Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum My Piano in the "Equal Temperament via Marpurg 'Quasi' ET"

Over the weekend, I had the pleasure of having Bill Bremmer visit and tune both my pianos in the "Equal Temperament via Marpurg 'Quasi Equal Temperament". My player piano tech was also here doing some work on both player systems. The end result of Bill's work was a very enjoyable and pleasant sounding piano. What impressed me was that the tuning/notes seemed to just "float" in the air when we had the LX play. Bill expressed it as "the notes just hang there". I would also say it has a certain "stillness" type quality to it. All in all a beautiful sounding temperament, and another tuning that I can use with my ETD when I tune my pianos, as I have all 88 figures taken from Bill's Sanderson Accutuner IV. The stretch for this temperament, compared to EBVT III is a lot less...C8 is at 44 instead of 76 for example.

I was fortunate to have a new/used pair of Earthworks QTC 40 mics connected to a Tascam DR-60D field recorder and a Canon Vixia Camcorder. What is nice about the Tascam, is that I can go directly to the Canon Vixia from the mics, no syncing necessary. The quality of that combo is far superior to the built-in mics of the Canon, however, the direct feed from the mics to the Tascam is definitely better. Because I went from a .wav file to an .mp3 for the direct files, the audio for the Video is actually better.

I recorded and used the Canon Vixia for the full tuning that Bill did on my 1927 M&H RBB 7ft Grand. Right after he finished, I turned on the all the equipment and used the LX to record several Jazz pieces without stopping. These were also recorded directly to the Tascam via the mics.

Below are the 3 video files that the Canon made of the appx 44 min tutorial from Bill. Also included is the video of the jazz pieces, and the direct high end sound files of all 4 videos.

My piano tech also installed a "Touchrail" in the M&H. You can see it in the videos. What a huge, positive difference this made to the player systems, especially the Ampico roll system since it does not have the ability to adjust individual notes. The LX has that ability to adjust each note for evenness, however, the Touchrail also improved it's playback. What a great invention by Scott Jones. www.pitchlock.com I should add that Scott recommends a thorough Protek of the action when installing the Touchrail, which Randy did.

Once I go over the tuning on the M&H, will post some Ampico rolls, and I think you will hear how expressive the Ampico is now. The Touchrail allowed us to reduce the overall vacuum of the Ampico, which translated into improved dynamic contrasts and better expression of what is on the rolls. With the LX, the Touchrail allowed me to reduce by at least 4-5 clicks on the amount of power for each note, compared to what it was before the Touchrail.

Bill, thanks again for your excellent work, and a thank you to Randy Cox, one of the best!



Bill's Video Tuning Sequence for the ET via Marpurg Temperament








Video of the LX www.live-performance.com playing some Jazz files played by M. Garson, after the tuning. There are some unisons that are not spot on due to time constraints. The video is in 2 sections. I will add the 2nd section when it's finished uploading to YouTube...added now.




[video:youtube]http://www.youtube/watch?v=A83KzbP6SUQ&ns=1[/video]




Direct High End Stereo Files

1. Sound file of the tuning video https://www.box.com/s/l0fyg1ln6j23kkv5wt8a

2. Sound file of the Jazz selections https://www.box.com/s/poyavn1invgree1jano3


FLAC file of the Jazz pieces https://www.box.com/s/8mdelydrgrfatc63lyvk

WIth apologies, I was expecting to be more enthusiastic, but BIll it is just IMPOSSIBLE to tune the high treble as you do, the pin have to be set while there is enough energy.
It is heard later in the music played - the only note that sound real to me is the B7
.
The effect you are listening in the treble is audible without playing the bottom notes.

The main problem with that bump method on the lever is that it is eventually possible on an instrument that is tuned daily and need no control on the front segment (I make efforts, there !)

If not we are purely guessing where the front segment is at the end.
SO the complete motion when bumping the lever that way addresses the "front segment tuning" , if it was not tuned during the hammer motion, it have to be checked.

We cannot count only on the pin to even the tension, unfortunately.

In the end as soon as we are in front duplex zone, the tuning of the front segment is absolute necessity,it clears the tone and give the wanted sparkle.

This is what you see with the up or down moves that some tuners do at the end of the manipulation.

On an optimally set pin/wire system, when the lever is slighly raised, the tone follows, if not there is less tension than wanted in the front segment and then it lowers the energy by absorbing some of it (plus it will "give" when a too hard blow will be played)

To have optimum energy produced by the piano (his is AUDIBLE, not just a theoretical nebulous idea) the upper part, pin and wire, must be tense to the point that a little more and the note will raise.
This simply add firmness to the wire fixture, and then helps the tone.
You can absolutely feel that with the tone the tuning pin makes when you put the lever on it.

It makes it difficult to lower a note (BTW I believe that Pianoman have used some "slow pull and that now the pin setting is firm on his piano, as it can be seen in the videos it is not so easy to lower some notes, the pin really "grips")

That light method rob some energy, while it is available, may be also the cause of that "blotting" of the attack .

Of course the unison stabilize and couple, but the initial energy have not been totally reflected, some have been lost in the front segment.

If not enough time, the only choice for the tuner is to play harder, more, or use test blows, but it is not as precise as direct torquing of all the upper part of the sounding system.

Well Isaac, I totally disagree because that is the way I have tuned for 34 years. I accept that for some people, a slow push and pull works but I prefer the impact method which causes all segments of the string to move at once.

Thank you Grandpianoman for taking the time to create and post these videos.

Of course, many thanks to you Bill as well for demonstrating and explaining your ET via Marpug tuning sequence!

Michael Staples
Associate member PTG

I like the hammer technique.

I knew it!!
Grandpianoman had something up his sleeves!

Many thanks to Bill and GPM for making these recordings and putting them up here.

I have a question.

Does anyone else perceive the top-most octave, especially around F7 to G#7, over-stretched? To me, they sounded really sharp relative to the temperament octave and clusters. While Bill was tuning them, going past C7, I was wondering: "Why so sharp all of a sudden? Where is this going?" And it sounded as if the piano was already very strongly stretched before-hand.

I'm really just wondering, though. I'm not the professional... If the question is a bother, please ignore.

Mark, you are spot on about that area being sharp/to sharp.

From F#7 and up certainly sounds too sharp to me as well.

Hello everyone...just a quick check in to the post.......I am wondering if what you are hearing is also a thinning of the sound up there....the reason being, we forgot to put the cheek blocks back in before Bill started....the treble section was not in the ideal place....as soon as I put the cheek blocks back in yesterday, the tone improved, and seemed to further improve with the whole piano after I put the 2 screws back in the blocks, along with the fallboard. The correct position did improve the treble section due to the strike point...anyone venture a guess as to why securing the keybed to the bed of the piano by the 2 cheek block screws, improved the overall richness of the whole piano tone?

As far as the stretch, when I have EBVT III on there....C8 is 76.5....ET via Marpurg is 44...perhaps some voicing is in order as well. There is far less stretch in the whole piano with this Marpurg. . I am going to tune the piano again using Bill's figures with the Verituner Ipad...let's see if it's still sounding too sharp.

I'm surprised that the piano was tuned without the cheek blocks in. There is a big loss in power and possibility of knocking when they are not in. Plus the strike point not being where it should be certainly does not help the tuner to make the best job.

As far as how sharp it sounds..... to me it sounds too sharp. Your numbers don't match what my ears are hearing. But it is a well known fact that different tuners hear the top octave differently.

I did not listen to all three videos, just ramdomly looked around. I use a similar jerking, bumping etc... method as Mr. Bremmer does, and have been for 27 years. And my tunings are quite stable. But it is a well known fact that different tuners use different techniques with equally good results.

All the best.

Thanks Bill and GP...

I had been moving in this direction on my own, until Bill posted the details of what he's showing here. Since then, man, I've been doing this in its utter simplicity. Every piano I walk away from is getting serious client wows.

It works, and its musical, and, yes it's well stretched. I remember a similar real turning point in my tuning a while ago...David Andersen was giving a tuning class to the Boston Chapter at NBSS...another well stretched dude...

In the course of tuning octaves into the treble, he tuned an octave in the 6th octave where he wanted it, then thought about it for a second, bumped it down to the "normal" octave (whatever that means...meaning how tuners are taught to do these stretches to pass whatever). He stopped and turned to the class and said "what do you think of this octave". I'm sitting there squirming in pain in my chair saying to myself "man, its F%*#'in flat". Up to that point "tuners" had gone as far as to tell me there was something "wrong" with my hearing, as I was vocally looking for something their tunings were not providing for me. Not so, man...tie the whole keyboard into one consonant, resonating whole...yeah!!!

Not only that, it works great on small pianos.

Jim Ialeggio

Jean, I just input the figures Bill gave me for Marpurg...indeed there are about 5 notes in the 7th octave that arre about 4-5 cents sharp, C 8 included. In the next few days I am going to tune it with the Ipad Verituner and Bill's figures....will record some rolls and a few LX pieces.

Thanks GP!!!

Thanks again and all the best.

Thanks Jim, I agree with you but I also know there are differences in opinion on that. Let me address the comments in the order that they came;

Hammer technique: Slow pull or impact? I started out as a slow pull tuner in 1969. I think that is anyone's instinct to want to turn the tuning pins. Then, in 1979, I attended my first PTG convention where Jim Coleman, Sr. and the late George Defebaugh lectured on tuning.

They both emphasized the importance of a pitch correction before attempting a fine tuning. They used muting strips throughout the piano as you see that I do. I used a calculated program before I started the video to get the piano close, even though it was at pitch and Grandpianoman had also used a calculated program before that to do the same.

Once I had seen that process, to essentially tune virtually every piano at least twice, I adopted it and have continued to do it that way now for 34 years. I often see people claim that a single mute method is better but for me, that is far more tedious and stressful than using the muting strips, so I continue to do it that way. There is no reason, however that the tone cluster approach has to be done with muting strips. It can also be done with single mutes.

As for the hammer technique, I recall seeing both Jim and George use what looked like Karate chop strokes on their tuning hammers. They both had vertical pianos for their demonstrations and placed their tuning hammers at 2 o'clock and instantly tuned each string to pitch with a single stroke! That was astonishing to me but I quickly found that I could do that too and never used the slow pull method again.

If it were true that it doesn't work, there would be no such thing as an impact type tuning hammer! I could not survive in business, let alone pass my exams and go on to give exams and all that is involved with that, be a concert technician, etc., if an impact style technique did not work. One simply has to use the kind of technique that works for one personally and stay with it.

Cheek blocks: The Mason & Hamlin is not like the Steinway where the cheek blocks absolutely must be in place. The player technician had also been working on the piano, I had my mind on the tuning, so I really did not give that any thought although I normally would have if I had been the only person working on the piano. I also noticed some weakness in the high treble but I was busy making a demonstration video, so I was not going to stop and check on things like that.

The player technician still had some details to complete, so I am not even the person who replaced the fallboard or anything else. I was there solely to tune the piano and nothing else.

How much is a proper amount of stretch? There is no wrong or right answer to that. In the end, tuning the piano is an irresolvable dilemma because of both the Pythagorean Comma and inharmonicity. The Comma requires intervals to be tempered rather than be pure. Well Temperament uses a mix of pure and tempered or in the case of the Victorian style WT I most often use, two pure 5ths, some 5ths less tempered than in ET and some 5ths tempered a little more than in ET.

ET, of course is seen and mostly insisted upon as the ultimate compromise because it distributes the Comma equally in the smallest amounts possible to all 12 5ths. On one hand, that works, more from a scientific angle than a musical one but it works. Here, I use a tiny variant of ET where I cause the 4ths & 5ths to beat equally and to beat equally with the stretched octave. It is a 4:2 octave. That is rather conservative. Most concert technicians use a wider octave than that.

If you want pure 12ths, for example, you have to have a wider central octave than a 4:2. So, my central octave is anything but highly stretched. It is very nearly but not quite pure.

The 4th, 6th and 8th partials (which correspond to a double octave-5th and triple octave) are all audible everywhere from the low bass all the way to at least the 5th octave. If one were to tune 2:1 octaves throughout the whole piano, single octaves would sound perfectly pure, yes, but double octaves would be narrow, octave-fifths would be even narrower and triple octaves would be narrow to the point where they would beat objectionably.

Therefore, some kind of compromise is in order. Some technicians like to make double octaves be pure. The "mindless octaves" approach I have used for some 30 years has double octaves slightly wide and the octave-fifth still slightly narrow but both intervals tempered equally. Therefore, the pure octave-fifth style that many people like is actually more stretched than what you hear in these videos.

I actually aim for the pure triple octave. To get the triple octave to be pure, the two single octaves below it must be stretched to some degree. So, that means that starting at F6, you can hear a slight beat in the single octave. That being said, it is at that point in the piano where the dampers usually end and the reason for that is that the sustain is so short. Therefore, a slight beat in a single octave from F6 to the top does not sound objectionable to most people.

There will, however always be people for whom it does sound objectionable. The PTG exam requires 2:1 octaves for the 7th octave. The tone cluster technique can be used to tune any type of octave that one desires. If 4:2 octaves are preferred, simply play the note that lies a M3 below the bottom note of the octave. When the octave is a perfect 4:2, the cluster will just "hang there" (as I think of it) or "float" as others have described it. If 2:1 octaves are desired such as for the tuning exam, use the note that lies a M10 below the bottom note of the octave.

I have experimented with all kinds of stretch scenarios. One must keep in mind that there is generally a natural tendency for the ear to want to hear higher pitches sharper than they would be theoretically. The more stretch there is in the octaves, the more it satisfies that desire. Just think of how on top of the pitch you may hear violinists play in their upper registers or operatic sopranos sing. Stretching of the octaves in the piano goes along with all of that, not against it.

Typically, I have done the following using the direct interval method with my ETD: from F6-B6, pure triple octaves. C7-E7, pure triple octave-fifths. F7-B7, pure quadruple octaves. C8: pure quadruple octave-fifth (C8 is in perfect tune with F3). That leaves those last several notes in the +50 to +60 cent range and C8 at about +75 cents. So, the tuning you hear in these videos is far more conservative than that!

Believe me, I have heard tunings by concert technicians that exceed what I said above by 20 cents or more. What encouraged me the most to use the highest justifiable amount of stretch possible (meaning that the values actually come from the temperament octave itself, not just out of thin air) is the feedback from concert artists and a comment I well remember from the stage and sound technician of the concert hall I have served for more than 20 years now, "You are the first piano tuner I ever heard tune those high notes where my ear really wanted to hear them".

So, I will continue to do as Steinway as a company does and go with what the people who actually use the pianos I tune say as opposed to what other piano technicians say. If you like what I do, that is fine with me but if you try to tell me that what I am doing is wrong, couldn't work, wouldn't work and should not be attempted, then I won't give your comments any serious consideration.

No one is perfect and no piano will ever be perfect in every respect. We all have to find what works for us individually and what works well for the majority of our clients but also be able to adapt to specific requests.

For a period of over 20 years, I outright refused to tune any piano in ET. Now, I have found a close approximation of ET that is not only "under the radar" of the PTG exam tolerances but which also possesses its own magic. So, when I get a specific request for ET (which is quite seldom) or I think that the music to be played may best be served by ET as in the case of the March 10 Jazz concert that was captured on video, I will use the ET via Marpurg tuned with the tone cluster method.

You may be interested to know that I also use the tone cluster method to tune the EBVT III. With its many equally beating intervals, the tone cluster technique tunes them all perfectly to where chords just hang there in complete stillness and music just "floats" out of the piano!

Next week, I have to tune the piano for the opera rehearsals. I will use the ET via Marpurg for that because I know that the artistic director is squeamish about non-equal temperaments. I think it is ironic that he is because the usual concert technician for symphony concertos always puts a bit of Reverse Well in the temperament and uses stretch that can't be justified in any way if you ask my opinion of it.

Several months ago, I got an urgent call from a recording studio that could not handle the tuning that was on the piano. The piano had last been tuned by that same symphony technician. The A4 pitch was spot on but the octave to A3 was at least 1 beat per second wide. The temperament was fairly even but still had that slight Reverse Well character to it. All octaves up and down were progressively wider. When I got to G7 and above, I found notes that were not just a little too sharp but the wrong notes entirely! 100-150-200-250 to 300 cents sharp of the highest amount of justifiable stretch! (This is no exaggeration!)

It took several attempts to lower the pitch of those strings! They just kept creeping back way too sharp because of how unbelievably sharp they had been tuned. It was a wonder to me that no strings had been broken.

There used to be an old blind tuner in town but who passed away several years ago. I could always tell that he had been the last person to tune the piano. Reverse Well temperament and the last several notes at least 200 cents too sharp. There was often a string or two broken and missing from that section. So, if you think what you heard on these videos was too sharp, what I did last Saturday pales in comparison to what some other professional piano technicians do every day.

By my own standards, it was a restrained and very conservative amount of stretch. By PTG exam standards, the top octave would have generated "errors" but considering the tolerances and only 12 notes tested as "High Treble", it would still have remained within "passing" range.

One final comment on what Jim I. had to say about small pianos. They often have higher inharmonicity, so getting the high treble really up there to match what the poor little piano has to offer can really make such a piano sparkle like a gem!

Every Mason & Hamlin grand that I have seen has the action positioned only by the cheek blocks, just like Steinways, even the one I have that used to have an Ampico mechanism. What makes this one special?

It is entirely possible that since I lowered that section of the piano about 25 cents from where it had been, that those notes crept sharp again as they did (but to a much larger degree) in my previous post about tuning a piano in a recording studio.

BDB, I see that you are always right on it. My bad. I just went to the piano and started tuning. I had not removed the cheek blocks and did not even know where they were at the time.

Another dissertation... I read the first few paragraphs. Then quit.

For the purpose of the video? Would you not want your best performance as a tuner to be displayed? You tuned the last octave with the action not aligned? And way sharp?

I have been comtemplating putting up a video of myself tuning, and you have given me confidence.

Sounds to me that you were more interested in making a video, commendable as that may be. But now you are just making excuses.

All the best.