Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum Do we hear 'in tune' intervals by size or beats?

in that aspect , the more consonant points are obtained, the more in tune it sound. that mean consonance address only notes/partials having enough energy to be concerned. (hence the somewhat useless tuning of triple octaves)

Exactly, Prout. There's a quantum leap in clarity that comes from strong partials reinforcing each other rather than favouring the substantially weaker upper partials that even tuners strain to hear. Tuners raised on the holy grail of stretching everything and the creed of a pure octave being somehow a physical impossibility have probably never heard this clarity. It can by no means be described as dull!!!

Interestingly, and perhaps more to the point of this thread, did any of the ensemble perceive any melodic flatness in the treble of the piano? I would be extremely surprised if they did.

There's something happens in the scaling of a good piano that reaches out to help the tuner achieve both clean treble octaves and clean fifths without speeding up the M3's, tenths and 17ths. but only if you really really believe. Just as those who are convinced that stress is the natural way of things will never find peace and clarity, so it is with those who think stretch is the natural way of things. Sorry, Sunday's not til tomorrow. You don't want that sort of stuff from this old heretic anyway.

Well, I assume they are hiring them for more reasons than just the sound of their treble octaves.

My question was, why would someone, you, prefer clean octaves over clean triple octaves (which are a good compromise between all the larger SBI)?

But I think Prout already answered it.

Thanks Rxd. I know what a clean octave sounds like and I also know what a narrow 12th sounds like. I prefer a cleaner 12th with a bright (wide) octave. The narrow 12th just sounds wrong, to me.

However, we must be clear here. Those who play around with high quality grands, ;-) are not experiencing what I am talking about in the same degree. It is much easier to get all those larger SBI humming together nicely on those kind of pianos.

Of course I can get clean octaves, fifths, 12ths, and triple octaves on a Steinway D. It is the smaller more challenging pianos that demand a more committed approach.

Best Regards,

the so called "2:1" octave to me is reinforced by more than the only 2:1 ratio.

Hopefully (seem to me) there is a kind of justness for pure intervals that allow for a small band of acceptability. The effect have a name, but I don't know it in English.

The same for 5ths, 12ths, double octaves (probably)

For instance, the treble octave can be tuned without playing any reference note one octave below , the sudden raise in clarity and focus signs the "good " octave. Works more or less well depending of the instrument/depending of the quality of the tuning lower in the scale.

Maybe I am trying to find the best of both worlds. As a rank amateur tuner, I am trying to understand and hear what happens when I attempt a certain stretch in the bass or high treble. I am slowly learning to hear beats, harshness, and a sense of the cohesive whole. The problem I am facing is that I haven't yet achieved clear, clean, ringing octaves in the treble and still have a cohesive whole. My tuner/tech, who I finally let tune my piano after a year of regulating and voicing, was able to get both qualities, and in Young to boot.
I'm jealous!

I have a forty inch upright(well, the plate is 37" or so) in my London pied à terre that I tune more than ever now. I don't make a statement on this forum until I have tried it on this piano.

Everything I have said about treble tuning bigger pianos actually works out on this piano too.

No matter what other instruments we play, some of our tuning habits stem from our first attempts at tuning and preconceptions arising from that time.
We haven't looked or listened closely at/to them since. I know I do.

Tuners don't create a tuning curve, the piano does.

At first glance, an octave may seem narrow. So why does widening it make it sound worse? It's a paradox inside an enigma. Are we trying to make things what they're not?

Of course we are. Humans have been desperately attempting to make things they are not since the Troglodytes.

I think there is a song in there somewhere……

Thank you Rxd.

2:1 octaves on a grand produce 12ths that are not as narrow as those produced by 2:1 octaves on an upright. That is not opinion, that is scientific fact.

After that, it is preference. Does one listen to the taste of the octave or the wider SBI's.

There is a choice to be made.

High level tuners make that choice. I'm interested in bringing this to the attention of tuners who may not be aware.

At one point I thought there was only one stretch curve that sounded good on a piano. Now I choose the best one for the situation.

That is why I am so greatful for all the varying opinion; opinion means there's more to the eye of one who may not have an opinion on the subject, and we move forward.

Great stuff.

IME it doesn't.

But it can make the 12th sound better.

I just finished tuning my BB. I tuned C7-C8 aurally as pure octaves, then checked them with my frequency meter. They were spot on 2:1 octaves. We're not talking about +\- x cents here. We are talking no beats. No stretch beyond the iH. This surprises me.

Which is the part that surprises; the part discovered about the accuracy of the human ear or the part where you executed the preciseness of the task.

What do the 12ths and triple octaves sound like?

Usually, for me anyway, the 12ths are audibly narrow when I used to tune pure pctaves in the treble, which makes the top note "sound" flat.

On big pianos, I now look for pure 19ths, which produces the widest octaves, but on big pianos, it's not noticeable, IME.

Hi Brother,

You wrote: ..."I have a forty inch upright(well, the plate is 37" or so) in my London pied à terre that I tune more than ever now. I don't make a statement on this forum until I have tried it on this piano."...

That sounds wise and generous on your part.

..."..Everything I have said about treble tuning bigger pianos actually works out on this piano too."...

Yes, I believe what you are saying. How about the mid-bass and bass section, is it very different from bigger pianos?

..."No matter what other instruments we play, some of our tuning habits stem from our first attempts at tuning and preconceptions arising from that time."...

Well, who knows?

..."We haven't looked or listened closely at/to them since. I know I do."...

Who is "We", Brother, who is "I"?

..."Tuners don't create a tuning curve, the piano does."...

Hmmm... This is a new one, the piano creates a tuning curve?... Perhaps you mean the manufacturer, in which case it would be "conceive". Oh, perhaps language has to do with that.

..."At first glance, an octave may seem narrow."...

Not for me, ..."an octave" is never an octave on its own, please read "never an octave on its own"; an octave cannot "seem narrow": actually a narrow octave slows down 3ds, 4ths, 6ths, 10ths, 15ths and 17ths, and makes 5ths and 12ths too narrow. An octave cannot "seem" narrow, either it is or it is not. The same (only inverted) would apply to octaves that (you would say, Brother) may 'seem' wide.

So, how many 'not_narrow_not_wide octaves' do you count?

..." So why does widening it make it sound worse? It's a paradox inside an enigma. Are we trying to make things what they're not?"...

Well, I don't know about you, Brother, I have been making 'things' and "what they're" for many years now, but let me say, 'things' are what we make of them and I don't know, you might feel more confortable when you are part of a paradox or inside an enigma.
.

It is part of the Fourier series for sin(x)/(5-4cos(x)), but I have no idea what it means.

Kees

It is the fact that no stretch is required beyond the iH the of lower note in the high treble octaves. I previously thought, and calculated, that a greater stretch was required to match the iH of the middle and lower notes, but, with a relatively short sustain in the high treble, tight sounding octaves, for me, are best, since, even with a full compass arpeggio with dampers up, the resulting consonance after about three seconds, is based entirely on the lower notes. This is, to me, an untrained amateur, revealing.

I profess ignorance regarding the pro tuner's use of the phrase "listening to twelfths". Are you referring to playing the root note simultaneously with the twelfth note above? If so, it an issue, as I tune in Young temperament.

The triple octaves sound OK to me (a number of false beats that I cannot completely control in the C5-C6 area).
I have recorded CM3s from C2-A#4, all muted notes, and tomorrow I will record full compass octaves and arpeggios. I will post the results.

Let's not forget the resonance of those lower notes. Pure 12ths and 19ths have a different tone. Try it. Tune the first no damper and last damper as pure 12th or 19th then play the 12th or 19th below. The higher note has a brightness to it that is not there with the lower.

Also, concert grands have much more sustain on those higher notes than uprights do.

These are the reasons I make the choices of pure 12ths and 19ths.

I also may choose tempered 12ths and pure 22nds, depending.

Of course, only when I have a discerning customer or concert performance, or extra time; for myself.

Each choice produces differing tonal qualities; more or less consonant wide chords.

Interesting points. Thanks. I had not thought in terms of tonal changes when adjusting octave size. I will test your theory in a day or so ( have to fly today). There is a possible application of your ideas to my tuning style. Since I tune in Young, there are several pure fifths that are tuned in the temperament octave(s) (I am trying to rigorously maintain the temperament from at least C3-C5). That means the octave partials do not line up perfectly with the fifths and their partials. As well, the very narrow fifths of the keys closely related to C present other challenges.

Hi Mark,

You wrote: ..."Let's not forget the resonance of those lower notes. Pure 12ths and 19ths have a different tone. Try it. Tune the first no damper and last damper as pure 12th or 19th then play the 12th or 19th below. The higher note has a brightness to it that is not there with the lower."...

I am sorry to have to say that I do not understand the meaning of that test. Dampers absorb energy... what do you mean by "...Pure 12ths and 19ths have a different tone", I sincerely think I must have missed some vocabulary.

..."Also, concert grands have much more sustain on those higher notes than uprights do."...

Yes, although it varies depending on the brand. In any case, unless there is a problem with false strings, I do not have reasons to modify my tuning Form (ops...Pre-Form).

..."I also may choose tempered 12ths and pure 22nds, depending."...

Wondering "depending" what on... Perhaps you explain that later, when you say "Each choice produces differing tonal qualities; more or less consonant wide chords."

Here again, I wish I knew what you mean by "tonal qualities". This evening I tuned for a jazz event, the pianist said... "usually these chords sound out of tune". Now, the point is not how I agree with him, but how I would (in fact I do) relate "tonal quality" to "in tune", like a dictat that comes from "intonation".

If I may ask, what do you mean by "tonal qualities", and what is the discriminant for you, i.e. when would your choice be "more.. consonant", and when "..less.."?

Regards, a.c.