Peterson AutoStrobe

[Brian Trout]

Hi Robert,

Thank you for the comments.  I agree whole heartedly.  There are a lot of
complexities and variations in inharmonicity that no doubt vary quite a bit
from note to note.

The things that I have been noticing in particular have more to do with the
amount of stretch and where fits in the best.

The temperament region for me is basically the two octaves below A-440.  In
that area, we agree almost without dispute, with the possible exception of
the lower half of the lower octave.  (I've been using David Porrit's
'Calculate' to start off.)  My ear wants to hear less stretch in this area,
and usually Tunelab wants it stretched more.  It's only a mater of a cent or
so usually, but if I really don't like the sound of what it's telling me to
do, I will "lean" it in the direction I think it sounds best.  Overall, it
likes the bass a bit flatter than I do in the upper parts of the bass, and I
like it a bit flatter than it does in the bottom octave or so.

In the regions above the temperament, I like to hear the beat rates of the
intervals increase a bit faster than Tunelab usually calculates them, and
the overall stretch usually doesn't go as far as I would normally go
aurally.  But we can usually come to an agreement, even if I have to go into
the graphic tuning editor and tweak a bit.

The things I mention are quite minimal though, considering the overall
picture.  As an example, I had tuned a 7' grand for three weeks in a row.
The first and second weeks it was done aurally.  The third week, I used
Tunelab.  I muted with a mute strip and tuned the middle strings.  When I
pulled out the mute strip, I could have left the outside strings untuned and
probably half of the performers who might have used it would not have found
the unisons in the temperament area offensive.  The worst of the bass was
about 1/2 cycle off, most of it not that bad.  The treble was about the same
as the bass, the worst offenders being perhaps 1/2 to 3/4 cycles off, most
not anywhere near that bad.

I was being picky.  I do think that an electronic tuning device can be a
good tool to help one to be a better tuner.  I can't help but think that
those who tune strictly by the machine and fail to even use the ear are
somehow shortchanging themselves.  It's just an opinion.  (I'm sure others
have differing ones, and that's o.k.)

I do appreciate the comments though.

Thanks,

Brian Trout
Quarryville, PA
btrout@desupernet.net

----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Scott <rscott@wwnet.net>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2000 12:53 PM
Subject: Re: Peterson AutoStrobe


> Brian Trout writes:
>
> >I've been messing around with Tunelab, trying to get it
> >to tell me where my inconsistencies are, and believe it is helping
> >me to be a better tuner.
>
> At the risk of deflecting a compliment, let me suggest that the
> "inconsistencies" that TuneLab shows in your aural tuning might
> actually be evidence of your (proper) aural accomodation of irregular
> inharmonicity that TuneLab doesn't know about.
>
> -Robert Scott
>  author of TuneLab
>
>
>