Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 2.5 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers (it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

SEARCH
Piano Forums & Piano World
What's Hot!!
Posting Pictures on the Forums
-------------------
Forums RULES & HELP
-------------------
ADVERTISE on Piano World
(ad)
Piano Tuning
How to Tune Pianos
(125ad)
Piano Life Saver - Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
(ad)
Piano Buyer Guide
Piano Buyer Spring 2017
(ad)
4th Finger Enigma Resolved!
Schumann's 4th Finger Enigma Resolved!
Who's Online Now
51 registered members (AZNpiano, Agent88, cmb13, 11 invisible), 761 guests, and 2 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
(ad)
Estonia Pianos
Estonia Pianos
Quick Links to Useful Piano & Music Resources
Our Classified Ads
Find Piano Professionals-

*Piano Dealers - Piano Stores
*Piano Tuners
*Piano Teachers
*Piano Movers
*Piano Restorations
*Piano Manufacturers

Quick Links:
*Advertise On Piano World
*Free Piano Newsletter
*Online Piano Recitals
*Piano Recitals Index
*Piano & Music Accessories
*Live Piano Venues
*Music School Listings
* Buying a Piano
*Buying A Acoustic Piano
*Buying a Digital Piano
*Pianos for Sale
*Sell Your Piano
*How Old is My Piano?
*Directory/Site Map
*Virtual Piano
*Music Word Search
*Piano Videos
*Virtual Piano Chords & Scales
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 17 of 25 1 2 15 16 17 18 19 24 25
#2186188 - 11/21/13 09:59 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: UnrightTooner]  
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 9,230
Olek Offline
9000 Post Club Member
Olek  Offline
9000 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 9,230
France
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner
Originally Posted by Olek
Jeff,thanks for providing that record

I still suspect that the beat rate impression (interval activity) differs a little for what is measured only at one partial match level.

For instance you would not leave A C# at 7.7, I suggest you are hearing it a little faster (?)

Audibly the M6 should raise in speed more, to me.

When using the 12th (when enlarging the octave) , the beat rate progression lowers a lot.
I believe that the limit is attained with the CHas method, then some progressiveness is retained more audibly.

Do you have some recorded music played with that tuning ?

Here is a verruy short few measures where the 12-15 ratio have been tuned a lot, but at the same time I want to retrain more contrast between modulations and tonalities, so I did "something" at that level

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6GjQDkF_AMQaVE0SkxKSHVFazg/edit?usp=sharing


WHat is your point about "standard ? PTG exam ask the tuner to show he can follow instructions, that is the same here,with more leeway probably. The tuner is asked not to be enlarging much, to do something moderate.

Best regards






I am sorry. I really don't understand your grammar.


I said the interval activity is not exactly provided by the beat rate at the lowest level. if not you would not left A C# at 7.7. I hear that interval faster than that.

Now what are you looking for ? a progressiveness of FBI or a level of consonance in the 12th, octaves, 5ths ? both ?

In the end the FBI speed does not say us much about how the tuning is sounding. Does not look bad nut it does not say much.

I believe that consistency in 12 ths is generally noticed in a light progression and some coherence in the M6, more than with M3


Professional of the profession.
Foo Foo specialist
I wish to add some kind and sensitive phrase but nothing comes to mind.!
(ad 800)
PTG Journal
PTG Journal
#2186210 - 11/21/13 10:37 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: Olek]  
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,760
UnrightTooner Offline
5000 Post Club Member
UnrightTooner  Offline
5000 Post Club Member

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,760
Bradford County, PA
Originally Posted by Olek
.....

I said the interval activity is not exactly provided by the beat rate at the lowest level. if not you would not left A C# at 7.7. I hear that interval faster than that.

Now what are you looking for ? a progressiveness of FBI or a level of consonance in the 12th, octaves, 5ths ? both ?

In the end the FBI speed does not say us much about how the tuning is sounding. Does not look bad nut it does not say much.

I believe that consistency in 12 ths is generally noticed in a light progression and some coherence in the M6, more than with M3


As I listen to the recording while looking at the numbers, I think the numbers are accurate.

The purpose of the recording was to judge my sense of beatrate progression. But other things are involved like scaling and pin setting.

My goal in tuning is to have consistent 12ths, octaves, 5ths, 4ths, M6s and M3s in that order.


Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?
#2186218 - 11/21/13 10:53 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]  
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 9,230
Olek Offline
9000 Post Club Member
Olek  Offline
9000 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 9,230
France
Thank you for the answer. May be you are right,

Then those intervals (12th octaves and 5ths) , you could record them. the 12th is indeed a good rule to know the maximum of enlarging, and also it is very strong. Now it is not necessary to have them acoustically pure in my opinion.

Consistency mean consonance ? they are supposed to tone the same color, or have some kind of progression from low beat to pure ?

When spreading the temperament, you tune octaves to obtain the 12th ? I noticed the M3 are really at the end. The fun is that 2 totally different venues are obtained depending on what intervals the temperament is based on. it is not supposed to be so, but ...

Regards



Professional of the profession.
Foo Foo specialist
I wish to add some kind and sensitive phrase but nothing comes to mind.!
#2186225 - 11/21/13 11:01 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]  
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,760
UnrightTooner Offline
5000 Post Club Member
UnrightTooner  Offline
5000 Post Club Member

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,760
Bradford County, PA
Olek:

Consistent: Having a character that changes smoothly through the scale.

No, I will not post the 12ths. The question is about discerning beatrates. I don't want to get Off Topic. Besides I have better things to do.


Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?
(ad)
Piano & Music Accessories
piano accessories music gifts tuning and moving equipment
#2186235 - 11/21/13 11:16 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]  
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 9,230
Olek Offline
9000 Post Club Member
Olek  Offline
9000 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 9,230
France
Originally Posted by OperaTenor
Originally Posted by alfredo capurso

Hi All,

In order to find this Topic... I had to go back to page 6(!).

"Should There Be A Standard?"..., I thought it was a good question... I well remember my first years, when I was trying to tune 12th_root_of_two without having a clue on how to tune it and then expand the first octave.

Dear Colleagues (mature aural tuners), do you remember your first years...?

Regards, a.c.
.






Yes, I do.

My mentor taught me that ET was a balance between all 12 keys. Tuned by 4th's and 5th's, checked with 3rd's and 6th's; as equally slow-beating as possible.

Unisons tuned by listening to the highest audible partial, octaves mildly stretched.

If it sounded musical at the end of the exercise, mission accomplished.

Ah, if life were still so simple...

wink



very good resume


Professional of the profession.
Foo Foo specialist
I wish to add some kind and sensitive phrase but nothing comes to mind.!
#2186257 - 11/21/13 11:57 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: UnrightTooner]  
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 9,230
Olek Offline
9000 Post Club Member
Olek  Offline
9000 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 9,230
France
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner
Olek:

Consistent: Having a character that changes smoothly through the scale.

No, I will not post the 12ths. The question is about discerning beatrates. I don't want to get Off Topic. Besides I have better things to do.


You are welcome, I thought you where trying to prove that the M3 and M6 are relatively consistent when the tuning is based on slow beating intervals scheme.

Not at all OT in my opinion.

Regards



Professional of the profession.
Foo Foo specialist
I wish to add some kind and sensitive phrase but nothing comes to mind.!
#2186389 - 11/21/13 03:39 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: UnrightTooner]  
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,265
Mark R. Offline
2000 Post Club Member
Mark R.  Offline
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,265
Pretoria, South Africa
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner
But notice that all the CM3s are definetly progressive? I am not sure how a CM3 based sequence would necessarily make the Fs lower in pitch


The CM3 sequence would have compared, right at the beginning,
F3-A3 = 6.7
A3-C#4 = 7.7
C#4-F4 = 10.9
F4-A4 = 12.9
It would have compared the beat rates without knowing their absolute values.

Although you point out quite correctly that they are progressive, I would submit that one could have picked out that...
1) The difference between F3-A3 and A3-C#4 is too small, while
2) The difference between A3-C#4 and C#4-F4 is too big.

The remedy would be to lower both F3 and F4.

Perhaps this is what Bill was referring to.


Autodidact interested in piano technology.
LinkedIn profile
1922 49" Zimmermann, project piano.
1970 44" Ibach, daily music maker.
#2186447 - 11/21/13 05:20 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: Olek]  
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,726
Grandpianoman Offline
2000 Post Club Member
Grandpianoman  Offline
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,726
Portland, Oregon
Thanks Isaac....Yes, I did the tuning.....all this is a work in progress, learning how to improve my tuning.

Here is another example of this temperament. recorded the same day as the Rachmaninoff above.

https://app.box.com/shared/static/jn675d9vma4djqils45t.mp3

How would the professional tuning world come up with a "standard" when there are so many wonderful ways to tune "ET" etc?

#2186454 - 11/21/13 05:28 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: Grandpianoman]  
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 1,131
SMHaley Offline
1000 Post Club Member
SMHaley  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: May 2013
Posts: 1,131
Seattle
ET is a hypothetical to begin with.


PTG Associate
AIO Regular Member
ASCAP
Pipe Organ Builder
Chief Instrument Technician, Director, Chancel Arts
Church Music Professional
AA Music Arts 2001, BM Organ, Choral 2005


Baldwin F 1960 (146256)
Zuckermann Flemish Single
#2186514 - 11/21/13 07:59 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: UnrightTooner]  
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,920
Bill Bremmer RPT Offline
3000 Post Club Member
Bill Bremmer RPT  Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,920
Madison, WI USA
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner

Care to post [a recording of] an ET RBI sequence?


I have actually been thinking of doing that. My new smart phone can do some amazing things, including actual documentation of RW when I find it.

A couple of new guys in the area have wanted to observe how I would tune a typical piano. They had both bought the correspondence course that lots of people fall for because it is cheaper than the good one. Cheap tools and a C fork.

The sequence that the course teaches is the very same one as from the Braide-White book minus anything at all about RBI's. Just the straight 4ths & 5ths. Little wonder why none of them who use that sequence can get it right so they immediately go buy a Peterson Strobe tuner (also recommended by Dr. Braide-White and the correspondence course).

Last week I showed one man how to tune the whole piano by ear on a Baldwin Hamilton. That scale causes the F3-A3 M3 to be slower than usual. Today, I tuned a small grand for another man using the same method and temperament sequence.

Even though it is something I rarely do, the sequence I use produces perfect results every time. I am not talking about the Marpurg sequence either. It is the "Up a 3rd, up a 3rd, down a 5th" sequence that everybody thinks means I pull 3rds out of thin air but that is not true. I tune all 4ths & 5ths after the initial set of CM3's. There is at least one check available after each note is tuned and that is what keeps the tuner on track. There are no cumulative errors and no compounding of errors.


Bill Bremmer RPT
Madison WI USA
www.billbremmer.com
#2186554 - 11/21/13 09:32 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: SMHaley]  
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,556
OperaTenor Offline
2000 Post Club Member
OperaTenor  Offline
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,556
Sandy Eggo, California
Originally Posted by SMHaley
ET is a hypothetical to begin with.


Does that mean it can't be a standard?



Happiness is a freshly tuned piano.
Jim Boydston, proprietor, No Piano Left Behind - technician
www.facebook.com/NoPianoLeftBehind
#2186654 - 11/22/13 02:07 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: SMHaley]  
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 25,412
BDB Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
BDB  Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 25,412
Oakland
Originally Posted by SMHaley
ET is a hypothetical to begin with.

So is everything else.


Semipro Tech
#2186690 - 11/22/13 04:05 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: UnrightTooner]  
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,443
DoelKees Offline
2000 Post Club Member
DoelKees  Offline
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,443
Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner
Originally Posted by DoelKees
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner
OK here is what I tuned on a Charles Wlter Console. Break is E3/F3. A D3-A4 P12 is tuned. The recording starts with the M6/M17 test, then M3s then M6s. I think F3 is a hair sharp:

https://app.box.com/s/d993gdtyoh3oq9wwh525

So Kees, could you extract the beatrates, please?


M3 5.18
M17 5.19

M3

D3F# 6.0
D#G 6.7
EG# 7.1
FA 6.7
F#A# 8.1
GB 8.1
G#C 8.0
AC# 7.7
A#D 8.4
BD# 8.9
CE 9.9
C#F 10.9
DF# 9.9
D#G 10.9
EG# 14.1
F4A 12.9

M6

D3B 7.3
D#C 7.8
EC# 7.0
FD 7.9
F#D# 8.8
GE 8.7
G#F 9.4
AF# 8.2
A#G 8.9
BG# 11.0
C4A 11.5

Kees


Thanks! Looks like both F3 and F4 were high. Guess I got the P12 right, though.

So, Kees, your gracious analyses was to explore the question of how accurately experienced tuners can discern beatrates. This would be necessary to know to establish a tuning standard. I had scoffed before at how the PTG exam criteria seemed low, that progressive CM3s seemed suspiciously to be the standard. From the results of your analyses maybe that is the practical limit.

Do you have thoughts on this?

Not really except CM3 are not a requirement for the PTG exam and that if you can't hear that they not precisely progressive who cares?

Thus far nobody has been able to make them contiguous, but I'm sure the pianos sound just fine.

Kees

#2186742 - 11/22/13 08:17 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: BDB]  
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,760
UnrightTooner Offline
5000 Post Club Member
UnrightTooner  Offline
5000 Post Club Member

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,760
Bradford County, PA
Originally Posted by BDB
Originally Posted by SMHaley
ET is a hypothetical to begin with.

So is everything else.


Are YOU hypothetical, BDB? wink


Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?
#2186745 - 11/22/13 08:24 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: DoelKees]  
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,760
UnrightTooner Offline
5000 Post Club Member
UnrightTooner  Offline
5000 Post Club Member

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,760
Bradford County, PA
Originally Posted by DoelKees
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner
.....

So, Kees, your gracious analyses was to explore the question of how accurately experienced tuners can discern beatrates. This would be necessary to know to establish a tuning standard. I had scoffed before at how the PTG exam criteria seemed low, that progressive CM3s seemed suspiciously to be the standard. From the results of your analyses maybe that is the practical limit.

Do you have thoughts on this?

Not really except CM3 are not a requirement for the PTG exam and that if you can't hear that they not precisely progressive who cares?

Thus far nobody has been able to make them contiguous, but I'm sure the pianos sound just fine.

Kees


You are correct. Progressive CM3s are not explicitly required to pass the PTG exam. But if you take progressive M3 and apply the allowable error, the CM3s remain progressive.

I hope many more tuners post recordings. I continue to believe that progressive M3s and M6s are barely attainable. Maybe it should be considered a goal, not a standard.


Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?
#2186756 - 11/22/13 08:43 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: UnrightTooner]  
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,710
Ed Foote Offline
1000 Post Club Member
Ed Foote  Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,710
Tennessee
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner
Progressive CM3s are not explicitly required to pass the PTG exam. But if you take progressive M3 and apply the allowable error, the CM3s remain progressive.

I hope many more tuners post recordings. I continue to believe that progressive M3s and M6s are barely attainable. Maybe it should be considered a goal, not a standard.


Greetings,
Barely attainable? They either or or they are not. Progressive thirds, sixths, and m3rds were considered the standard where I was taught. We were also taught to vary the progression if needed to render a fifth or octave more acceptable. Scales can interfere with our pursuit of mathematical perfection, but human ears rarely have the ability to hear any difference in the output of the piano due to minor deviations in step size between the thirds. I'm talking about 1 cent deviations at the most.

At some degree of resolution, there is no way for the intervals to increase perfectly, as inharmonicity would exert its unequalizing force. If we get to the realm of "How exactly progressive", do we stop at 1% deviation from the mathematical ideal? 10%? Where will it end? Once again, I haven't seen this small amount of inequality render the sound of an ET discernibly different.

How about if we define "progressive" as every third beating faster than the one below, and slower than the one above? This is easy to hit. This requirement doesn't leave too much room to get ET out of place, and if all the cumulative error isn't located in one place, will pass the PTG tests with little problem. It will be perceived as equal by any listener I have ever encountered, and any increase in evenness in the thirds will be academic, musically.
Regards,

#2186758 - 11/22/13 08:49 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: UnrightTooner]  
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,443
DoelKees Offline
2000 Post Club Member
DoelKees  Offline
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,443
Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner
Originally Posted by DoelKees
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner
.....

So, Kees, your gracious analyses was to explore the question of how accurately experienced tuners can discern beatrates. This would be necessary to know to establish a tuning standard. I had scoffed before at how the PTG exam criteria seemed low, that progressive CM3s seemed suspiciously to be the standard. From the results of your analyses maybe that is the practical limit.

Do you have thoughts on this?

Not really except CM3 are not a requirement for the PTG exam and that if you can't hear that they not precisely progressive who cares?

Thus far nobody has been able to make them contiguous, but I'm sure the pianos sound just fine.

Kees


You are correct. Progressive CM3s are not explicitly required to pass the PTG exam. But if you take progressive M3 and apply the allowable error, the CM3s remain progressive.

I hope many more tuners post recordings. I continue to believe that progressive M3s and M6s are barely attainable. Maybe it should be considered a goal, not a standard.

Are you sure? I thought the error margin was 1 cent and we computed the tolerance earlier to be 0.2 cent for progressive M3's didn't we?

I agree with your idea of the standard. The meter is also a standard but if I order a meter beer in a Dutch pub it could be 99.3cm.

Kees

#2186765 - 11/22/13 09:03 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]  
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 9,230
Olek Offline
9000 Post Club Member
Olek  Offline
9000 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 9,230
France
When often the tuner does not leave a "perfect progression in temperament octave, this is corrected in 10th s when spreading, with some backtrack if necessary.

I was trained to tune those progressive M3 but hardly considered that as an ultimate goal, be it at the expense of slow beating intervals.

But the recipes for Chas for instance imply to listen directly to 5ths beat and also to some low activity in octave (not at 4:2 or 6:3, more at 2:1 in my opinion.
The
It provide in the end an extremely precise and slow progression of beats.

Seem to me that the tuners that focus on slow beating intervals obtain more consistency in the fast beating ones that way.

No much mistakes allowed in temperament, can be backtracked only up to 2 notes off.


Last edited by Olek; 11/22/13 11:15 AM.

Professional of the profession.
Foo Foo specialist
I wish to add some kind and sensitive phrase but nothing comes to mind.!
#2186771 - 11/22/13 09:16 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: DoelKees]  
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,760
UnrightTooner Offline
5000 Post Club Member
UnrightTooner  Offline
5000 Post Club Member

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,760
Bradford County, PA
Originally Posted by DoelKees
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner
Originally Posted by DoelKees
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner
.....

So, Kees, your gracious analyses was to explore the question of how accurately experienced tuners can discern beatrates. This would be necessary to know to establish a tuning standard. I had scoffed before at how the PTG exam criteria seemed low, that progressive CM3s seemed suspiciously to be the standard. From the results of your analyses maybe that is the practical limit.

Do you have thoughts on this?

Not really except CM3 are not a requirement for the PTG exam and that if you can't hear that they not precisely progressive who cares?

Thus far nobody has been able to make them contiguous, but I'm sure the pianos sound just fine.

Kees


You are correct. Progressive CM3s are not explicitly required to pass the PTG exam. But if you take progressive M3 and apply the allowable error, the CM3s remain progressive.

I hope many more tuners post recordings. I continue to believe that progressive M3s and M6s are barely attainable. Maybe it should be considered a goal, not a standard.

Are you sure? I thought the error margin was 1 cent and we computed the tolerance earlier to be 0.2 cent for progressive M3's didn't we?

I agree with your idea of the standard. The meter is also a standard but if I order a meter beer in a Dutch pub it could be 99.3cm.

Kees


Sorry, I meant the PTG test allowable error, like 0.9 cents, before a deduction in points if I remember right.


Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?
#2186777 - 11/22/13 09:25 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: Mark R.]  
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,760
UnrightTooner Offline
5000 Post Club Member
UnrightTooner  Offline
5000 Post Club Member

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,760
Bradford County, PA
Originally Posted by Mark R.
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner
But notice that all the CM3s are definetly progressive? I am not sure how a CM3 based sequence would necessarily make the Fs lower in pitch


The CM3 sequence would have compared, right at the beginning,
F3-A3 = 6.7
A3-C#4 = 7.7
C#4-F4 = 10.9
F4-A4 = 12.9
It would have compared the beat rates without knowing their absolute values.

Although you point out quite correctly that they are progressive, I would submit that one could have picked out that...
1) The difference between F3-A3 and A3-C#4 is too small, while
2) The difference between A3-C#4 and C#4-F4 is too big.

The remedy would be to lower both F3 and F4.

Perhaps this is what Bill was referring to.


I did notice that both the F3-A3 and the F3-D4 were slow indicating that F3 was sharp but declined to give any real excuses. The sequence would have little to do with it at this point of polishing. Really, I had just had enough of fighting it and decided to make the recording. Another piano and another time, perhaps.

The dog would have caught the rabbit if he hadn't stopped to take a ...




Jeff Deutschle
Part-Time Tuner
Who taught the first chicken how to peck?
#2186893 - 11/22/13 02:53 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: UnrightTooner]  
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 25,412
BDB Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
BDB  Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 25,412
Oakland
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner
Originally Posted by BDB
Originally Posted by SMHaley
ET is a hypothetical to begin with.

So is everything else.


Are YOU hypothetical, BDB? wink


Absolutely! All persons, living or dead, are fictional, and any resemblance is purely coincidental.


Semipro Tech
#2187063 - 11/22/13 09:17 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: UnrightTooner]  
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,443
DoelKees Offline
2000 Post Club Member
DoelKees  Offline
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,443
Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner
Originally Posted by DoelKees
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner
Originally Posted by DoelKees
Originally Posted by UnrightTooner
.....

So, Kees, your gracious analyses was to explore the question of how accurately experienced tuners can discern beatrates. This would be necessary to know to establish a tuning standard. I had scoffed before at how the PTG exam criteria seemed low, that progressive CM3s seemed suspiciously to be the standard. From the results of your analyses maybe that is the practical limit.

Do you have thoughts on this?

Not really except CM3 are not a requirement for the PTG exam and that if you can't hear that they not precisely progressive who cares?

Thus far nobody has been able to make them contiguous, but I'm sure the pianos sound just fine.

Kees


You are correct. Progressive CM3s are not explicitly required to pass the PTG exam. But if you take progressive M3 and apply the allowable error, the CM3s remain progressive.

I hope many more tuners post recordings. I continue to believe that progressive M3s and M6s are barely attainable. Maybe it should be considered a goal, not a standard.

Are you sure? I thought the error margin was 1 cent and we computed the tolerance earlier to be 0.2 cent for progressive M3's didn't we?

I agree with your idea of the standard. The meter is also a standard but if I order a meter beer in a Dutch pub it could be 99.3cm.

Kees


Sorry, I meant the PTG test allowable error, like 0.9 cents, before a deduction in points if I remember right.

0.9>0.2 so you can score 100% with nonprogressive M3's.

Kees

#2187150 - 11/23/13 02:56 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]  
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,726
Grandpianoman Offline
2000 Post Club Member
Grandpianoman  Offline
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,726
Portland, Oregon
I wonder what temperament this is, and whether we can gather any information for a "Standard"? Listen particularly to the tuning. wink

Wonderful instrument from the silent movie era...a lot of movie houses would buy this instrument to accompany the silent films...it came in different sizes as well. He must be one of the best in world at playing it. (watch what happens at the very end)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tT1LTdUnyVk


adding a nice story about one of the pieces.......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTGEvqEmR-4

Last edited by Grandpianoman; 11/23/13 03:14 AM. Reason: added a link
#2187350 - 11/23/13 02:32 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: Mark R.]  
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,920
Bill Bremmer RPT Offline
3000 Post Club Member
Bill Bremmer RPT  Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,920
Madison, WI USA
Quote
The CM3 sequence would have compared, right at the beginning,
F3-A3 = 6.7
A3-C#4 = 7.7
C#4-F4 = 10.9
F4-A4 = 12.9
It would have compared the beat rates without knowing their absolute values.

Although you point out quite correctly that they are progressive, I would submit that one could have picked out that...
1) The difference between F3-A3 and A3-C#4 is too small, while
2) The difference between A3-C#4 and C#4-F4 is too big.

The remedy would be to lower both F3 and F4.

Perhaps this is what Bill was referring to.


Exactly! As I point out in my own version of "Let the piano tell you", when you compare a series of 4 CM3's (not just three), if the top M3 (F4-A4) is too slow, then the bottom M3 (F3-A3) is too slow. You then lower both F3 & F4, then possibly also slightly adjust C#4 so that everything fits.

Works the same if the top M3 is too fast.

When Jim Coleman Sr. was reviewing what I had written about that, I now recall that he said he had written virtually the same thin sometime in the 1980's. However, when you posted what he had written in another thread, that was the first time I had ever seen it.

I certainly have not seen or read everything that Jim Coleman wrote but it does show that when something exists to be discovered, it will be. It was actually Viviano, someone who was trying to learn how to tune a temperament octave and who was trying to help me edit my material so that it would be clearly understandable who pointed out to me that what I was doing was treating the F3-F4 octave as a pair. If one F is moved, the other must be moved by the same amount. If that does not yield the correct result, then try again.

Usually, it only takes one, maybe two adjustments of both F's to find the correct balance but for a beginner, I can see how one may have to go back and forth a few times before getting it right.

I would also like to say that there is no reason why a person cannot use a traditional 4ths & 5ths sequence that is practiced and familiar and then use CM3 tests to sort out ("nitpick") small errors.

In the example that Jeff posted, if he had listened to the chain of CM3's from F3-A4 after having arrived at the results in the usual and practiced way, the small error would probably have been evident.

In the end, all 4ths & 5ths need to sound very much a like, none too pure, none "beating", all M3's and M6's progressive and all CM3's also having the proper but small, slower/faster relationship. When you have all of that, you have what would be an indisputable ET. It can exist on any piano, regardless of scale.


Bill Bremmer RPT
Madison WI USA
www.billbremmer.com
#2187430 - 11/23/13 05:28 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: Bill Bremmer RPT]  
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,443
DoelKees Offline
2000 Post Club Member
DoelKees  Offline
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,443
Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted by Bill Bremmer RPT

In the end, all 4ths & 5ths need to sound very much a like, none too pure, none "beating", all M3's and M6's progressive and all CM3's also having the proper but small, slower/faster relationship. When you have all of that, you have what would be an indisputable ET. It can exist on any piano, regardless of scale.

It can exist, but this does not prove that it does exist. Every single recording posted here of M3/6's, including your own which I took from your PTG educational video, were not completely progressive.

Moreover the tolerances of the PTG tuning exam are such that it is possible to score 100% without having progressive M3/M6.

Kees

#2187681 - 11/24/13 11:51 AM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]  
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 9,230
Olek Offline
9000 Post Club Member
Olek  Offline
9000 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 9,230
France
Something strange : as I am actually testing for methods to allow different levels of consonance in chords, so to favor more contrasts in modulations, I had to tune back to a "standard" temperament as I did before, using a F3- F4 sequence.

I immediately noticed how what some tuners call "the shimmering of ET" was back, it was mostly sensitive in the higher region of the temperament and beginning of the 5th octave. it get better for one octave and a half then, and then high treble can be acceptable, depending the way it is tuned.

In basses not all octaves are harmonious, notes are sounding as without clear link to mediums (again , depending of the compromising used)

The point there is not at all that "all chords sound alike" , but they have a strange behavior, that does not seem to have much tonal or harmonious "meaning"

I seem to hear that strange sensation linked to fast beat rates, which are in the end unavoidable, but seem to me that when the notes from the octaves , 12th, etc under the one played are consonant clearly, they lower the harsh sensation of fast beats (6ths M3 for instance)

I am not so surprised that musicians regularly seem to appreciate Well tuning, while I still believe this is basically due to a misconception of how to install ET on a piano.

My point is that tuners could work some high consonance tuning , so they begin to recognize the level of consonance they obtain when tuning in their more usual way.

"pure" 12, Chas, pure 5th, whatever, the quality of the "halo" provided and the crispness of the attack are the signs of consonance at a larger span than the octave.

Much of that being decided by the piano inharmonicity, we have not as much control as we think.

What I am after now is how to use the provided leeway to allow definitive changes in modulations "color" . (color = consonance level, to me, I do not wish to go farther than that)


Professional of the profession.
Foo Foo specialist
I wish to add some kind and sensitive phrase but nothing comes to mind.!
#2187685 - 11/24/13 12:03 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: DoelKees]  
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 9,230
Olek Offline
9000 Post Club Member
Olek  Offline
9000 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 9,230
France
Originally Posted by DoelKees
Originally Posted by Bill Bremmer RPT

In the end, all 4ths & 5ths need to sound very much a like, none too pure, none "beating", all M3's and M6's progressive and all CM3's also having the proper but small, slower/faster relationship. When you have all of that, you have what would be an indisputable ET. It can exist on any piano, regardless of scale.

It can exist, but this does not prove that it does exist. Every single recording posted here of M3/6's, including your own which I took from your PTG educational video, were not completely progressive.

Moreover the tolerances of the PTG tuning exam are such that it is possible to score 100% without having progressive M3/M6.

Kees


I will record that if you wish, (did retune with "standard tuning" and stack of M3) there is always some small imbalance in the reconciliation of slow and fast beating intervals, but if the goal is to have progressive M3 or 10th, it is in now way impossible.

I am far from sure this is what gives the most consonant piano, but it is possible to realize, and the more enlarged the 1st octave is, the easier it is .

BTW the first octave is tuned "enlarged (focusing on 4:2 6:3) because the 5ths partials are then more easily flowing together)

Due to the way I listen to intervals activity, I believe I can leave some "mistakes" as my beat rates are influenced by more than one partial match.

I am also not happy with a straightforward beat rate that flow straight and relatively staticly from the intervals. That gives a somewhat harsh sensation. Ideally, the beats may flow like the tone of an unison, something that is firmly set but is flowing somewhat freely.

THe most audible beat rate is generally influenced by the second set of partials, this gives the beat rate some sort of "respiration" .

When tuners say they need to have a very quiet ear to tune, that mean they can allow anything to flow in a natural way, out of the piano.
Make sense to me.




Professional of the profession.
Foo Foo specialist
I wish to add some kind and sensitive phrase but nothing comes to mind.!
#2187686 - 11/24/13 12:04 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: DoelKees]  
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 585
Tunewerk Offline
500 Post Club Member
Tunewerk  Offline
500 Post Club Member

Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 585
Boston, MA
Excellent point, Kees.

I think we return to an important point here: there are a lot of tuners who overestimate their ability, or who no longer hear the imperfection inherent in their tuning. Imperfect scales mean tuning variations to find compromises over them.

The amount 4 notes would have to cumulatively vary is about 0.2c to upset the balance of CM3rds. However, if four notes cumulatively varied this much in one direction, it wouldn't upset progression. Localized variation is required and for a single note, this is about 0.76c.

This is underneath the PTG test limit for errors. Built into the PTG test is an understanding that up to 1.0c variations are required to find scale compromises in the temperament region.


www.tunewerk.com

Unity of tone through applied research.
#2187760 - 11/24/13 03:37 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: Olek]  
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,443
DoelKees Offline
2000 Post Club Member
DoelKees  Offline
2000 Post Club Member

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,443
Vancouver, Canada
Originally Posted by Olek
Originally Posted by DoelKees
Every single recording posted here of M3/6's, including your own which I took from your PTG educational video, were not completely progressive.

Moreover the tolerances of the PTG tuning exam are such that it is possible to score 100% without having progressive M3/M6.

Kees

I will record that if you wish, (did retune with "standard tuning" and stack of M3) there is always some small imbalance in the reconciliation of slow and fast beating intervals, but if the goal is to have progressive M3 or 10th, it is in now way impossible.

Yes, if you (or anyone else) would be so kind to record progressive M3/6 in the temperament range I would be grateful. I will believe it when I see it, and I think I'm not the only one.

Thanks,
Kees

#2188207 - 11/25/13 06:43 PM Re: Should There Be A Standard? [Re: OperaTenor]  
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 551
Phil D Offline
500 Post Club Member
Phil D  Offline
500 Post Club Member

Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 551
London, England
This thread is getting really interesting!

I recorded this, with a strip mute in. I was happy with the progression at the time, until I listened back to the recording. I know I can do better, but I'm emboldened to post it now smile

https://soundcloud.com/phil-dickson-1/piano-tuning-1920s-chappell

ugh... those 5ths are really uneven!

Last edited by Phil D; 11/25/13 06:43 PM.
Page 17 of 25 1 2 15 16 17 18 19 24 25

Moderated by  Piano World 

Piano Acc. & Gift Items in
Piano World's Online Store
In PianoSupplies.com ,(a division of Piano World)
our online store for piano and music gifts and accessories, Digital Piano Dolly, party goods, tuning equipment, piano moving equipment, benches, lamps Caster Cups and more.


Free Shipping* on Jansen Artist Piano Benches, Cocoweb Piano Lamps, Hidrau Hydraulic Piano Benches
(*free shipping within contiguous U.S. only)
(ad)
Pearl River & Ritmuller
Ritmuller Pianos
(ad)
Pianoteq
PianoTeq 6 Out now
(ad)
Lindeblad Piano
Lindeblad Piano Restorations and sales
ad
Pierce Piano Atlas


New Topics - Multiple Forums
Free piano ebook for review
by jjjkay. 10/18/17 10:46 PM
Free piano ebook for review
by jjjkay. 10/18/17 10:39 PM
Corrosion on Plate
by Bob. 10/18/17 08:11 PM
European Piano Party 2018 in Germany?
by patH. 10/18/17 05:26 PM
Home made tape deck Electone - awesome!
by Doug M.. 10/18/17 04:15 PM
Forum Statistics
Forums44
Topics182,365
Posts2,665,574
Members88,990
Most Online15,252
Mar 21st, 2010
(ad)
Accu-Tuner
Sanderson Accu-Tuner
Check It Out!
There's a lot more to Piano World than just the forums.
Click Here to
Explore The Rest of Piano World!!
Visit our online store for gifts for music lovers


 
Help keep the forums up and running with a donation, any amount is appreciated!
Or by becoming a Subscribing member! Thank-you.
Donate   Subscribe
 
Our Piano Related Classified Ads
| Dealers | Tuners | Lessons | Movers | Restorations | Pianos For Sale | Sell Your Piano |

Advertise on Piano World
| Subscribe | Piano World | PianoSupplies.com | Advertise on Piano World |
| |Contact | Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter |


copyright 1997 - 2017 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0