[CAUT] FW: S&S Guidelines

[Horace Greeley]

Hi, Fred,

Very well said, and directly in line with my own long-time experience.

I think the only thing I would add would be that it is often the 
second-chair wind players who drive up pitch the most (and the most 
quickly).  More competent composers than myself may wish to chime in 
on this, but I think that part of it has to do with them so often 
winding up in first or second inversion.  This is most noticeable 
with clarinets and bassoons, though also often found in second and 
fourth horns.  Many modern orchestras do not even have a pitch 
center, themselves, so, it is often hard to tell what to do without 
some experience with the group.

Best regards.

Horace


At 05:44 PM 5/7/2008, Fred Sturm wrote:
>On May 6, 2008, at 9:51 PM, Cy Shuster wrote:
>
>>Re: [CAUT] FW: S&S GuidelinesWhat's the deal with this?  Bottom of
>>page 2: "Concert Instruments should be tuned to A-441 to more easily
>>address requests for pitch changes."
>>
>>Sure, it's a pitch raise up and back to go to 442, but do they
>>expect you to drop down from 441 just before a concert and pop it
>>back up, just in case someone wants 442, or do they want you to have
>>the thing four cents sharp all the time?
>>
>>--Cy--
>>ABQ, NM
>Hi Cy,
>         They mean keep it at 441 as a substitute for 440. It's a practical
>matter from many points of view, and it has been fairly standard
>procedure among many if not most C & A techs to the best of my
>knowledge for quite some time. Do keep in mind we are talking about an
>instrument used primarily for concerto with orchestra. The reasoning
>is that
>1) sharp will be more acceptable than flat
>2) stage lights will make the instrument go flat
>3) it is easier to accommodate requests for higher pitch
>4) 441 is within the range an orchestra can accommodate/tune to
>5)  concerti usually come after the first piece in the concert, so the
>winds will likely be warmer, hence going sharper, as opposed to the
>beginning when they might find it harder to tune a bit sharp
>
>         Steinway folks are very practical. The absolute #1 priority 
> for them
>in the realm of tuning is crystal clear unisons, and a rock solid
>tuning. Lots of other things can be compromised to varying degrees,
>but not unisons and stability. Hence, if pitch is off a bit, tune it
>where it is unless you happen to have extra time (and plan to have
>extra time if possible next time you see the instrument). Same with
>precision of temperament and other similar concerns. It is in this
>context that the recommendation of 441 should be taken. They want the
>instrument to contribute positively to the performance. If there is
>any noticeable drift in unisons, it will detract. Slight variance in
>pitch will be unnoticed except perhaps to a few members of the
>orchestra, far less important than the audience.
>         I really liked Steve Carver's article on concert tuning in 
> May's PTJ.
>It hit several points very well, including the one about minimizing
>pitch change (of individual strings as well as the piano as a whole),
>maintaining an established balance.
>         Note that this 441 notion doesn't really apply to cauts very often
>(maybe to a larger hall that serves visiting ensembles), as we are
>mostly dealing with recital halls, and with instruments that are used
>in small ensemble, usually with one other instrument. In that
>circumstance, the soloist is far more sensitive to pitch. And our
>stage lights are less likely to be as extreme. And we are far less
>likely to need to accommodate visiting orchestras and artists
>requesting 442 or higher. Personally, I maintain both recital hall
>instruments within 1 cent of 440 at all times. I allow very minor
>float when I don't have time to correct it. Using an ETD, this is a
>pretty simple matter (though honing and nailing unisons is never
>really easy - no room for loss of focus).
>
>Regards,
>Fred Sturm
>University of New Mexico
>fssturm at unm.edu
>