Pianos in the mix

Joseph writes:
<<I was thinking more of cases where one couldn't hear ANY clear
beating at all due, I think, to "noise" and from the shorter strings of
upright pianos.
Is there a reason for that lack of "clarity" in an
old piano??>>

Greetings,
Hmm, I don't think that the difference in string length is it. My
Steinway uprights have the same length of strings as a 6 foot grand,(except
the very lowest 8 notes or so.) It is also worth pointing out that the top
note on a spinet has about the same length as a concert grand! ( usually 1
7/8", maybe 1 15/16"). The middle and bass sections of spinets do have high
inharmonicity, which really can confuse the ear, but there is always some
beats in there.
The lack of "clarity"? I am not certain how this term is being used here,
but usually that means lack of partials and is often the result of dead felt
on the hammers and poor termination at the bridge pin. As a hammer wears,
the felt gets compacted, which shifts the spectrum toward the higher end,
however, the contact surface also widens which damps the higher partials.
Thus, when the hammers are rock-hard but flat, you get a terrible mix. This
is a condition more likely found in an upright, since they are usually
allowed to deteriorate farther than their more expensive, horizontal
brethren.
Regards,
Ed Foote RPT
Nashville, Tn.

--- In tuning@egroups.com, a440a@a... wrote:

http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/16672

>Ed Foote writes:
> Greetings,
> Hmm, I don't think that the difference in string length is it.
My Steinway uprights have the same length of strings as a 6 foot
grand, <cut>

But, a 6-foot grand is rather short, yes?? Occasionally, I have had
the opportunity to tune longer grands, and I noticed that the
partials are clearer and there was more precision in the tuning since
the hammer could move further and more precisely as the pitch changed
in the longer strings... At least this is what I *think* I was
experiencing. (??) What is the relationship of the length of string
to the pitch again?? The longer strings (comparing different
length pianos for the same pitch) must actually be tuned tighter,
with
a higher tension, yes (??)

(I am not a professional piano tuner, but did once work for a
professional who ultimately claimed that my tuning technique was best
suited for "jazz" pianos...)

>The middle and bass sections of spinets do have high inharmonicity,
>which really can confuse the ear, but there is always some beats in
>there.

"Some" seems to be the key word here... The "inharmonicity" is the
problem I'm referring to, I think...

> The lack of "clarity"? I am not certain how this term is being
used here, but usually that means lack of partials and is often the
result of dead felt on the hammers and poor termination at the bridge
pin.

I'd like to know more about this "poor termination at the bridge
pin." How is it "poor??" What happens?? I've also replaced broken
strings myself... probably to mixed effect... (literally)

>As a hammer wears, the felt gets compacted, which shifts the
>spectrum toward the higher end, however, the contact surface also
>widenswhich damps the higher partials. Thus, when the hammers are
>rock-hard but flat, you get a terrible mix. This is a condition
more
>likely found in an upright, since they are usually allowed to
>deteriorate farther
<cut>

Ummm... thanks, Ed. This is interesting. Most probably the bad
hammers I had were more responsible for the inharmonicity than I had
ever thought.

However, it seems on some of these "student days" old pianos, the
entire resonance of the instrument created incredible inharmonicity
that interfered with the beating of the strings. I suppose this is
possible, yes??

What fun I had in those days!
__________ ____ __ _
Joseph Pehrson

Greetings,
I wrote:
My Steinway uprights have the same length of strings as a 6 foot grand
and Joseph asks:

>>But, a 6-foot grand is rather short, yes??

The six foot pianos are regarded as "medium" size. Steinway only makes two
sizes larger and two sizes smaller. The inharmonic values in the 6 foot range
are low enough that a good electronic tuning machine can calculate a tuning
program that is hard to improve on aurally. (the little pianos require a LOT
of human compromises to accurately tune)

>>Occasionally, I have had the opportunity to tune longer grands, and I
noticed that the partials are clearer and there was more precision in the
tuning since
the hammer could move further and more precisely as the pitch changed
in the longer strings...>>

I assume you are speaking of the tuning hammer? If so, the difference is
measurable, but of little consequence. The longer strings are scaled to
carry higher tension, and since pitch is dependant on the square of the
tension, this tends to even the difference out.

>>What is the relationship of the length of string
to the pitch again?? The longer strings (comparing different
length pianos for the same pitch) must actually be tuned tighter,
with a higher tension, yes (??)

It is difficult to make that generalization, since the larger pianos
usually have heavier strings. The length is there for reduction of
inharmonicity and the increase of power.

>> I am not a professional piano tuner, but did once work for a
professional who ultimately claimed that my tuning technique was best
suited for "jazz" pianos...)<<

I would guess that you are tuning a "pure fifths" style. This tends to
stretch the octaves and really heat up the thirds! I hate it, but use it for
some jazz venues. The human ear accepts a lot of sharpness in the treble
and this sound is a real "in your face" sensation. One jazzer told me that
with this tuning, the piano was a real "blowtorch" and he was able to easily
cut through the bar sounds in the club. Kind of like having a chainsaw on
the front bumper of your car.

>>I'd like to know more about this "poor termination at the bridge
pin." How is it "poor??" What happens?? I've also replaced broken
strings myself... probably to mixed effect... (literally)<<

Poor termination is usually due to a loose bridge pin, or a string that is
not firmly seated against the angle formed by the bridge pin and bridge. A
loose pin allows the string to have two resonant periods, quite close
together, which manifests itself as a false beat. *this is the "accepted
theory amongst techs, and my own experience hasn't given me any logical
reason to doubt it. There have been many instances where I tapped
(carefully) a false beating string down on the bridge and had the note clear
up. In those cases where this doesn't help, a very small drop of very thin
superglue at the base of the pin(string held off) will usually do the trick.

>>However, it seems on some of these "student days" old pianos, the
entire resonance of the instrument created incredible inharmonicity
that interfered with the beating of the strings. I suppose this is
possible, yes??>>

I normally associate the beating with the interval. The higher
inharmonicity requires that some intervals be compromised in favor of others.
ie, very inharmonic scales on the small spinets require that the fifths or
thirds be less that evenly tuned so that the octaves will still sound right.
We have just finished our second well tempered piano CD,("Six Degrees of
Tonality") in which we have a Steinway concert grand tuned in six different
tunings. We start with Scarlatti on a 1/4 comma meantone, (inspired by Dave
Hill's meantone recording projects). The piano doesn't sound very lively but
the pure thirds are interesting and smooth. However, the next cut is
Mozart on a Prelleur well-tempered tuning of 1732 and the arrival of the
tempering is very evident.
There is some question of using the Pietro Aaron tuning with such a
Railsback influenced sound, since there was no instrument with this sort of
tension on it when Aaron documented the pure third tuning of the meantone
tunings. However, life is too short to be fettered by convention! This is
also the reason that later in the project we present Chopin on a DeMorgan
tuning in which the key characters are reversed from their normal order,
giving the more remote keys the less tempered thirds. (ah, but I digress)
Regards,
Ed Foote
Nashville,Tn.

--- In tuning@egroups.com, a440a@a... wrote:

http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/16698

Hello Ed Foote! More piano tuning "biz..."

>
> >>Occasionally, I have had the opportunity to tune longer grands,
and I noticed that the partials are clearer and there was more
precision in the tuning since the hammer could move further and more
precisely as the pitch changed in the longer strings...>>
>

> I assume you are speaking of the tuning hammer? If so, the
difference is measurable, but of little consequence. The longer
strings are scaled to carry higher tension, and since pitch is
dependant on the square of the tension, this tends to even the
difference out.
>

Yes, TUNING hammer... I noticed that ambiguity in my post later, as
well. Well, it just seemed that on the longer pianos I could move
the tuning hammer further before there was any change in pitch... and
therefore there was more precision finding beats. Does that have any
basis in physical reality, or was I just imagining this to be taking
place??

> >>What is the relationship of the length of string
> to the pitch again?? The longer strings (comparing different
> length pianos for the same pitch) must actually be tuned tighter,
> with a higher tension, yes (??)
>
> It is difficult to make that generalization, since the larger
pianos usually have heavier strings. The length is there for
reduction of inharmonicity and the increase of power.
>

Ah ha! So the "reduction of inharmonicity" *is* a part of wanting
longer strings... So wouldn't that lead to more precision in hearing
the beats with longer strings, which I was gabbing about??

> >> I am not a professional piano tuner, but did once work for a
> professional who ultimately claimed that my tuning technique was
best suited for "jazz" pianos...)<<
>

> I would guess that you are tuning a "pure fifths" style.

Oh no. I would never do that. My fifths were always tempered... I
was just a rather "novice" piano tuner at that time, hence the
comment. Hopefully, I have improved since then, but I mostly just
tune my own instrument now anyway...

By the way... do YOU, Ed, use an electronic tuner in your day by day
work? And, if so, which one is it. Is it the one you mentioned
months ago on this list. I have lost their website address, and
would enjoy a "refresher" if you might. I think the thing was around
$1,500, which is too high for the amount of tuning I do at this
point, but I still would like to know about it!

>
> >>I'd like to know more about this "poor termination at the bridge
> pin." How is it "poor??" What happens?? I've also replaced broken
> strings myself... probably to mixed effect... (literally)<<
>
> Poor termination is usually due to a loose bridge pin, or a
string that is not firmly seated against the angle formed by the
bridge pin and bridge. A loose pin allows the string to have two
resonant periods, quite close together, which manifests itself as a
false beat. *this is the "accepted theory amongst techs, and my own
experience hasn't given me any logical reason to doubt it. There
have been many instances where I tapped (carefully) a false beating
string down on the bridge and had the note clear up. In those cases
where this doesn't help, a very small drop of very thin superglue at
the base of the pin(string held off) will usually do the trick.
>

Frankly, I also think some of the "inharmonicity" of my student-days
pianos probably had something to do with these loose pins... just a
guess.

> >>However, it seems on some of these "student days" old pianos, the
> entire resonance of the instrument created incredible inharmonicity
> that interfered with the beating of the strings. I suppose this is
> possible, yes??>>
>
> I normally associate the beating with the interval. The higher
> inharmonicity requires that some intervals be compromised in favor
of others. ie, very inharmonic scales on the small spinets require
that the fifths or thirds be less that evenly tuned so that the
octaves will still sound right.

Hmmm. Well, I must admit I never got to this level of "finesse..."
but nice to hear about it! Actually, I've always enjoyed tuning
pianos and exploring the "inner workings!"

In fact, my "piano technology" courses in college were the ONLY
courses where the knowledge gained was immediately applicable to
"hitting the street" and making some cash....

As we know, the majority of music school courses do not have that
kind of applicability... marvelous as they are in their own right...

Thanks so much for the commentary, and congrats on your new tuning
CD...

____________ ___ __
Joseph Pehrson

Greetings,
>>the larger
pianos usually have heavier strings. The length is there for
reduction of inharmonicity and the increase of power. >

>So wouldn't that lead to more precision in hearing
the beats with longer strings, which I was gabbing about??

I use the word "inharmonicity" specifically to mean the degree of
deviation from pure multiples of the fundamental that the partials exhibit,
ie, the internal "stretch" that is found in a vibrating string's (in)harmonic
series. The inharmonicity doesn't make any given partial more difficult to
hear, thus, it doesn't affect the degree of difficulty in hearing the
beating. However, inharmonicity DOES make the decision HOW to use the
partials more reliant on the experience of the tuner. It is just as easy to
hear the partials when they are wildly inharmonic as when less so, it is just
more difficult to find a compromise that is musically acceptable. This may
be somewhat tighter a definition than the general musical world is accustomed
to.

>>Frankly, I also think some of the "inharmonicity" of my student-days
pianos probably had something to do with these loose pins... just a
guess.<<
Possible, but I also suspect that here the definition of inharmonicity is
being expanded to cover the "trash noise" that is in the sound.

>>do YOU, Ed, use an electronic tuner in your day by day
work? I think the thing was around
$1,500, which is too high for the amount of tuning I do at this
point, but I still would like to know about it!<<

Yes, I now use the Sanderson ACCU-TUNER III. It is built by
Inventronics ( Dr. Albert Sanderson). I think the web address can be found
with most search engines, can then begin to refine this template with
repeated use, ultimately arriving at a tuning which doesn't require further
tweaking. It will hold 176 such patterns in memory.
Also, once this "template" is had, all sorts of data manipulation is ava
ilable. Not only can the tuning then be shifted into all the documented
temperaments of the past, it can be lifted or lowered to meet the demands
for A-442 or A-435. It also allows pianos to have their pitch raised or
lowered far more accurately and easily.
These machines have filters that allow them to listen to a specific
partial of any given note. There are a lot of them, used, on the market. An
Accutuner II may be had for about $700, these days. It doens't have all the
bells and whistles, but will still accurately select and measure any given
partial to a +- .1 cent !!

>>In fact, my "piano technology" courses in college were the ONLY
courses where the knowledge gained was immediately applicable to
"hitting the street" and making some cash<<

Where did you take these courses? I now have had a lab built for me in
our new music school at Vanderbilt, and there is an option of me writing some
courses,(they DO worry about offering a "trade school" course amongst their
ivory walls, but I think I can get it past them on the basis of calling it an
art......)
Regards,
Ed Foote
Nashville

--- In tuning@egroups.com, a440a@a... wrote:

http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/16766

> I use the word "inharmonicity" specifically to mean the
degree of deviation from pure multiples of the fundamental that the
partials exhibit, ie, the internal "stretch" that is found in a
vibrating string's (in)harmonic series. The inharmonicity doesn't
make any given partial more difficult to hear, thus, it doesn't
affect the
degree of difficulty in hearing the beating. However, inharmonicity
DOES make the decision HOW to use the partials more reliant on the
experience of the tuner. It is just as easy to hear the partials when
they are wildly inharmonic as when less so, it is just more difficult
to find a compromise that is musically acceptable. This may be
somewhat tighter a definition than the general musical world is
accustomed to.
>
> >>Frankly, I also think some of the "inharmonicity" of my
student-days pianos probably had something to do with these loose
pins... just a guess.<< Possible, but I also suspect that here the
definition of inharmonicity is being expanded to cover the "trash
noise" that is in the sound.
>

Got it! But then, how do you, in your framework, technically
distinguish "inharmonicity" from "trash noise." By "inharmonicity"
are you refering to patterns of overtones that APPROXIMATELY resemble
the harmonic series?? I'm a little confused on this point...

Thanks, by the way, for the info. on the electronic tuners. I think
I'll try to pick up a used one... It would be good, at least, to
know how to operate it!

> >>In fact, my "piano technology" courses in college were the ONLY
> courses where the knowledge gained was immediately applicable to
> "hitting the street" and making some cash<<
>
> Where did you take these courses? I now have had a lab built
for me in our new music school at Vanderbilt, and there is an option
of me writing some courses,(they DO worry about offering a "trade
school" course amongst their ivory walls, but I think I can get it
past them on the basis of calling it an art......)

I studied "Piano Technology" for a full year at the University of
Michigan School of Music under the tutelage of Kurt Pickett, an
interesting German instructor who had a great accent, and a deep
interest in tuning systems. I'm sure he would have been fascinated
by this list. It was the first time that I had even heard of the
Pythagorean comma! We learned the "German A" system of tuning...
using A440 as a reference point. Only later, when I did some
freelance tuning, did I learn that there was also a "Smith C"
system... beginning on, I believe, middle C...

The first semester was dedicated to tuning, and some of the concepts
behind it (not quite so deep as we get on this list... but going
there), and the second semester was the physical repair of, mostly,
grand pianos...

What a great course! I enjoyed this more than practially any other
course I took, with the exception of acoustics with John Clough
which, you can imagine, would be something special!

This whole "trade school" snobbery really bothers me... since I
believe music schools and conservatories should now teach PRACTICAL
courses in addition to more abstract fare. Basic computer
technology... processing, graphics, programming, should be part of
the package as well... since so many composers and musicians are
finding they have to make a living OUTSIDE of academia.

Only 50% of PhD's or DMA's in the liberal arts ever find teaching
jobs these days... and the other half?? Well, they have no practical
skills when they graduate....

Need a piano tuned (??)
___________ _______ ___ __
Joseph Pehrson

Joesph asks:
>>But then, how do you, in your framework, technically
distinguish "inharmonicity" from "trash noise." By "inharmonicity"
are you refering to patterns of overtones that APPROXIMATELY resemble
the harmonic series?? <<

Trash noise is the non spectrum stuff; impact noise, extraneous phase
sounds, etc. Inharmonicity is the degree of sharpness that the partials
exhibit from mathematical multiples of the fundamental . It is where
stretch comes from.
Regards,
Ed Foote RPT

--- In tuning@egroups.com, a440a@a... wrote:

http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/16825

>Trash noise is the non spectrum stuff; impact noise, extraneous
phase sounds, etc. Inharmonicity is the degree of sharpness that
the partials exhibit from mathematical multiples of the fundamental
.
It is where stretch comes from.

Thanks so much Ed, for explaining white trash noise...

_______ _____ ___ __
Joseph Pehrson