Re: tuning keyboards

>The modern, state of the art, tuning machines produce consistant tunings
>with a tolerance of .1 cent. This is a negligible amount, so it is safe to
>say that two tuners with the right machines are going to be >indistinguishable from one another to the vast majority of musicians.

I meant that different machines or different people produce different tunings, but that they are each consistent with themselves. That is, I was agreeing with you.

I wasn't coming from any anti-machine thing. Sanderson tuners produce some of the best-sounding tunings I've ever heard (of course the big plus is speed). Just that the standard of accuracy is defined by the listener at this point, not on paper, since it isn't always clear what they're listening to.

>Often, unisons actually sound better when out by about .2 cents, (Weinriech >effect), but it has to be very carefully done.

I'm not familiar with this effect...

-C.

>>Often, unisons actually sound better when out by about .2 cents, (Weinriech
>>effect), but it has to be very carefully done.
>
>I'm not familiar with this effect...

Gabriel Weinriech, (I think that is the correct spelling), published a
study on the coupled motion of piano strings. It is included in the "Five
Lectures On The Piano" or something titled like that.
It was found that the apparent increase in impedance at the bridge that
results from slightly out of tune unisons will increase the sustain. The
locking of the frequencies, which happens among the three strings, produces a
clearer, longer sounding unison when there is a very slight discrepancy.
This can explain why some machine tuners sound differently than others. The
attention to the micro-level of unison agreement pays off in a piano that has
a clarity and sustain that it otherwise would not have.
Regards,
Ed Foote

I agree that unisons can have a nice affect mini-out but you have to be careful which side of the phase you're on.
P

Carl Lumma wrote:

> From: Carl Lumma <clumma@nni.com>
>
> >The modern, state of the art, tuning machines produce consistant tunings
> >with a tolerance of .1 cent. This is a negligible amount, so it is safe to
> >say that two tuners with the right machines are going to be >indistinguishable from one another to the vast majority of musicians.
>
> I meant that different machines or different people produce different tunings, but that they are each consistent with themselves. That is, I was agreeing with you.
>
> I wasn't coming from any anti-machine thing. Sanderson tuners produce some of the best-sounding tunings I've ever heard (of course the big plus is speed). Just that the standard of accuracy is defined by the listener at this point, not on paper, since it isn't always clear what they're listening to.
>
> >Often, unisons actually sound better when out by about .2 cents, (Weinriech >effect), but it has to be very carefully done.
>
> I'm not familiar with this effect...
>
> -C.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Wanting to get back in touch with old friends?
> http://www.onelist.com
> Reunite through a ONElist community.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> You do not need web access to participate. You may subscribe through
> email. Send an empty email to one of these addresses:
> tuning-subscribe@onelist.com - subscribe to the tuning list.
> tuning-unsubscribe@onelist.com - unsubscribe from the tuning list.
> tuning-digest@onelist.com - switch your subscription to digest mode.
> tuning-normal@onelist.com - switch your subscription to normal mode.