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

Bill, GPM, from your comments it seems I nailed it.

I don't want to get my main point lost though, that this is a 100% a machine tuning, and EBVT can be machine tuned with high quality results. When tuning I just stopped the display for every note (wearing earplugs) and did not listen to anything.

After I was done I went over Bill's 21 page tuning instructions and found a few faults. Double checking with tunelab it turned out those faulty notes had drifted. When retuning them with tunelab again they were in complete accord with the EVBT instructions.

Kees

Hi guys! It's been a long time since the last time I posted in PW.

It took me 3 whole days to read all posts in this thread. It's really amazing.

Kamin disapeared for the A/B tests! All along with his perfect pitch. I was waiting for him to come in and enlighten us mortals about the uggly dissonances and unbalanced intervals he only can hear in those EBVT III recordings. But to my surprise he didn't answer.

Much to the credit of Bill statement that they (the ET only tuners) won't accept the challenge.

Also UnrightTooner was quiet! The only one able to tune 15/16 beat rate ratios! The one able to tune a smooth progression of fiths (fourths) in the temperament octave. He was unable to distiguish the presence of pure and tempered 5ths/4ths in the uneven EBVT III temperament.

Not to speak about all the other ET partisans: BDB, Emery, Mark, Stopper, Capurso, and forgive me if I inadvently forget someone else...

But I shouldn't blame anyone because I my self neither could tell which was which. At least by simply hearing these recordings on my computer.

When I play music on my piano, I can immediately tell if it is tuned in ET or in WT. Also if I play a run of chromatic M3s I hear ipso facto the eveness of ET or the uneveness of EBVT III.

But when hearing those recordings... I was not 100% sure.

What is outrageous is that those same recordings were blamed previously when it was clearly said they were EBVT III tunings, and were qualified as harmony destroyers, unbalanced, wrong, mistuned, etc.

How is it possible for those same recordings to become undistinguishable from ET? What kind of magic has operated here?

The answer is simple: prejudices! Only prejudices that cloud their ears and prevent them to hear music!

Bravo GPM and Bill! You've made your point! Those who are against UT could not say nothing anymore! They had to keep quiet!


The first WT I tuned was, if I remember right, Broadwood Best. Then I tuned Moore and Moore and I liked it very much. But I was and still am unable to tune it by ear. Only with my Verituner I can tune those WT. But ETDs have limitations. I wanted to tune aurally.

Then I discovered EBVT III and I began soon to tune it by ear. Someone here has posted that it will take 4 months to learn it. I disagree, for me it was question of some 3 or 4 tunings and voila: I was tuning by ear. It is not that difficlult, the main differences from ET are: 6 bps F3-A3, pure 5ths/4ths, equal beating fast beating intervals (M3s, M6), equal beating slow beating intervals (P5ths, P4ths): easy done! The rest is done exactly as in ET, I mean 6:3 and 4:2 octaves. Of course you must have tuning hammer technique and all other tuning skills. But if you can tune ET then you can easyly tune EBVT III: there is nothing new in it that you don't already know.

The advantage of aural tuning vs ETD is that it makes possible to tune stretched octaves of different sizes: for example A3-A4 = 6:3, F3-F4 = 4:2, D4-D5 larger than C4-C5, etc. And it makes also easier the tuning of mindless octaves i.e. equal beating double octave/octave + fifths, though this can be done electronically via direct interval tuning, it is cumbersome and time consuming, at least for me with the Verituner.

So here we are, listening to all these people, musicians and tuners, charmed with the expressive musicality of EBVT III and those frustrated "ET only" tuners who have nothing more to argue against EBVT III.

Gadzar,

Shhhhhhhhhhhh! It was just getting quiet in here and easier to sift through all of the garbage reading... Don't stir the pot dude! :-)))

Sorry. I arrived late into this thread and I'm afraid it was all said before I came in. I won't say nothing more.

Maybe off topic, but I heard once that Horowitz took his piano and piano tuner with him everywhere he performed. He preferred a tuning temperament that had a 'rolling' sound to it. I wonder what temperament his tuner used? Does anyone know? Just wondering...

As far as I know, Franz Möhr, Horowitz's tuner-technician, tuned ET using an up a 5th-down a 4th sequence between A3-A4.

A4<-440 hz. fork
A3<-A4 down an octave
E4<-A3 up a fifth
B3<-E4 down a fourth
F#4<-B3 up a fifth
C#4<-F#4 down a fourth
G#4<-C#4 up a fifth
D#4<-G#4 down a fourth
A#3<-D#4 down a fourth
F4<-A#3 up a fifth
C4<-F4 down a fourth
G4<-C4 up a fifth
D4<-G4 down a fourth

D4 must close the circle with A4.

The tuning of all notes is arranged in a way that you first tune a pure fifth/fourth and then flatten it to correctly temper the corresponding fifth/fourth. It is meant to setting of the tuning pins, rendering of the strings and to contribute to a greater stability of the tuning.

The most difficult issue with this sequence is to correctly temper each interval to achieve a real Equal Temperament.

Greetings everyone

To further the understanding of EBVT III, and to give another chance for folks to guess which is which, here is the Jazz version/selection "Oh Danny Boy" played on my piano through the LX playback system. www.live-performance.com

One is in ET, using the Reyburn Cyber Tuner, OCT 5 stretch, and the other is in EBVT III using Bill's live EBVT III tuning figures for my piano, inserted into the Iphone Tunelab. Both selections are the same LX file and have been normalized for volume etc. The corresponding WAV file is also included, which will give you a better quality sound.

Please feel free to comment, and also post what you feel is the ET and EBVT III temperament. Will post the correct answers later in the thread. Headphones are suggested.


1. "Oh Danny Boy" No.1 MP3 http://www.box.net/shared/7bkbzg3j4r

2. "Oh Danny Boy" No.2 MP3 http://www.box.net/shared/ldshlkkarp


1. "Oh Danny Boy" No 11 WAV http://www.box.net/shared/xn3s13b37h

2. "Oh Danny Boy" No.22 WAV http://www.box.net/shared/1mvrhcclb1

OK. I'll be the first guinea pig now that I saw this one posted. I missed the last one because I wasn't reading everything posted. To much garbage to sift through.

1. ET.
2. EBVT III

You know, they both sound very good, all in all. Some out of tune unison's here and there make it more difficult to decipher BUT, I'll be happy to make a fool out of myself if I'm wrong because I am liking the EBVT III more and more all the time anyway. For a while I was not liking it at all.... I am finding it more and more interesting all the time. Basically, I find it a very interesting sounding tuning.

As I said before, there is more than one way to accomplish the same goal. Last week Friday for fun, I tuned using the EBVT III and then checked the tenor section with my RCT set in its normal mode and everything in that section was less than 1¢ off. Most of it was right around 1/2¢ off or less or dead on with my RCT. So, either I tuned EBVT incorrectly, or I tuned it correctly, I'm not sure which being an amateur at this new tuning...

Any Thoughts?

Who else is unafraid of guessing?

Jerry, good for you for being the first one to jump in here! Let's hope more will join you.

I will change my post above to reflect that the ET I tuned for "Oh Danny Boy" was from my RCT, OCT 5 stretch.

Ok. Here I go:

I really dont hear a temperament difference.

But I like more the sonority of the number 2 as a whole, so I'll put it as the EBVT III.

1. ET
2. EBVT III

(Note please that if I were an ET oriented tuner I would attribute the better sonority to ET and I'd conclude exactly the opposite.)

Welcome Rafael,

Thanks for your insights and for your guess. Will post the key later in the post.

Ok. Here I go:

I really dont hear a temperament difference.

But I like more the sonority of the number 2 as a whole, so I'll put it as the EBVT III.

1. ET
2. EBVT III

(Note please that if I were an ET oriented tuner I would attribute the better sonority to ET and I'd conclude exactly the opposite.)



Kees

We'll I'll be, I never thought I would see plagiarism here in PW~!

Hey GP, lol, I could tell which was my tuning the very first notes that were played! There is a "lilt" in the octaves that gives it away immediately but I won't say which is which because I don't want to give it away.

Now, the RCT tuning does have some stretch in the octaves but not as much as I put. When you go on to listen to the whole recording, there is this bland quality to the RCT tuning versus the singing quality in the EBVT III. You hear it in the very highest note of the melody. The EBVT III puts that pitch right wear you want to really hear it but the RCT tuning falls short of that and flat.

Don't get me wrong, both recordings sound just fine. The RCT version is perfectly acceptable. Danny Boy is a singer's song. Think about being the judge at an audition. Both candidates sing very well but one just has that extra quality which makes you choose him over the other.

Now, some people could focus immediately on the octaves that I heard first off had that extra lilt to them and compare them to the other recording where they sounded closer to pure and decide on that factor alone. Some may perceive the lack of texture in what remains as being more to their liking. I'm afraid, however that most people would enjoy and delight in the rich texture provided by the EBVT III.

The extra bit of tension and release in the chromatic modulation that occurs at the end and in other places gives it away too. The RCT version just neutralizes it all. I picked it all up with only the MP3 file on my crummy computer speakers with fan noise in the background.

Rafael, it is SO good to see you back again! It has been far too long! Your perspective on everything is so right on. I would say, however that the reason you don't see much of any comment from Tooner is that he does not have the equipment to listen to all of these various samples. He and some others don't even want to try to make comparisons.



I have read that there was a big seminar with Petrof pianos at Pianos y Organos in Mexico City recently. Did you attend? What do you have to say about it? I vividly recall being to a series of three conferences in Mexico City in 1989-1991. It seemed to me even then that there could be a PTG chapter formed in Mexico City. One person told me, "No, that could never happen".

The boss of the Pianos y Organos store behaved like a plantation owner as far as I was concerned. In a private meeting, he said to the late Danny Boone as I was there listening, "Let me tell you about my people...". He, dressed in his business suit, knew of the superior knowledge and ways of Americans but considered that his "people" could never hold a candle to it. He seemed to want to keep it that way too. The pianos in his store sounded mediocre to downright bad and the concert he took us to featuring a Petrof piano was not impressive.

He did not want technicians to be able to buy tools and supplies at affordable prices. He held out for 100% profits after exchange rates and tariffs on every item and forbade a one time opportunity for a supplier to sell at its normal rates (wholesale prices) in Mexico.

If you attended that conference, I would be most interested to read you comments, perhaps in a new thread.

I have to disagree with you a little bit on that point Bill. But, just a little bit. Although, for the most part, you are correct. Just not with me. I had made up my mind totally at one point that I hated EBVT III. But, I tried keeping an open mind to various possibilities with tuning methods, kept listening, kept trying and kept learning. I still don't have all quite yet but, will keep trying...

Why is it necessary to classify people so? I see a lot of "box thinking" in this thread. Words like "partisan" and the likes.

Frankly, I resent this. Can one not use a forum to learn from one another?

Last December, I actually tuned my parents' harpsichord to (a first attempt at) EBVT III. I actually e-mailed Bill with my feedback, which was NOT all negative. To wit, my parents normally use it for chorales in the closer keys, so they really liked the more harmonious major thirds. However, the more remote keys were (obviously) more colorful, which to my ear, was problematic. A flat major was one of them, but it may have been a mistake in my interpretation of Bill's tuning instructions. So to my mind, there were some positive aspects, some not-so-positive. Certainly I never condemned EBVT III outright.

But somewhere in this thread, I expressed the sentiments that I actually prefer the same type of third in all twelve keys.

And this now makes me an "ET partisan" who won't accept a challenge? And puts me in a box with all those bad ET-only-people? I was actually one of the first to take the test, and I even added a bit of self-irony, because when the results were published, it turned out I got all those answers wrong that I thought were easy!

Why is it necessary to continue with these stereotypes of "us" and "them", "friend" and "enemy" etc. etc.

As a musician interested in piano technology, I find tuning and temperaments really interesting, but I'm afraid this "camp thinking" takes out all the fun in reading these threads. It's a shame that these threads keep returning to offensive-defensive behavior, instead of focussing on the actual matter on hand, namely temperaments!

Bill, I thought the EBVT III only has to do with the temperament octave?

Are temperament and stretch not two independent things?

From what you wrote above, I deduce that that the pipe organ effect is actually ascribable to the right amount of stretch in the high treble, rather than to the type of temperament used - is this correct?

Surely, you could tune the temperament octave to ET, but still use your characteristic amount of stretch? Would this not also give a pipe organ effect?

Or is the pipe organ effect actually a result of both the EBVT III temperament AND the right amount of stretch?

I'm just trying to clarify terminology here. You say that the EBVT puts that top note in the right place. But is it not the stretch that puts the note into place?

Continuing on the road ahead, here is another A/B example.

As in "Oh Danny Boy", this is an LX encoded file played through the LX system. www.live-performance.com I used the RCT OCT 5 for the ET temperament, and the Iphone Tunelab for the EBVT III temperament. Headphones are recommended. Please feel free to comment.


1."Il Postino" No.1 MP3 http://www.box.net/shared/yyd0qx6gxe

2."Il Postino" No.2 MP3 http://www.box.net/shared/upaaya7tbd



1."Il Postino" No.11 WAV http://www.box.net/shared/b4xdakteap

2. "Il Postino" No.22 WAV http://www.box.net/shared/xc809oly0p

For comparison here's the pipe organ effect in just intonation, without doing anything special to the octaves (just beatless sounding).

Pipe organ effect just intonation

It seems much less rich than with EBVT

Kees

Very interesting Kees....in the your EBVT, I hear more sonority, than the just intonation example....that is the same thing I hear live with my piano....the after-sound has a bloom to it, along with the give and take of the harmonies.