[pianotech] re: the true properties of EBVT

[David Ilvedson]

So it was Ron that opened the box...shame on you

David I.



----- Original message ---------------------------------------->
From: Ron Koval <drwoodwind@hotmail.com>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Received: Mon, 09 Sep 2002 18:54:31 +0000
Subject: [pianotech] re: the true properties of EBVT

>Bill, Ed, and other respected technicians,

>I read and re-read what got thrown out on the list on this topic.  As I've 
>been involved in this thread for many years, I thought it was time for me to 
>respond.   Now, what got me to write is this:

>Bill Bremmer wrote:

>Ed Foote lied and tried to escalate a fight on this list as he has done many 
>times in the past by saying:

>>This doesn't change the fact that the ebvt creates a more tempered E-G# of 
>>17+cents than the F#-A# of 13.7.  It is folly to think that going up two 
>>semitones will somehow make the F# third seem to beat faster.  It doesn't, 
>>and the harmonic balance is poor because of it.
><snip>

>(Back to Bill Bremmer)
>These are the correct figures which Ed knows are correct and do not create 
>an imbalance but instead, Equal Beating, which is allowed under 
>Werkmeister's rules:

>E3           17.5

>F#3         16.0

>I tune by ear, so rather than depending on a program, I listen to what I am 
>doing.  The very last thing I would ever do is create a temperament which 
>has the kind of imbalances which Ed maliciously used to try to discredit 
>what I've been doing for 10 years.
><snip>


>Back to me...
>Now, without any inflammatory language, what I see here is a 
>misunderstanding of terms.

>Ed described, using the the width of Major thirds in cents, a non-standard 
>progression, when comparing the latest published figures for the EBVT.  Bill 
>responded, correctly, that BEATS, not cents, govern what we hear.  However, 
>the above numbers, showing beats/second still show that by using the 
>published numbers, the Emaj third will beat one and a half beats/second 
>faster than the F#maj third.  These numbers still support Ed's position.

>So, I think the terminology of equal beating has caused some confusion.  
>Those of us "number crunchers" took the term very literally.  Equal means 
>equal.  This has been the difficulty making the numbers work for the EBVT..  
>If we are now to accept that for the purposes of creating the temperament, 
>16 equals (or is close enough to) 17.5, there is a much wider range into 
>which this temperament may fit.

>Respectfully submitted,

>Ron Koval







>_________________________________________________________________
>Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
>http://www.hotmail.com

>_______________________________________________
>pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives