Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum Anti-EBVT Conundrum Rant

Reading this discussion, it would be possible for someone to assume that the only two possibilities are ET or EBVT... Just like some of the older books that assumed that there was only mean tone or ET. There is a whole bunch of other possibilities between ET and EBVT.

Realizing that one of the biggest reasons for the preference for ET from players may be due to the training from piano tuners over the past decades, I find it valuable to begin the journey (back) to tonal tunings with something with a bit less "spice".

Ron Koval

In addition to the ET, Your Stienway "Oh!" also has bobbling hammers!

More probaly wav to mp3 effect but the piano was not finished. you are welcome to provide your samples

Chris, it sounds from your report as though you got it. I am eager to hear what you think of the tuning today as you put it through some more paces. I say that because, even though I immediately responded positively to EBVT III on my piano, I had to "sleep on it," before I really started to understand what I was hearing and how to approach my playing with it. In fact, over the months, as I would get out pieces that I had shelved for a while, I would sometimes get disturbed by what I heard, and then it dawned on me that that aspect of the sound was exactly the clue I needed to work with in conceptualizing and realizing the interpretation. I would say, don't avoid music in the remote keys; rather, explore it carefully. If you are accustomed to ET and very familiar with your musical expression in it, and on a familiar piano that you play like wearing comfortable shoes, your new EBVT III might seem like you rearranged the furniture. Personally, I found the change exciting and refreshing. Perhaps you could record a few tunes and post them in the "My Piano In EBVT III" thread. I would love to hear Mompou!

--Andy

P.S.--Ron, I did mention a special Valotti tuning up top.

I gave it a 6-month trial. (There were a couple of quick clean-up tunings during that time.) I think I can say that I myself am not a convert to EBVT III, but I can see why others might like it (see my prior analysis below). I'd have no problem tuning it on a customer's piano if they requested it. At the same time, I don't think I'm going to push it unless a customer asks.

ET went back on my piano today. There are a couple of pieces in my current studies that just sound too far out, and I couldn't take it any more. At least I gave it a try.

Recently, as a sort of thank you for sticking by me during my recent medical problems, as well as for satisfying my own curiosity, I tuned 3 pianos at a greatly reduced cost for a music store. I decided to try one example of each of the three major types of temperament:

Pythagorean - Charles E Moscow Equal-beating Pythagorean Temperament of 1895

Meantone - One-tenth comma meantone

Well - Equal-Beating Valotti Temperament III

Now these pianos were each raised more than 1/2-step, they are on the floor where they will be moved around alot, they are new and still settling in, and they are exposed to door traffic in the winter. So, I don't expect them to stay perfect for very long.

While the tunings were reasonably fresh, I asked a very good, classically-trained, professional jazz pianist to please try each of them and give me opinions. I stated that is was perfectly OK to absolutely despise any or all of them. I just wanted honest feedback from someone I respected.

The results were not what I expected.

I personally have become rather partial to the one-tenth comma meantone. This pianist really disliked this temperament.

The pianist very much enjoyed playing on the Equal-beating Pythagorean Temperament (especially various arpeggios and runs), and played the EBVT III piano the longest (seeming especially to enjoy exploring chords and harmony).

If I had any tendency to subconsciously influence the outcome, it would have been toward the modified meantone. Yet surprisingly (to me), the Pythagorean and Well examples seemed to be preferred.

Of course, this is only one test with one jazz player. But, it has given me something to think about.

At first I also was hesitant to seriously consider tuning in other temperaments. ET is probably the most difficult to master because of all the possible checks one can use to verify it. Edit:I invested alot of myself learning ET. But over time, I started thinking a little differently.

If string players, such as guitarists, can routinely use alternative tunings in order to get certain musical results, and nothing is thought of it... nothing is thought of it at all... maybe pianists and piano players should have that same option. As long as the tension on the various strings does not vary too much from ET, no harm will come to the piano. And, the tuning is easily changed back to ET if the UT is not liked.

Just my $0.02.

I think the pianist would react more to differences in the voicing than the tuning. What types of pianos were tuned for this trial and what were their tonal characteristics? It would be interesting to know.

Guitars and pianos are apples and oranges, and while just about every (even wannabe) guitar player tunes their own guitar, very few pianists do the same with their instruments. I would venture to guess over 90% of guitarists either use an electronic tuner or simply tune the guitar to itself using standard procedured to do so (eg. open A tuned to fretted A off E string expanded up from string to string). Fret positions are a straight line also, so any varience in string inharmonicity cannot be perfectly tuned out on conventional guitars.

The type of precision and stability we get on piano strings far exceeds any guitar I have handled. I put an ETD at finest setting on my guitar and I was amazed how even the slight varience in pressure of my finger (on the same fret position) jerks the spinner around way beyond what is acceptable on piano tunings.

Very few people can tell the difference between mild temperament variations on pianos...it is ludicrous to think the average listener will pick up on a 1 or 2 cent tweak of a note in musical context...smoke and mirrors is what its mostly about.

I don't see any rule that says pianos are to be tuned in ET and ET only. Variety is the spice of life.

Variety is fine...as long as its tasteful, othersise it can be hideous.

As in all art forms, quite true. I am glad though that are consists of all the colors of the spectrum, and not only the "approved" ones.

Taste is a very subjective term.

Variety IS the spice of life!
(But, please hold the curry.)

The Equal-beating Pythagorean temperament was used on a Weber console.

The 1/10th comma meantone was used on a Story and Clark console.

I think the EBVT III was used on a Bergman console.


I Expected the results to be:

1/10th comma meantone the winner

EBVT III a close second

I expected the Equal-beating Pythagorean Temperament to be disliked. It seemed dry and clinical. It didn't seem warm and expressive. But, the expansion of the temperament seemed to work well in all areas of the piano and the piano sounded very much in tune "globally", not just "locally." If you refer to the rollingball.com site, it states: "Moscow sought 'the easiest to tune equal-beating temperament ever devised' --and had no problem selling this temperament to musicians and calling it equal temperament in 1895." www.rollingball.com

Instead, it seemed that EBVT III and EBPT were both very much preferred, and the 1/10th CM was very much disliked.

Emmery, this pianist was hardly the average player. I still don't see why pianists should not be able to take advantage of alternative tunings if they are harmless to the piano.