Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum Verituner vs Tunelab

Currently use tunelab but considering switching over to veritune, its expensive but am wondering if the price is worth it over tunelab.
Anyone compared both ?
I normally use tunelab to get me in the ballpark on a first pass then tweak things aurally on a 2nd pass.

If you want to use verituner the same way - a two-step approach where you finish aurally, it probably isn't worth your effort..

If you want to use the Verituner so that the calculation ends up right where you would tune aurally,(or in many cases, better) it is well worth the cost and effort to learn the software! The custom-style lets you dictate how you want the software to use the data gathered to shape the tuning.

Ron Koval

Like you, I use Tunelab to get me in the ballpark and then I adjust aurally. I also wondered whether switching from Tunelab to Verituner was worth it.

I don't own Verituner but I have found that Tunelab has trouble with strings that are not perfect, for example, oscillating displays or multi-peak spectra. In the end, my ear does a much better job of reconciling all of the factors to put the pitch where I want it. Perhaps Verituner takes care of these problems?

Thanks Ron, Of course i would like to learn to use vertituner to its full extent,
Have you tried tunelab and if so had any success with it reproducing results similar to a good aural tuning ?

I'm wondering if you're using TuneLab to it's full potential. I have TuneLab and Tunic OnlyPure and I've been working on getting TuneLab to conform with the perfect 12ths temperament that OnlyPure does. It's a great temperament that many aural tuners say sounds more like what they like to hear. You might experiment with these settings - Take only one reading from the bass section, the highest wound string and then take about 3 readings from the treble. Maybe C4, 5 & 6. Do NOT invoke split-scale mode but DO use the Auto Partial Selection like normal. Go to the Tuning Curve page and set the bass at 8:4 and the treble at 3:1 12ths. See what you think of those settings.

You might look at what spectrum zoom you're on. I like the +130 cents w/Mid 20 cents expanded. Also, I like to use it in landscape mode so the spectrum display isn't so tall. Seems to be easier to read to me.

Having said all that...I think Verituner would be a great app to own. I might have tried it by now but it's only available for iPhone and I'm an Android guy. Yes, I could buy a cheap iPhone/iPad but, I don't want to. Also, you might take a look at Tunic OnlyPure. It's really fabulous software!

Thanks Scott

Yes i'll try that out for sure, I also use the 130 cents w/mid 20 cents expanded view.
Why do you only take one reading from the bass ? Do you find those settings work for a variety of piano sizes ?

I must also try experimenting with how you can manipulate the tuning cure with custom offsets, have you tried this ?
Tune a few octaves aurally, mark the notes as custom offsets, then adjust the curve to the offsets by selecting different octave types or by manipulating the full or semi manual curve adjustment.

Scott,

As I only use TuneLab set to 50 cents display, I'm curious why you chose 130/20 as it is much courser for fine tuning

Ian

I only take one reading from the bass because it usually messes up the perfect 12ths. Morphs it into something else. It seems, so far, that those settings do work for various size pianos. The only thing I change is maybe going to 10:5 in the bass on a 9' grand. That stretches the bass more.

Yes, custom offsets and changing the curve are very useful. In this instance my goal is to get TuneLab to conform to a perfect 12ths tuning with the full automatic mode.

Yes, I see what you mean. I got used to the 130/20 because of doing a lot of pitch raises and also the 50 cents display moves around as you get higher and lower. I found that disconcerting. Nothing wrong with any of the display modes, it's just personal preference.

Kent Swafford has been working on a "perfect 12ths" approach - similar to OnlyPure, but hasn't applied it to Tunelab because he isn't familiar with that platform... Maybe Scott will be able to find something that works.

I always ran into problems (subtle) with mid range octaves crossing over to the bass bridge on many pianos while using Tunelab. None of the tweaks I tried let me customize enough there.

For me, any 'magic' in tuning happens at the very subtle level - I believe the way Verituner gathers data and then applies that data to the calculation makes for a superior tuning result. It may actually be most noticeable on more challenging scales.

Ron Koval

Ron, I agree with you completely.

I might update things with regard to the various ETDs. OnlyPure, CyberTuner, and Verituner can tune excellent pure 12th ET on most any piano.

I also own and am now familiar with both the SAT and TuneLab, both of which may produce acceptable traditional tunings.

There is a procedure out there purported to use the SAT's DOB to tune pure 12th ET. On very, very good pianos this procedure, which I do not distribute myself, works rather better than I might have expected. However, on lesser scales the procedure may not work so well.

I have failed to find a procedure that will allow TuneLab to tune an accurate and reliable pure 12th ET. If pure 12th ET were possible with TuneLab it seems like the calculations would use the 3:1 12th in the treble and the 6:2 12th in the bass. But I note that Scott is suggesting partials other than 6:2; this indicates a problem, at least to me. Much like with SAT, on very, very good pianos, TuneLab may do OK, but it will have inherent difficulty with lesser scales, the very scales that seem to benefit the most when pure 12th ET is tuned on them accurately.

I am continuing to explore, but for the moment, I am happy to recommend OnlyPure, RCT, and Verituner for pure 12th ET tunings.

I am curious if you Mr. Koval and Swafford have tried the easy piano tuner by Mr Willey.

Thanks

What problems were you always running into when you were using Tunelab? Are you able to be more specific? What tweaks did you try and why and what were you actually trying to accomplish? and why do you think that it never worked out for you?

Hi Mark - Often, the octaves were too wide (for what I wanted to accomplish) in that crucial area - no matter what changes I had made using the adjustment curves and selecting specific partials. I was about to begin experimenting with changing the measured iH constants that the software was using, but it was suggested that trying to do that might cause more unexpected problems than were worth the effort.I believe that there are two specific places where there are structural differences between Verituner and Tunelab which lead to the problems I experienced.
1. Data collected and used from measurements. (Boiling down to an iH constant or using more complete measurements.)
2. Driving the calculation note-by-note, vs creating a "curve" of any specific partial.

It really is surprising how well the iH constant and smooth curve model has done to push the tuning level over the past decades - consider the technology level used for the earlier rounds of the aural vs ETD competitions that ended essentially with a draw!

As in many things in the service world, my goal is not to only find a way to make something work, but to make it efficient, repeatable and easy to learn and share. It didn't seem that I could get the level of tunings I was looking for, though again, the level of change I'm talking about is often pretty subtle on decent pianos.

Ron Koval

Thanks for explaining Ron.

I must admit that I have no problems with Tunelab. I only have problems with the pianos themselves. I, in general am able to work something out for most pianos that is satisfactory to me and to my clients (some of my clients are extremely discerning, and they have said that they are very pleased with the tuning).

What I like about Tunelab is that it is an adjunct to my ears. I must admit that I am not that much into partial/s tuning but whole sound and interval tuning, so basically I tune for the best sound of various intervals and Tunelab is a big asset for this.

I'm glad to hear you're doing some experimenting with TuneLab!

Mark,

Do you use the custom offset feature much to adjust the tuning curve ?

I know you didn't ask me, but I have used it and I think it's very capable software, however, as the name implies, it is simple and is not able to do a perfect 12ths tuning like we're talking about. But, if you want a conventional ET it does the job. Functions kinda like Verituner in that it continues to take readings and make small adjustments as you tune. It's recommended to do 2 passes for that reason. Hey, for $20 it's pretty awesome!

Thanks Scott, you were the one who had me look it up!

I did try it. And it did work well.

I think I was able to use it because I have been tuning so long, the spinner/strobe is not very steady, there is no info on how far you are from theorethical. Like C8 at 30 cents sharp etc... so you have to blindly trust it. No adjustments whatsoever are available.

Then again, because of the lack of info, I enjoyed having to use my ears to test the software. I mean I obviously always use my ears, but with this you kinda wanna find fault, so your ears are the judge. Something I should do more often to keep me from being "blazé".

At 20$, I'm sure some of the other developers can't be too happy. I have been using tunelab for years, was thinking of trying verituner or tunic, and this little software has me enjoying using my ears again. What I was looking forward to do with verituner or tunic.

Thanks for giving me a headsup about this app.

Jean

Am I the only one using Entropy Piano Tuner?

It has it's bugs but when it works it

1) Calculates a really nice tuning (not much customization possible though)
2) Visualizes all partials really precisely in the strobe tuner view