I would just delete the C3 reading - seems like it might be a faulty reading - would re-measure on a different C3 string and also sample B2 and C#3 to see more precisely whassup. -----Original Message----- From: pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org]On Behalf Of Cy Shuster Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 6:01 AM To: Pianotech Subject: Re: Inharmonicity factors OK, that makes sense; smoothness in everything across the keyboard is what we want. With TuneLab, I measure iH across the wound/plain string break to determine when to use it's "split-scale" mode. Robert suggests that more than a 20% jump in iH should trigger use of this mode. To my surprise, I found a big jump there on a 1983 Yamaha U3, which I thought should have a pretty good scale (since it's so big). Anything funny with this particular scale? (See attached screenshot of iH). --Cy-- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Nossaman" <rnossaman@cox.net> To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 8:47 AM Subject: Re: Inharmonicity factors > Hi Cy, > The problem is inharmonicity isn't a particularly critical factor in > scaling. Spot sampling won't tell you much about anything but expected > octave stretch in tuning. Tension, impedance (loudness), and break% are > better initial indicators of how the scale will sound, and break% will > tell you something about how it will go out of tune. Seeing all the > numbers for all the notes will let you see what happens at the > transitions, so you don't build something that can't be tuned or voiced. > For the most part, changes at the scale breaks are more important factors > than actual number values. > > Ron N
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC