Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum Question About Tuning

When I was a student back i the late 70's, I had a tendency to want to tune the highest octaves too sharp. Then, I discovered the "Nadia's Theme Test." This may sound silly, but it worked for me.

Simply take the first few bars of Nadia's Theme and use it to test the highest octaves... D6 to D7, F6 to F7, etc., just by transposing the opening few bars, if you are in doubt about any of the high treble octaves.

This may sound overly simple, but you will know immediately if you hit the mark. The octave will either work, or it wont.

Yes, there are many tunes that begin with an octave upwards. Andersons' "Forgotten Dreams" oscillates upwards and downwards between the notes an octave apart and so also checking the downward motion. It will certainly get them in the ballpark and sounds plausible, even prettier to the uneducated listener.

We always assume we can estimate an octave accurately that way despite how we happen to be feeling at that moment. It is certainly easier to get into the habit of tuning melodically than making the effort to listen closely to harder to hear simultaneous intervals which are played in real music just as often and need to sound equally good. They are based on more scientific principles that are totally independent of how we feel.

Do you ever check the accuracy of melodic intervals? If so, how do you check their accuracy? Isn't it more efficient and certainly much quicker to use those accuracy checks to tune the notes in the first place?

I can be sure that using the more scientific checks will prevent me falling into the trap of tuning sharper and sharper in the upper octaves as I get older and older and older.

Quote:

Do you ever check the accuracy of melodic intervals? If so, how do you check their accuracy? Isn't it more efficient and certainly much quicker to use those accuracy checks to tune the notes in the first place?

I do check the accuracy of the highest notes. For instance, i will quickly check A7 to A6, A7 to A5, A7 to A4, and so on.

But, i do so much work on little Lester "Betsey Ross" spinets, Wurlitzer spinets, Kimballs, Whitneys, Winters... Frequently, there is so much distortion and false beating that the checks alone can be ambiguous on some notes.

The customer is not going to pay for major troubleshooting or even rebuilding of such instruments. Nor should they invest thousands of dollars into a piano worth perhaps hundreds at best. But still,the customer wants a good result.

My suggestion is a good way to "check the checks" in such circumstances.... It is an additional tool to verify what has been done in the highest octave.

This is not "either/or;' this is "and".

Do you not check your aural tunings musically after you are finished? Surely you have your own list of test passages that you use.

For a beginning aural tuner, this can also be a good tool for learning to tune octaves in the very high treble.... until he develops the ability to tune octaves there with certainty on the mid-grade to highest quality instruments..

Joe.
As you know, I usually agree with most everything you write. There is nothing personal about this but you raise some interesting points.

If I have just spent the best part of an hour tuning a piano examining all intervals concerned in detail, why would I re test this by playing tunes which are essentially a random selection of notes and intervals. How many of these tunes would I have to play in order to test all the intervals I have just tuned and know by experience are already optimum?

Even concert grands have contradictory interval tests and we both know by experience how to deal with that in any piano.

Because I complete all my 'work' early each morning, it gives me a leisurely lifestyle that means I am free to cover emergency tunings that might arise. Sometimes, an inexperienced good tuner who has fallen into this soft option of pure melodic tuning ( who hasn't?) is put under pressure to finish a tuning early for some reason or have to work in noisy environs or both. This can have devastating results and an immediate emergency retune is necessary. I am often free to do this and I see these results. We have all here seen the really excessive sharpness of a rushed melodic treble tuning by a tuner of more than 30 years of experience only a few weeks ago on this forum. Good habits should be practiced at all times so that they are automatically in place for those times when conditions are less than adequate.

Those who remember know that a pitch raise on a new spinet can be overstretched in the treble and left that way for practical reasons and when this is done in a showroom, that piano sells first. Such is the attractiveness of excessive treble sharpness to a casual listener. The harshness of over stretched simultaneous octaves is, as you say, not easily heard on such instruments. Over stretching is popular. No doubt.

If I have tuned an octave as far wide as it will reasonably go and still sound clean enough, yet I still want to hear it wider when I play it melodically, what then? This stretching syndrome can get out of hand. The wider we get used to hearing, the wider we want to hear them.

Let me posit that the commonly accepted idea that tuners tune sharper as they get older is not a function of age but of habit.

All of my work is for professional musicians who listen intently for a living. String and wind players, particularly. The vast majority of tuners are hired by pianists, most of whom are not listeners to intonation at this level of intensity and, quite frankly, allow tuners to sometimes get away with murder. Such pianos are rarely played with other instruments. When they are, it is often by young students of wind or string instruments. Don't we have a duty to these young players, whatever the piano, however we feel melodically that day.

I vehemently resist being called an 'artist tuner' this, in my experience usually implies someone who tunes trebled too sharp.

This is not elitist, I have paid my dues with spinets. They naturally tune sharper, why make it worse? All pianos tune out sharp enough already in the treble when played with other instruments without sharpening more. Testing by melodic intervals mostly increases this sharpness unnecessarily. I have also heard flat melodically tuned intervals but that is just as out of tune. Sharpness is more acceptable to the casual listener than being below pitch. It was said ' better sharp than flat' until some wag with a sarcastic sense of the greater truth said ' better sharp than out of tune'.

It is not unusual for the casual listener to perceive an upper note as out of tune. When they do, it is mostly perceived as flat whether it is or not. The tendency then is to continually sharpen until it sounds in tune which, of course, it never will.

I sometimes perceive an interval as narrow, even though it is physically wide. I also know that if I leave it alone and get back to it with fresher ears it is fine. We probably all sense this at some time or other. There are also continual checks on my work by seasoned musicians matching pitches to it. I would soon know if there was a problem.

The idea of stretching for large halls is not currently practiced by anyone I know in major centres of music. Anyone out there still stretching more for large halls? Modern acoustics can make large halls quite cozy, acoustically and even in the great Victorian 10,000 seat edifices, it is not currently practiced. Orchestras would not tolerate it.

Although I tune some of the finest pianos in the world and have been mistaken for a good pianist, I never indulge myself by playing a piano I have just tuned. I have confidence in my work, for one. There simply isn't time, for another and that I am usually surrounded by people who can really play is perhaps the best of many reasons. The moment I finish my work, that piano is ready for the pianist who is about to play it and no one else should touch it. Including me.

"The idea of stretching for large halls is not currently practiced by anyone I know in major centres of music. Anyone out there still stretching more for large halls? Modern acoustics can make large halls quite cozy, acoustically and even in the great Victorian 10,000 seat edifices, it is not currently practiced. Orchestras would not tolerate it. "

Possibly today we have more data to backup that, I remind having tuned pianos that went back from church concerts, and they where clearly raised in the high treble, while the acoustics was just asking for that at tuning time.
(the exact opposite of studio tuning , with tone 'in" he piano miked)

Now that was may be just me at that moment.

I believe, that the tuner can "project" his ear, and "tunes" it to the acoustical behavior of the place, that mean using the return of the sound to evaluate the effect of the tuning a little apart from the piano.

The same may happen in some reverberant room.

Possibly this is implying too much justness variations to be accepteable, I just do not know.

For sure those "extra stretch " that look so appealing are more robbing something than adding it.

But that is not in the high treble that the problems of stretch are the most, way more in the soprano section in my opinion.

It is very possible that tuners have quietened topday (due to the amount of ETD tuinings ?) but many where "inflating" their treble to the max, just to finish with another "attractive spot" in high treble. (in France, it may depend from which school they come from)

possibly I see that as the tuner pushing a little to much the gas pedal, then obliged to brake before the turn

In any case some good amount of self consonance of the piano is to be used so each note is enlighted by enough others.

I have no clue if that is an adequate method but I find intervals mistakes just by playing octaves (unison tuned) , when one sound less full I have to chase for the mistake. The acoustical energy seem to be enough to show if the eveness is respected (on a piano with a decent tone/scale) usual checks confirm that so I use them less and less, only to find the mistakes.

the iH may drive much of that sort of testing so it may be takn with a pinch of salt, certainly, anyway I dont feel I have trouble to know how the treble is to be tuned, so melodic or plain justness both are credible.

most tuners I follow seem to tune the treble the same so I suppose only my appreciation method may differ, certainly I would use more chromatic testing too if the situation ask for that.

Or I am simply basically lazy.

Tuners may develop a knowledge of octaves that imply hearing what the partials are doing, once on the slope with progressive fast beatings the next just consist of congruence ...

Thanks for raising another hoary old saw. That of tuning to the resonances of the room. If there were 88 resonance points near or near enough to all the required frequencies of a piano.... Well, there aren't so we are left with the odd frequency here and there. If we try to match them we would have great unevenness of tone. Surely, if that were ever the case, the course of action, if at all, would be to tune avoiding all natural room frequencies. Take into account the differences in natural frequencies when the hall is full compared to when the hall is empty we are left with notes that are out of tune for no apparent reason.

I just emerged from tuning a piano that was at the side of the stage, covered with a thick fitted quilt and surrounded by music stands and chairs. Plenty room to lift front lid and tune. What price room frequencies now?

Fortunately it's all just another pretension.

And no, Isaac, you are not lazy, just not guilty of over-egging the pudding.

I probably used an improper term, resonances are a hassle, my point was about the reverberation. Of course it change when the room is full hence not so useful to listen for it.

I know I was so used to wait for the tone reflections that I was always not at ease yo tune outdoors, with a very dry tone.

Probably a trick to focus more easily on tone projection..

Hello rxd,

No offense taken I know you are one of the good guys on here... even one of the very best of the good guys. I mean that personally (from what I see on this forum) and professionally.

I use test passages for several reasons. The main reason is...

I want to get the sound melodically into my ear. If I verify whatever interval using aural checks, I want to know how it sounds melodically. I simply want to know.

I have no doubt that if you were presented a piano that was tuned in some UT, you would know immediately the the piano was not in ET merely by playing some passages. You would not need to rely on your aural checks. A lifetime of tuning would make the aural checks almost superfluous to determining if this was ET or not.... or a failed ET attempt by someone.

I also have little doubt that you could tell just by playing whether or not a piano is at A440.

I have spent 35 years getting the sound of the high octaves melodically into my ear... octaves that were first verified by aural checks. When I encounter notes that are so distorted, that have so much false beating at various partials, listening melodically can be another useful tool for verifying the octave.

A phenomena I occasionally encounter when using an ETD is the "odd man out" octave. That is, all the octaves in a particular area are in good tune when set exactly to the ETD, except for one. Maybe a different octave type is needed there, maybe there is some weird thing happening that makes the octave sound bad even though it is correct... whatever... the important thing is "How does the piano sound?"

I would never presume to tune a piano just melodically without the aural interval checks. A tuning should be provable. However, I do remember hearing rumors many years ago when i was a student that there existed tuners in the 19th century that were so advanced, that they did exactly that. And, that they did it well.

This "might" be verified by the Bemetztrieder Temperament of 1808. Quoting the the rollingball.com site:
"A French music teacher, Bemetztrieder regarded singing talent as a prerequisite for tuning, and his tuning method was to temper melodically by ear... "
http://www.rollingball.com/TemperamentsFrames.htm
You can find it in the Well Temperaments section under Bemetztrieder.

Joe , reading you I just do not understand if you use check or an ETD.

"A phenomena I occasionally encounter when using an ETD is the "odd man out" octave. That is, all the octaves in a particular area are in good tune when set exactly to the ETD, except for one".

I noticed similar thing also, but does not seem to encounter that anymore now, may be because I rely to a similar resonance from not to note to decide that justness is OK (I have no ETD to induce me in error, also)

I guess there may be plenty of reasons for the ETD to be perturbated in high treble.

Thanks, Joe for the compliments although I make no pretentions to any skills other than those essential to my job. I'm merely lucky enough to have been in the right place at the right time a few too many times and to associate with helpful people.

I am familiar with the repeated attempts at reconciling static and dynamic intonation over the centuries. Although there much more information now than there was for me 40 years ago, the content of that information remains essentially the same. A study of the work of Frescobaldi will shed light on many aspects. The adoption (more accurately, allowing) of a shifting pitch base is the only answer I have found to resolve the direct conflict between the natural tendencies of harmony and those of melody. This was practiced daily by a broadcasting BBC á capella group I had connections with in the ' 70's. The director was particularly keen on melodic intonation with the result that they lost or gained pitch as they modulated and always returned to pitch at the end of the pieces that did return to the the key they started in. Quite an experience. Don't know of anybody doing it currently.

For many years I have been piano technician for a festival of all types of music that has long standing connections to the proms season. I breakfast, lunch, dine and sup daily with some of today's finest musicians from all styles. Over the weeks, I must associate with 300 of them. in return, I look after 3 'D's for them. As a mark of the esteem they hold for a reasonably competent piano tech, I am given better accommodation than most of them. Just an hour or so tuning a day and occasional coaching of professional ensembles.

Interesting that I drew the short straw and was obliged to tune a fortepiano at A=430 one week, the harpsichord exprtt refused to touch it. Since tuning time with the instrument was extremely limited, I tuned it electronically to my pre-programmed steinway D tuning in the treble and tuned the middle on down in a variety of octave styles to give the illusion of a well constructed mild unequal temperament. All octaves and double octaves were clean sounding and no interval too far from ET Almost exactly the same intonation they had heard from the real D an hour or so before except at 430

You mention stray harmonics. Tone regulation will remove all but the most recalcitrant of them but it reminded me of tone quality. I hear players with poor tone quality but good intonation which makes the experience listenable. I also hear good tone quality with questionable intonation, particularly some violinists but the superb tone quality forgives the intonation.

Gotta go

Isaac,

I am school-trained as an aural tuner using checks. I worked exclusively that way for my first 20+ in business.

I later acquired a Verituner. These days, I will use whatever method, or even various hybrid methods... whatever I feel will give the best result in each particular circumstance.


rxd,

I know that you are a very knowledgeable and successful tuner-technician. But, I do feel that there is benefit to melodic listening as well as using aural checks.

As the saying goes, we can disagree without being disagreeable.

-Joe

Good point. Tune correctly, present room or hall acoustics notwithstanding. (Voicing? That's another matter entirely.)

Sorry, Joe I didn't think I was even disagreeing, merely adding from my own experience. Ultimately, that's all we can do everything else is merely heresay until we experience it for ourselves.

I noticed you directed me to an UT site. I know that if, after tuning ET for how many years, I was to switch to an UT and try to listen melodically with ears infected with ET for so long I would get thoroughly confused.

The tuners using entirely melodic tuning I have also heard of. I have only indirect experience of this. Who knows how good it was and on what authority do they speak. A published book is not necessarily any more reliable a source than a website. This forum, for example.

Some here would get all upset at any constructive criticism of UT's and their being the antithesis of melodic intonation but surely that's not you?

Bill,
Tonal discrepancies do have their effect on pitch perception. Voicing does come into it. I find some quick tone regulation gets at the root of discrepancies in pitch perception as I'm sure you do. Lid up/ lid down has a marked effect. Pianos sound totally different with all the casework o,n better if it's a thoughtfully designed case, worse if it's not. All affects pitch perception. Voicing is not a separate matter at all. It is assential to have the whole piano in order before discussing the melodic results of harmonic tuning.

Over the past few weeks I have spent far more hours listening than tuning in full and empty halls with different pianists in different styles with the piano and it's lid in different positions. In fact I did hardly any tuning at all except concert checkovers and on changeover days when I do my share of blitzing all the practice pianos with local tuners.

I forbid any playing of a concert piano with the lid fully closed and with the lid off unless entirely necessary. I hear the differences and because I am in a consultant capacity have to assume enough of the audience do too. We have a full symphony orchestra for most weeks composed partly of musicians on a summer break from their own orchestras around the world. I have taken a particular interest in the experience of foreign orchestral musicians this year. I am confident that consummate musicians who are particularly sensitive to melodic intonation would let me know if I were not tuning melodically enough.

I am making the assumption that we are discussing minuscule differences here and not the afterthought correction of blatant errors. Since everybody hears differently and at different times under different circumstances and we ate dealing with a temperament, of course I would hear discrepancies. If I really went into it the thorough way I tune with what I have, I would drive myself crazy. At some point I have to tune the thing. It's a job to be done. If it is done right in the first place, random corrections should not be necessary. It shows a distinct lack of self confidence to keep fiddling randomly with a job after it is supposed to be finished.

And all autocorrect devices can go to he'll.

rxd,


Not to be overly relativistic (I hope ), but when it comes to matters of music and tuning, I tend to think more in terms of preferences rather than right and wrong... unless something is just too far out there.

My point was exactly what you said... that you would be able to tell that the piano was not in ET without needing the aural checks. I have no doubt that if you listened melodically, you would know if you weren't in ET. You could use the aural checks to figure out exactly what is different. But, you would be able to confirm whether or not the piano was in ET melodically after a lifetime of tuning in ET.

Btw, it should be mentioned that overstretching isn't only a sin of the high treble. It is also a sin often committed in the low bass.

For some reason I cannot quite fathom, I often find pianos that have been tuned ridiculously sharp at A#7, B7 and C8. And, ridiculously flat at B0, A#0, and A0. The rest of the piano is fine. It almost seems like the tuners were trained to screw these notes up as much as possible.

I've contemplated whether it could be a hearing loss problem. But then, some pianos would only be messed up at C8 and B7. Or only A0. Or A0, A#0 B0, C1, C#1. But no, for some reason, it's always just those six notes.

Hi. Joe.

Rest assured that any hearing loss would be an entirely different thing and show up in an entirely different way.

I agree, others can make basses too wide and trebles too sharp. It only bothers me only when I have to follow them. Lowering high notes is a tough job just before a performance. . We had a tuner started sharpening trebles unreasonably once until we all blitzed him with texts to stop doing it.

Tuning the top notes sharp often robs them of power. I, too have llistened with baited breath at the end of a quiet piece that ends on an upward arpeggio for that last note. They're always in tune but 'only just' any flatness is easily detected in these circumstances but the slightest sharpness is also noticed by an attentive listener. When a friendly shop assistant gives me the right change I will often look at it and say, jokingly,' only just'. Fine tuning is only ever only just. Thats the reason for continually checking it in concert situations.
One cent either way is noticed even by those who never count their change.

With ultra quiet playing we can get away with nuthing, zero, zilch.

I once heard a perfectly well tuned piano playing a single note treble melody against the accompaniment of an extremely sharp saxophone section. It came across as not merely flat but it affected the way I heard the intonation also. This was brought to my attention by one of the student sax players who didnt hear, even on the playback of the casual recording how excruciatingly sharp they were.

My strong believe is that high treble octaves, notes played together, will sound a certain way if the double, triple octave, twelve and twelve and an octave, are on the same line than the precedent note. (this is ET)

The behaviour of the single note when compared to the precedent one is usually enough to have a clue about justness related to the center part of the piano.

Very apparent on good pianos, audible as well on small grands in a less evident way.

The reconciliation of the instrument own acoustic, and intonation is what is perceived there.

I was very aware when doing concert work that some tuning acted as a layer of tone constructed despite the piano own resonance.

That construction may be more or less present, more or less perceived.

Ideally we should be able to keep tuned with the instrument, but there are scaling that does not allows that, too high IH raise for instance. (voicing, too)

Then it is a good pleasure to keep tuning while in peace with the instrument, and what strikes me is that the pianos seem to appreciate that and stay with a nice tone longer then.

Tuning is a little like throwing darts, I believe I have to learned to be confident in the piano ability to catch the pitch at the good height.

Now I may confess that I probably use to the most my "perfect pitch" ability to tune, the use of checks simply reassure me, if I use less 10+-17 checks than before that is because after a few ones that tell me it is OK I find no reason to use them.

chromatic, yes, comparison with the precedent fast beating, yes, but it is very fast done, and when I am confident in my tuning I only need that in case of doubt.

I stopped to be ashamed if a few notes just fall too low, it is due to bridge motion, mostly, and that mean I did not add enough leeway, experience help to reduce that effect to a few notes. For a 436 - 442 tuning I did lately in one pass on a vertical I really "re-tuned" 4-5 notes in the 5 th octave .

Unison work allow to correct such amounts, generally, it is not necessary to do the 2 passes tuning I did before then, unless the piano is a semi tone flat.

Being attentive to energy provide a link to justness, for ET anyway, and probably can be also used for UT's.

the top notes need all the available energy, but coloring them by making them placed in a strong spot (in regard of lower octaves)helps for crispness. the attack being enhanced stabilize faster and makes for a nicer tone.

The result is that less energy is necessary to stabilize unison attack, as the note is immediately in resonances from the other (even when damped)

that may allow more available energy for the sustain.

When the tuned note is in less consonances, it need more primal energy to "self center" itself, so the tone is sort of delayed, less concentrated.

Why are we so piano centric here? I have just finished checking over 8 pianos intended for accompaniment of string and wind players.

Perhaps im misunderstanding and i hope i am. There are enough compromises in pianos anyway ( that's why I don't allow anything less than 7' for any exam purpose) to go searching after resonances in the piano and pitching accordingly. Very few notes have resonances on the piano. To tune to them would produce unevenness of tone apart from the pitch variation. Surely tuning away from such resonances, of at all, makes more sense.

I get to know the postgrad students quite well over the years they are here. I'm not about to play fast and loose with their finals am I? Should I favour some notes over others simply because they resonate more? Even if I adjust the unison and make no pitch change, It's simply not practical if the whole final recital is to be considered as a musical unit.

I've had examiners say they're not listening to the piano anyway. Hopefully they don't really mean that going into a well rehearsed final recital. I tolerate fools gladlier than most but not when these fools have power of pass/fail over others. The newer visiting examiners think I'm only the piano tuner. Ha!

Tone building when tuning : I feel a sort of pyramidal assembly.

It happened often that I begin to be perceiving well the kind of tone I want when tuning the 5 th-6 octave.
When unisons begin to be build, the reaction from below begin to be more apparent.

I sometime begin to work congruence at that point, going back to medium unisons whenever a treble note does not show the correct amount of reaction.

being well aware of unison building structure lessen the need for those corrections - the piano have also his own tone in the diskant, more or well adapted to an unison type in mediums.

Hi RXD I am unsure I understand you , you do not say "so lets use a PT 100 tuning on any concert grand and forget the voice of the piano". are you ?

Apparently pianists appreciate the piano being colored by itself.
It is more or less possible justness wise, I agree with that.

I do not reject justness theory , just I believe that part of the unison build is included in intonation.

What you hear with that note sounding dull or less centered is not only an unison question, most often.

A piano will sing more or less by itself. when that jump of the tone can relate to intonation , it really does not seem to be any problem for string players, harpists, etc.

The construction have to be perceived and the tone is predictive then.

You probably misunderstood me but all notes have resonances to me even when damped. That provide a background for the piano tone and the justness may find its place in that.

Indeed in the end it is not as important as the music played, What I do I do for myself and do not pretend to any artistry in that, but I know how I feel when doing the job, and how much I am more or less "piano centered" at that time.

You may have listen to one of those tunings made by Lucien Vary, who gives a lot of importance to the piano resonances. (that man that blocked the sustain pedal at some occasion during tuning)

As a return to the tone of the 60's , very bright very rich.

The Yamaha style tuning is the perfect opposite of that , while both do the job.