EBVT imbalances disproven?

[Ron Koval]

I've just caught up from the weekend's messages and thought I'd try to get 
this back on track.

Bill responded to my temperament morphing idea with:

That's called "aural tuning", Ron.  Surely, when I get to the point where I 
am satisfied with a set of correction figures for the EBVT, all of the 
interval data that could be extrapolated from that would produce a list and 
that list would be like any other.

Do you really think that if you used correction figures for any given
temperament, then tuned several different kinds of ordinary pianos,

<snip>

Actually, I think it's called inharmonicity, and it works very well with the 
Verituner, thank you very much.  But seriously, check out my other post 
today for some inharmonicity information that should help you in measuring 
the EBVT.  The key point being that you should shift your measuring range 
above C4.

We are approaching the goal of setting a temperament on a piano from 
different directions.  As an aural tuner, you may work with concepts like: 
how far from pure (6 bps), or equally beating, or faster, or slower.  Those 
of us working with the EDT's will be coming from the direction of how far 
from ET.  So yes, the ability for the machine to get a good ET is crucial. 
(hint for all:Verituner)  Or, as Ed and some others choose, use an aurally 
adjusted, machine calculated, saved tuning before overlaying the offset 
numbers.

So to answer the question about if we get consistant, measured results on 
different pianos: yes, well at least I do.  I'll be measuring more this week 
to confirm.  That's kindof the whole point of using a precision tool when 
tuning. (I'll get on my soapbox about precise vs. accurate another day)

Ron Koval


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