"Bloom" comments: tuning vs voicing, etc.

Joseph Garrett joegarrett@earthlink.net
Sun, 24 Mar 2002 10:22:30 -0800


all,
I HAVE to comment here, as I was the one who started this controversy.
Although, I agree that proper hammer to string matching is essential and
voicing is prime, I still contend that the tuning can be the major factor of
"bloom".
Having just returned from the Pacific Northwest Conference, in Pasco
Washington, the emails have piled up.
One of my classes was on "bird-cage" pianos (correctly: Over-damper pianos).
I was furnished with a German, overstrung, Overdamper Upright, vintage circa
1875. This piano had been restrung, but little else was done, in terms of
action work. The piano, initially, sounded, as most of these do, awful! I
spent about 4 hours on correcting the miscellaneous playing problems and
then pitch raised it and tuned it. I used a John Marsh Meantone temperament,
as I believe that HT is far more appropriate on a true Olde instrument,
rather than a modern instrument.
The results: All, (yes, All), in the class agreed that the instrument
sounded quite nice. None could identify what kind of temperament was on the
instrument. As I did the pitch raise in ET, I can attest that the piano
sounded ok, but did
not have much warmth and didn't seem to have much "projection". After
putting the John Marsh tuning on the piano, it did, in fact "Bloom".
I submit all of this, simply for your consideration.
One final thing: with these type of instruments, the damping is always a
bone of contention with most techs. I have found that when a "Bird-cage" is
out of tune, it sounds like _ _ _ _, (pick an adjective) ;-). But, when
properly tuned the damping becomes less of a "bone of contention". This
fact, is IMHO part of the thing that creates the "bloom".
Thanks for listening.
Best Regards,
Joe Garrett, RPT, (Oregon)



This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC