “energetic” so strong that it becomes unusable?

...“Transposing did give the accompaniment a different character but it was not so different that it was unusable or completely destructive to the music.”...

So, is it a mild “in between”, different character and energetic? What are you referring to when you say energetic?

...“I have done that with the Vaccai Italian songs too. I may sometimes, actually want that slight "edge" that a half step transposition would provide. It would not be for the purpose of suiting my vocal range but in fact for the slightly different character and the energy that using a remote key would afford.”...

Yes, compared to what?

...“At the final verse, the pianist moves up a half step to F# Major for a little more energy during that final verse. This would often be done in ET and the increase in energy would be there both in pitch and a very slight increase in the beat rates of the M3's yes. If the piano is tuned in the EBVT III, there is simply an enhancement of that effect but not such a difference that it destroys the music.”...

So, do you think it is more energetic than ET? My interest in understanding more is real. Maybe you manage to briefly answer my other questions too, thanks Bill.

Regards, a.c.

...Maybe you manage to briefly answer my other questions too,...

Bill, I've just seen that you had already answered my previous questions, sorry, I'm going to read your replay right now.

Many thanks, a.c.

Yes it is that way. But when you talk about geniuses like Bach, there is no problem there are only advantages that he exploited wisely, using remotes keys to express energy, power, etc. and primary keys to express beauty, calm, harmoniousness.

So if the modern composer has this gift, he can make music using to his advantage these subtle differencies in Modern Well Temperaments that allow free modulation in all keys.

The more I listen to samples the more the question I have is :

Do US techs voice pianos so mellow because of the way they tune unisons, or do they tune unisons that way because they voice mellow.

In that context I understand the search for "contrast" in tone.

But I suggest that on pianos that articulate more, the differences would jump to the ear way more.

That said the samples from PPat where not that chocking, while the unisons had more presence at the attack that what I have generally heard on US pianos.. still waiting to hear more.

So you find American pianos have mellower tones than European pianos!

That's curious, because I believe exactly the contrary. Although I seldom tune European pianos.

Here, I have to tune mainly american pianos which I find to have a brilliant tone, some asian pianos which have mainly a metallic tone, and rarely European pianos which have a mellower tone.

I think of the density of the tone at the attack (always !)

Seem to me that the "envelope" (?) is flatter while indeed the spectra can be brillant and with some flavorus acidity, I mostly talk of dynamics and articulation of tone there)
Particularly the impregnated hammer have lot of power immediately when playing piano, but the spectra behaviour does not change much if you play forte.
SO even if the power sensation (mostly felt by the pianist, less by the auditory) is very agreeable, tonal changes within dynamics are more important in my view.

I believe that the immediateness of the whole spectra oblige to voice the hammer surface and high regions more, and to use softer hammers. then the unison tuning "european like" is less natural as the rebound of the hammer is more damped.

Only after hearing instruments on Utube and some recordings that is difficult to say what is it really but I can recognize the way the tone evolve even if I dont really hear in the best conditions.

..."But when you talk about geniuses like Bach, there is no problem there are only advantages that he exploited wisely, using remotes keys to express energy, power, etc. and primary keys to express beauty, calm, harmoniousness."

..."So if the modern composer has this gift, he can make music using to his advantage these subtle differencies in Modern Well Temperaments that allow free modulation in all keys."...

It may be because of my ear that I compare UTs to potatoes (I love potatoes) and ET (my version) to a sphere.

One may say: I prefere to play potatoes or listen to potatoes, fair enough.

But then, why (on which basis) should a musician, a composer or a listener share the same bumpy-type potato?

How is it possible to talk so much about personal preferencies, so excluding a shareable concept or idea of "in tune", and then establish a preference and/or a supremacy for a single bumpy model? Should not a bumpy personal preference (which I respect) be even less shareable than a natural geometric progressive model?

And, for serious evaluations, should we not let philological researchers talk about Bach's intentions?

a.c.
.

I don't want to sound rude but it seems to me that the theories people who have no experience using and enjoying non equal temperaments are boundless.

Bill, to me you do not sound rude.

You may refer to me when you say "theories people who have no experience using and enjoying non equal temperaments", and you may refer to me using my name, no problem.

I hope you did not take offence, I really think that my compareson potato Vs sphere derives from my ear issues.

But leave my urges aside, I do not get the "preference" logics that are displayed here and there, in this forum. Can you help with that?

Here is a "light" and fascinating link to geometric proportions in nature (scroll down for pictures):

http://www.maths.surrey.ac.uk/hosted-sites/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fibnat.html

Edit: And if we were to think in terms of personal preferences, should not we get ready to offer a "custom bumpy", more than forcing our own preference? Maybe I would not mind the chance to get each different customer's bumpy taste, I generally like diversity.

Best regards, a.c.
.
.

What Bill said about

"the theories people who have no experience using and enjoying non equal temperaments are boundless"

applies to all of the posters here who claim to always tune ET.

How can they have a serious solid theory about something they never have done?

There are people with solid theories about poisonous mushrooms who have never eaten one.

Yes, the ones that have ever eaten one are dead. And their relatives have made the solid theories about eating mushrooms.

But when tuning a piano you are not going to die! You can try without any risk!

What are you afraid of?

Gadzar, I agree with you!

I don't understand why people are so opposed to tuning in something other that ET. I began tuning in ET just like most others, read about the EBVT III on this forum, tried it on my own piano, and LOVED the sound. Of course it's easier for me I guess, I DO play the piano and I can really hear the difference it makes musically.

I now tune every piano in EBVT III. I have tuned everyone's piano from the President of the Missouri Music Educators Association, to well renowned pianists and piano teachers in my area to a little elderly lady hosting a Sunday School sing-a-long in her home. They all love the sound. To some I explain the difference and others I don't. The music and piano teachers are usually the ones most fascinated.

I recently finished the book "Why Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony: and Why You Should Care." It was very interesting. From what I can gather..correct me if I'm wrong here Bill.. from the book the EBVT III is very similar to how Bach developed his Temperament for the Well-Tempered Clavier. The book describes Bach's Temperament at similar to ET, but each key slightly shaded to add more color....I paraphrased that loosely.

The bottom line is this...don't always accept the status quo...there may be something out there better.