You want to try an experiment?

If you send me a soundfile with every note of your piano from A0-C7 played about ten times, (single string only) I'll send you a couple of tunelab files calculated with the Verituner....

It's something I've thought about, but never tried yet. Long distance tuning!

I could send you something inspired by Pique's tuning, or something that matches your overall current stretch. You can go ET or overlay EBVT on your own. (or are you doing an aural EBVT now?)

I've been doing the EBVT aurally, but checking my accuracy with TuneLab, as I go. But I wouldn't mind an experiment. I'm due for a tuning right now, but had deferred it for some time, due to a back issue. I've actually been off of even playing, until this past week. Where I'd left off, I'd been thinking, "tuning time". But, as I've been playing, I'm thinking, "Oh picky ears". Touch up at least though. And I think it'd be best to do the exprement from a cleanly tuned piano, no? How would it skew the experiment to go with the EBVT as the starting point? I'm not budging off of that one. I would think it would skew any suggested tuning. It seems the experiment should probably have to have that starting point of the thing tuned equal. But I'm really not willing to go back there, if that's required for the experiment. So. Short answer, I dunno.

RT,

Could you fill us none tuners in on the ET and EBVT?

Ah, sorry, Equal Temperament and Equal Beating Victorian Temperament...

CG, for the sampling, it doesn't matter where the pitch is. (within 15-20 cents or so)

I can overlay the temperament for you, or let you try it in the Lehman Bach, or my own KV2.1 for a similar strength to the EBVT. I thought if I'd just send the ET file, you could save it and then overlay whatever temperament you want to try.

I suppose before you go and start recording, I'll run some tests this week to see if I can make it work...

I'll give you my take on it. It is a tuning that has evolved over time which was originated by Bill Bremmer some years ago, which is called Equal Beating Victorian Temperament.

It is a "well" temperament, meaning it is not equal. All well temperaments of whatever form are intended to provide some key "color" a bit of contrasting tension between some intervals, while also providing very relaxed and consonant intervals as well, rather than having every interval yielding the same amount of non-consonance and evenly distributed tension that "equal" (as if) does.

It's rather difficult to describe all the differences among the many, many well temperaments that exist. It's easier to just say that among them, I find the EBVT puts the pitches just where I want to hear them with my picky ears.

I've done equal, and rather textbook perfect at that. What I found is that pitches were not where I wanted them. Play something like "Clair de Lune" and compare it to an ideal of the mind for where you want those moments of tension and moments of unifying relaxation and release of tension.

Compare equal on a piano to some of the great recordings of what I see as a golden age of piano recording in the 50s. I was seeking to match that. So I tried several wells. Eventually Bill's. And with it, I had that "Aha!" moment. Finally, the piano just sounds like I think it ought. Notes seem to stand out in thick chords such that you can actually hear them individually, even while they blend. Just the right amount of consonance at intervals, but not so much that they sound like mush. And yet, no clashing. Except when you choose those intentionally dissonant intervals in music that uses it to advantage to perhaps bring out an ominous voice. There again, it's just more of what one wants in those intervals--a bit more tension, without having to just imagine it.

The technical description of doing the EBVT is more than I want to try to explain, since Bill's already put that on the web somewhere that I forget. Just like all the wells, it involves a particular tuning sequence and discretionary choices at the intervals, tempering them one direction or the other from theoretical pure even, by discrete amounts, depending on the interval. That results in those intervals beating more or less than equal would yield, depending on the interval.

What I think characterizes Bills tuning is the *impression* that various intervals *seem* to beat equally amid the actual music-making process, because of the way we actually construct notes in the various keys and how we want those to sound when we do. But I say "impression" and "seemes" because the intervals measured in the tuning process are anything *but* equal beating, while paradoxically seeming to be quite the perfect blend in actual use.

I don't know if that makes sense. But there is no interval that seems to stand out as a sore point while playing. No note that sounds impure or off from what my mind's ear wants to hear. No amount of beating amid intervals that yields what I call a "whine" that is sometimes evident on some pianos amid that decay part of the sound envelope. It's in that part of it where I hear the most difference. The beating of those intervals seems to remain steady, not rising or falling during that bit of sustained sound after the initial attack. I think of that bit of sound as being very important to a piano seeming to "breath". If a piano doesn't have that element brought out well, it becomes just too "percussive". I want that part after the attack to hang out there in the air unless I allow the damper to stop it, when *I* want it stopped, and not before. But it's got to sound clean while it's out there. Consonant with the attack part of the sound. That's where I hear the real improvement with EBVT.

I really felt like only with that tuning did the Chickering find its voice--the one I expected, when comparing it to my benchmark, the one in the Smithsonian. New hammers got me halfway there. But the tuning was the other half that got that "breathing" as I call it.

With that combination, I simply quit thinking about tinkering and tuning and got off into playing with a sense that I'm never disappointed in the piano for any piece of music I've thrown at it, whether classical LvB, DeBussey, Lecuona, or jazz like Desmond, Handy, or Joplin, or contemporary, or even the more modern bits that I don't think really have a proper name. All of them sound quite at home with that tuning. I never felt they did with Equal, or any of the other temperaments I tried. And I find myself these several years in still being wowed by the piano every time I play it, sometimes so much I just stop after I play and look at it, thinking how lucky I am.

So I stick to it. I've been tuning it for 3 years now and do a full tuning in about 2 hours now. And I'm happy every time. I have no issues replicating it. And it seems, for whatever reason, more stable. I think that might be a happy coincidence of matching pitch offsets to the natural differences in tensions on my particular piano's scale, but I've never put it to a spreadsheet to test or prove that that might be so. But it seems the piano can go a very long time between tunings.

I wish I'd measured Ron Nossaman's tuning when I first got it. That was gorgeous as well. And I'm fairly certain it wasn't textbook equal, even if that was the idea. It was certainly very well tempered to bring out a great voice.

quote:

Originally posted by rontuner:
Ah, sorry, Equal Temperament and Equal Beating Victorian Temperament...

CG, for the sampling, it doesn't matter where the pitch is. (within 15-20 cents or so)

I can overlay the temperament for you, or let you try it in the Lehman Bach, or my own KV2.1 for a similar strength to the EBVT. I thought if I'd just send the ET file, you could save it and then overlay whatever temperament you want to try.

I suppose before you go and start recording, I'll run some tests this week to see if I can make it work...

My question would be whether the sampling will be adequate going from recording to the verituner to really arrive at the best result.

I'll be checking that....

The VT is "listening" for location of the sounding partials, not tone, or even volume - that's why cheap little microphones do just fine. What will be missing long distance is the multi-partial responsiveness that the VT offers live.

Picture this:

The VT predicts, based on the measurements, not just where one partial should be tuned, but on a number of partials. Then it listens to all of them and based on the strength of each sounding, will favor one or another if the calculated placements do NOT match as projected. Kindof a backup plan if the calculation doesn't quite match the piano. All I can give you for tunelab is a single offset for each partial. (Actually, now that I think of it, I could send you a spreadsheet for all of the calculated offsets and let you plug them into tunelab- that way you could switch for a weak partial.... hmmm.....)

..more thinkin' required...

How conversant are most tuners with EBVT? I wonder if I could just ask my regular tech about doing it, without raising eyebrows.

Good question.

When my tuner comes out, I just say "tune it," point out an area or two that is particularly egregious, and go futz around until he's done.

I am such a rube. It never occurred to me to request a particular tuning.

What is the "standard" tuning that most people end up getting when they have their piano tuned? Or is there such a thing?

Those are the BIG questions!

The simple answer is that equal temperament is the 'default' tuning as of the early part of last century - and that any tuner that works on you piano will end up with the same tuning.

Of course that's not true, so the REAL answer is much more complex. For example, even though equal temperament may be the goal, the margin for error is painfully small to actually achieve that goal. There is even some question whether ET was ever tuned on a regular basis before the 50's or 60's - or even now! (especially by aural techs.)

The other big question has to do with how all the notes with the same name relate to each other.... the "stretch" of the tuning.

Joe,

Does your regular tech tune with a machine? It is much easier to try alternate tunings using an electronic tuning device. There are also aural directions on the web - Chickgrand may have a link handy...

It's my belief, (after trying to analyze Bill Bremmer's tuning results) that the EBVT is more a style approach, rather than a strict temperament approach. He varys the consonences and dissonences based on the instrument, so one tuning may not play like the next.

quote:

Originally posted by Nina:
I am such a rube. It never occurred to me to request a particular tuning.

You are in good company! I taught a class on alternate temperaments over the summer and asked this question:

How often have you been requested to tune equal temperament?

Only one tech remembered a few occasions, only because he sometimes tunes other temperaments for clients.

My point was to head-off the normal question asked by techs:
"No one has requested an alternate temperament, why should I even learn about them?"

It's an interesting question - Who chose equal temperament? Was it the pianists, the composers, or the tuners? Is it really required to play in all keys? (no)

quote:

Originally posted by rontuner:
Joe,

Does your regular tech tune with a machine? It is much easier to try alternate tunings using an electronic tuning device.

No, he tunes by ear. But who knows, I could ask him anyway. I've been intrigued by this tuning ever since it came up on the PW tech's forum a couple of years ago.

Of course, I could just call up Bill Bremmer...I met him in Madison, where he tuned for some concerts I was involved in.

And to tie this into another thread in Off Key...The concerts were at the Frank Lloyd Wright church...which leaks.

quote:

Originally posted by RealPlayer:
...The concerts were at the Frank Lloyd Wright church...which leaks.

There was a house up the street from me in the old neighborhood he'd built, too. Not as elegant as that Fallingwater, but with water features, too. It leaked. Then, near here where I am now, there's a residential high-rise with hanging gardens and water features that he designed. It's been closed for some time, awaiting renovation. Because it leaks. I assume he studied architecture at the British School of Automotive Engineering.

quote:

Originally posted by rontuner:
...Chickgrand may have a link handy...

The site that had hosted Bill's directions cratered a couple of years back. I think he put a post in the PW TTF to sub for it some time after that. I'd printed out his instructions from the original site so that I could have them in front of me while tuning. I may have a digital file somewhere, too, but finding it...