Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum My Piano in EBVT III

Emmery, I find offensive your insinuation as to my sincerity and honesty regarding my recordings. There is no "trickery" no "magic" and no "BS" here, as you put it. Patrick is correct, you are not, period.

I have had a lot of requests for the answers to the temperament comparison, so rather than send everyone a message here on PW, here is the KEY to the EBVT III -ET comparison/temperament test.

Since I had never intended these recordings to be in a so called "blind" test, if I do this again, I will use the same mics and digital recorder for all recordings.

Congrats to all who guessed correctly!


Key to EBVT III-ET Temperament Test

1. Jazz Test 1= EBVT III (Avenson STO-2 mics,Korg MR-1000 digital recorder)
2. Jazz Test 2= ET (Rode NT5 Mics, Zoom H4 digital recorder)

1. Il Postino Test 1= ET (Rode NT5 Mics, Zoom H4 digital recorder)
2. Il Postion Test 2= EBVT III (Avenson STO-2 Mics, Korg MR-1000 digital recorder)

1. Out of Africa Test 1= ET (Rode NT5 mics, Zoom H4 digital recorder)
2. Out of Africa Test 2= EBVT III (Avenson STO-2 Mics, Korg MR-1000 digital recorder)


Here are the 3 temperament comparisons referred to in the test.

1. Jazz Test 1 http://www.box.net/shared/q33lmi9hfs
2. Jazz Test 2 http://www.box.net/shared/78og9iz3zd

1. "Il Postino" Test 1 http://www.box.net/shared/sdfbiuoz72
2. "Il Postino Test 2 http://www.box.net/shared/hr9pk5ifyk

1. "Out of Africa" Test 1 http://www.box.net/shared/b3p9xif7zs
2. "Out of Africa" Test 2 http://www.box.net/shared/ac1z75rlcl

Well, I got them all right, but I just thought they sounded warmer.
Now I don't know if I like the Avenson/Korg or if I like EVBT :-)
Thanks for the effort!

Kees

Thank you, GP. I read essentially the same thing from four different people: the EBVT III is totally unacceptable because it is too unequal. The EBVT III is unacceptable because it is not unequal enough.

None of those who condemned the EBVT III ventured a guess. They all said there were other factors that would cloud the differences between ET and the EBVT III but they insisted as a premise that the EBVT III would not, could not and should not work. (They said they would never even try it, nor should you or anyone else).

Yet, when they could not really tell for sure which was which, they found ways to say that the EBVT III is not enough different from ET to matter at all and so therefore, whatever difference there is, does not matter. The EBVT III is therefore, not worth pursuing because nobody will like it except that nobody can tell the difference between what they like and don't like. But there may be, somehow, somewhere, somebody who could really tell that the EBVT III was not ET and we must at all costs, avoid tuning a piano in the EBVT III, just in case we may run across that very rare person.

We must tune the piano so that it sounds the way the composer intended. This, of course, means ET even though we all know that it could never have been true for any 17th or 18th Century music. We have to tune the piano wrong for that music because we just may decide that the very next thing we want to play may actually require ET. Besides, we all know that those early music composers always secretly wanted ET and would have used it if they could have had it. Never mind that no composer ever wrote that anywhere at all. It is assumed! It is assumed that nobody ever wants to hear any distinction from one key to the next. Nobody ever did and nobody ever will.

We must all strive for the ultimate in perfection: equalization of temperament down to less than 1/10 of a cent, perfect unisons (or whatever vague variance from that which may be found to be ideal, THAT is what we must all do), whatever amount of stretch we put in the octaves, so that everything sounds pure even though that is impossible. Whatever amount of stretch is applied to ET, depending upon who you talk to, is the one and only right way to tune.

Unless you can do what any of these people who could not and would not dare to guess which tuning was which, you are merely a student and have much to learn. Only their way to tune is right. It can all be proved mathematically. It can further be proved with a lot of hyperbole.

On the other hand, we do have some people here that have discovered what has long been a part of tuning and music history: Well Temperament and Equal Beating. While the classic 1/4 Meantone offers no distinction in tonality, the mild meantones from 1/7 comma on up do. The EBVT III is only one practical idea. Although it is what I use most often, it is not the only choice I have nor the only way I tune but it is true that I never tune a piano in ET except for the PTG tuning exams or when instructing a novice to prepare for them. I know how to get better music from the piano than the way I was originally instructed. I found it through research and development.

I do not seek to diminish the efforts of others who have engaged in their own research and development but I would strongly suggest that if the same efforts were also applied to well temperament and equal beating, the progress toward the ultimate super sounding piano would be more effectively achieved.

ET is in itself, a dead end goal. You can't really ever achieve it but the closer you get to it, the more uninteresting the piano sounds. There are other avenues of perfection to explore! The reaction I had from a phone message from GP confirmed to me as it has many hundreds of times from voluntary communication that what I seek to provide is what the piano owner/performer wants.

I am very appreciative of all of Andy's remarks. Really, all I did for his modest piano was the most basic of piano technology. I do, however, enjoy the experience of someone who believes that what I can do will benefit. I am not the kind of technician that feels that I am too good to turn some dowel capstans, turn some let-off buttons, re-pin a loose hammer and adjust a wayward damper wire. I can easily replace worn out pedal trapwork material. I can also easily stick some needles into some deeply grooved hammers and make them sound better for a while.

Why shouldn't I take the time to do this work on a Saturday, driving 90 miles to see a new client who has clearly expressed interest in what I can do? Why should I scoff at Andy and his piano when I know that I have the skills to make it sound better? As far as I am concerned, anyone who would have taken a different attitude is an obstructionist and a defeatist in a time when piano technicians need to take every opportunity that there is to demonstrate that what we know how to do is worth paying for.

Thanks, GPman,

What a hoot! The two pieces I thought "easier", I got wrong. The one I found almost impossible, I got right. Well, if nothing else, that made me laugh.

Well, then just a spontaneous question: Do you listen to music in general solely live, or do you play it on the radio, on the internet, from CD:s?

This is mostly processed music. Sound engineers correct false lead singer's notes (which becomes evident to many who hears their artists live for the first time. (but that is sometimes solved by real-time pitch correction. That is how far it have all gone.)

Now, this reluctance of yours bases itself on a suspicion of biased material ( GP's contribution). That is heavily insulting to him, and so It should be. I gave you an suggestion (run them by a sound engineer you can trust) for a validation check. That would clear that problem instantly, and you wouldn't have to insinuate forgery.


Does that go only for yourself, and do you think we post here because we need our egos boosted?
I think I can speak for all EBVT III posters that we really like the temperament and want to show what it sounds like to other people. Simple as that.


Bill has introduced EBVT III as the result of a long UT journey. The original EBVT has pretty "spicey" remote keys (as in big M3s and correspondingly narrow 5ths.) To make it more suitable as an all-around temperament in any key, he did two changes - the F#3 and the E3 was slightly raised as means to that end. There is only one EBTV sound, one milder (EBVT III) and the spicier EBVT. To me starting to pick out differences inside that sound ans rule them out as neglectable is to take a station wagon and a sedan of the same brand, then point to the differences, and state: is there any use for cars with such small differences? Yes there is: To drive them. As EBVT:s use is to tune pianos.



Emmery, I don't agree. EBVT III is very easy for Bill to tune, and for me (with my short-time experience with EBVTIII) it's easy to get the temperament around the perimeters. But to me, ET is still easier. And that is because I've practiced ET more.
Still, I get better at EBVT III all the time. But I myself can't se the phase when it becomes easier to tune than ET arrive in a nearby future. To get a good EBVT III is a lot of work for us that havent done it for many years. So the customers can be assured that there's no easy money in using that temperament.

You're welcome Bill. Thanks Patrick, I appreciate it, and your words ring true, on all accounts.

DoelKees, Mark, you're welcome. This has been a fun and interesting, and I might add, educational journey.
I am looking forward to it's continuation.

Thank you, Patrick for your remarks. I have to rely on such remarks as yours to avoid the appearance of having to "fight" back. "I am right, THEY are all wrong". We all know what we have going here. It will take time for everyone to get the idea but when they do, they will embrace it. Your application to PTG was discussed at the Chapter meeting tonight and will be expedited.

I was so proud of myself for being able to hear the difference, but then realized I had a very serve dyslexic moment and wrote down my answers exactly the opposite to what I thought. The EBVT recordings just sound better to me.

GP - thanks!
Bill - yes, absolutely! And thank's for keeping me updated on the PTG processing

Ok, all - here we go...

PW's (as in Patrick Wingren's) BLINDFOLD TEST. AT PW (as in Piano World)

GP's test brought new energy into this thread, and that's a great thing! I've been talking for som time now about making an A/B test myself, and
1) GP's contribution,
2) Cinnamonbear's interest,
3) the discussion about the quality of the recordings and tunings
- finally made it happen.

I'm not too organized by nature, and therefore I'm thankful to you all for kicking me in... well, you know where...

This weekend I recorded two pieces in both ET and EBVT III. The recordings are made on the very same piano (a Yamaha C5), within 48 hrs, using two DPA 4011's and the NOS stereo technique. The placing of the microphones as well as the signal path is identical for all versions. This rules out all except interpretation and temperament.

I think this might be a nice complement to GP's test, where the interpretation is the same (due to the nature of the player piano). Some listeners might find my versions of the same pieces in different temperaments too differently played... There are, without doubt, differences.

But I really didn't plan how to play, nor did I switch back and forth in a rush. When the first tuning was done I took a break, cleared my mind (and ears) and went back practicing/exploring the instrument. Same scenario for the next day, with the other temperament. After hours of playing, these versions emerged late at night during both days. They are the result of a musical interpretation on the instrument as a whole - the temperament included.

There are two audio versions of each file:

• Wave format (.wav), CD quality audio (44.1 kHz - 16 bits)
  
• Mpeg-3 format (.mp3), high quality streaming media, 44.1 kHz - 320 kbit/s

If you take the trouble of downloading the larger-sized wave files, it's all worth it. The sound in the wave files is uncompromised, whereas the mp3's (although they are high-quality ones) are compressed sound files, due to the limitations of the format.

The question of this blindfold test is of course familiar by now: "which one is ET and which one is EBVT III?"

If you don't like/care/dare to answer but just would like to describe what you hear in a technical or non-technical way, that is ok too. Look forward to hearing your answers and comments!

Here are the links to the files:

------------------------

1. J.S. Bach (Prelude in E minor BWV 855a), arranged for piano by Alexander Siloti, in B minor:

Temperament A - wave file | ab_01.wav (37.2 MB)
Temperament A - mp3 file | ab_01.mp3 (8.4 MB)

Temperament B - wave file | ab_02.wav (37.8 MB)
Temperament B - mp3 file | ab_02.mp3 (8.6 MB)

------------------------

2. Debussy - Clair de Lune

Temperament A - wave file | ab_03.wav (49 MB)
Temperament A - mp3 file | ab_03.mp3 (11.1 MB)

Temperament B - wave file | ab_04.wav (50.5 MB)
Temperament B - mp3 file | ab_04.mp3 (11.4 MB)

-------------------------

When I just heard the first couple of bars of both pieces I thought clearly
Bach: 1 EBVT Debussy: 2 EBVT. More detailed listening made me unsure again.

Eagerly awaiting the solution.

Kees

Patrick, nice tuning and playing

My guesses are:

Bach 1 - ET
Bach 2 - EBVT

Debussy 1 - ET
Debussy 2 - EBVT

I thought the 2nd version of each piece sound warmer, richer and fuller. I'll admit both versions sound nice though.

Andrew

Quotes by Pppat
"Well, then just a spontaneous question: Do you listen to music in general solely live, or do you play it on the radio, on the internet, from CD:s?

This is mostly processed music. Sound engineers correct false lead singer's notes (which becomes evident to many who hears their artists live for the first time. (but that is sometimes solved by real-time pitch correction. That is how far it have all gone.)

Now, this reluctance of yours bases itself on a suspicion of biased material ( GP's contribution). That is heavily insulting to him, and so It should be. I gave you an suggestion (run them by a sound engineer you can trust) for a validation check. That would clear that problem instantly, and you wouldn't have to insinuate forgery."

My mention of why I won't bother to listen to it because there are no assurances of the recording or the tunings being untampered with, still stands. When comparisons are fairly made in any valid test, the data is collected processed and presented by ubiased people, not clients of someone who has a vested interest in showing the world their "better sounding" tuning. In fact, one favour usually begs for a return, no? As for GrandPianoman, (no insult intended) but the fact remains that myself and most of the readers here don't know him, therefore its quite improper for you to expect us to blindly trust him. Who is the OP anyways, I see no name in the signature or profile? Any valid comparison in public deserves fairness of some kind, and I'm sorry, but there is none here...I believe the whole thread itself is an insult to a properly tuned ET and eveyone who tunes one. You have a lot of nerve saying I'm insulting a sock puppet.


"Does that go only for yourself, and do you think we post here because we need our egos boosted?
I think I can speak for all EBVT III posters that we really like the temperament and want to show what it sounds like to other people. Simple as that."

Then why does the OP hide behind an alias? If you want to show it properly, then learn how to do it fairly. Thats how you earn the respect, if it is indeed deserved.

"Bill has introduced EBVT III as the result of a long UT journey. The original EBVT has pretty "spicey" remote keys (as in big M3s and correspondingly narrow 5ths.) To make it more suitable as an all-around temperament in any key, he did two changes - the F#3 and the E3 was slightly raised as means to that end. There is only one EBTV sound, one milder (EBVT III) and the spicier EBVT. To me starting to pick out differences inside that sound ans rule them out as neglectable is to take a station wagon and a sedan of the same brand, then point to the differences, and state: is there any use for cars with such small differences? Yes there is: To drive them. As EBVT:s use is to tune pianos."

Poor analogy in my opinion. My point about EBVT (I,II,III) was that nobody can tell the difference in any way between the 3 if the music does not include the 2 slightly changed notes. You claim one is spicier, I say maybe, only if the music uses the slightly changed note(s) that makes it so. (ET is what it is...in every key...a huge advantage in my opinion) With the vehicles you mention, there are at least some differences, and you would have to be blind to not see it.

"Emmery, I don't agree. EBVT III is very easy for Bill to tune, and for me (with my short-time experience with EBVTIII) it's easy to get the temperament around the perimeters. But to me, ET is still easier. And that is because I've practiced ET more.
Still, I get better at EBVT III all the time. But I myself can't se the phase when it becomes easier to tune than ET arrive in a nearby future. To get a good EBVT III is a lot of work for us that havent done it for many years. So the customers can be assured that there's no easy money in using that temperament. "

You may have misunderstood my statement, ET is harder to tune than EBVT's. This is not just my opinion, several papers have been written by top respected tuners over the years stating that a properly tuned high quality ET is the hardest temperament to tune, hands down. Tuning anything other than ET is either done for the sake of a different/better sound (for the music), or as a short cut. If a client can't clearly tell the difference (in sound), then it would not be out of line for them to think you took the easy route, avoiding the more difficult temparament.

If this was a comparison of some important scientific process and presented this way to the public it would be beyond laughable. You do not make a questionable presentation, with unverifiable data, by an unamed poster who is also the client of the tuner, and then ask the very people who's opinion you solicit, to do cartwheels to validate it, or check that the recordings were done fairly. The tunings themselves even bring up questions. Was the ET done in 15 minutes and the EBVT done in 3 hours? How much effort was put into the rest of the tuning, unisons ect...?

I could very easily tune either of the said temperaments putting my own "shine" on the ET and post it here, and I'm sure Bill would be raising his eyebrows and asking the same questions I am. All I'm doing is informing the less informed about how a proper Pepsi Challenge is done.


Completely useless in my opinion for anything other than shameless puffery. The sad thing is that if the temperament truly has merit, Bill certainly knows where and how it can be presented. Why not do something similar to the ETD/Aural tune offs in years past? A lot of care went into those comparisons being on a level field.

If you listen exclusively to Ligeti's first piece of Musica Ricercata it would indeed be hard to tell the difference even between meantone and ET.

I took a break from practicing for the tuning exam today and tried to tune EBVT and found it harder than ET. It's also not trivial to tune by machine, so I don't think EBVT is a manifestation of Bill's laziness, as you seem to imply.

Kees

While we're splitting hairs, Patrick: I haven't made up my mind yet, but one thing that I did hear is that you missed a natural sign. The descending line of the left hand at the beginning of Clair de Lune should run
Bb3, A3 (natural), Ab3.

Hooray, at least I can spot a 100 Cent difference.

Excellent music, Patrick! I keep practicing the Bach-Ziloti piece and it is nowhere near as smooth sounding as you make it.

I received a ZERO on GP's recordings...at least I heard the differences clearly. Let's see what happens on your recordings (well-done, by the way).

Bach-Ziloti
Temp A EBVTiii
Temp B ET

Debussy
Temp A ET
Temp B EBVTiii

To muddy the waters even more, here is the first section of Chopin's Tristesse Etude 10 3, tuned as best I can in the two tunings in question - at least I know which is which this time. It is quite the amateur recording when compared to the most excellent ones posted previously.

Tristesse A
http://www.box.net/shared/lxnlsd2xnh

Tristesse B
http://www.box.net/shared/k905npqnlm

PIPE ORGAN effect
http://www.box.net/shared/ajdo60tzg0

Glen

With some exaggeration it sounds like A is played on an old badly tuned upright and B on a freshly tuned concert grand.

Kees

Mark, there is actually a story behind that natural sign. My first edition of Clair de Lune (bought over 25 yrs ago) had no natural sign at that spot, and although my later encounters with that music indeed has A natural, I learned to like the diatonic feel in the opening so much that I still play it that way - and steer any critique on that decision towards the editor

I also like the fact that F7 doesn't appear until the recapitulation in the end. It makes that dominant chord very powerful.

Implying this about Bill and GP is a real low mark, Emmery. It lands right on par with your earlier insinuations about tuning EBVT III as a schortcut to earning money more easily.



Yes, for some reason you continue to think that the trend of more people getting good experiences from EBVT III will work against ET. I think that's sad.

Those in this forum that know GP's true identity repeatedly state that they understand why he uses a signature. If he is in the position where a full disclosure isn't an option, why does that make him a sock puppet? Maybe my english isn't strong enough, but that expression seems to mean that an online identity is used to deliberately deceive an online community. Is this what you mean? If so, that would be yet another low mark.


...and playing the melody line of the A part in the tune "One Note Samba" (utilizing only two different notes), hardly nobody can tell any temperaments aside. What is your point again?



Nobody is soliciting you, Emmery, nobody is in your face about this. It is you yourself who willingly comes back to this thread with your packet full of a lot of negative energy, and I really can't understand why.

Look at your lines in this post and in your former posts above. They breath of mistrust, they imply all kinds of not-so-nice things about quite a few of the participants. You constantly try to undermine what this thread is all about: people from different parts of the world believe that they've found something very exciting, and want to share that with the community.

This might sound rude, but nobody called you in to defend ET. In fact, the temperament handles that quite well on its own, it doesn't need any help from self-appointed authorities. This agitation of yours must be stemming from something else. I guess it's from fear of some kind, I can't see why you otherwise would be so upset about this thread.



No, that's not all you are doing. You are also trying to take the joy of discovery away from a lot of excited people. I fail to see why EBVT III is threatening you. There will be no verdict that obliges you to switch temperaments. Why not just let EBVT III be?

And please do, if you find the time. Please post both temperaments with or without your own "shine" on the ET. Have you tuned EBVT III? If not, prepare a lot of time for that temperament, 'cause it's not going to be a walk in the park.

Sound examples naturally not demanded to post here, but that would be a humble and symphatetic way of contributing constructively, instead of putting all your energy into tearing down other people's efforts.



This has been done already, if I'm not wrong? Bill has presented EBVT III side by side with ET at the PTG convention. What more do you need, and why relate to standards of a scientific research, when none of us sound file posters have described the tests as anything such?
"Completely useless in my opinion for anything other than shameless puffery.". This about the sincere efforts of inspired, devoted forum participants. Who has the nerve, Emmery?