On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 9:13 PM, William Monroe <bill at a440piano.net> wrote: > > I have found the practice of listening musically to be extremely helpful in >> tuning. It sounds so much more pleasing and satisfying ... musically. This >> is not to say that I never use my skills of listening directly at various >> coincident partials. I frequently do, and I am thankful that I spent the >> time in training my ear to listen there. >> > > This phrasing I have difficulty with. I don't know any technicians of > value who do not listen to their tunings musically. The end-game of all > tuning is ultimately, "but, does it sound good?" Too frequently I hear > some technicians use this "listening musically" phrasing as an excuse for > poor tunings. I've had a couple in particular suggest for example that > having parallel thirds jumping all over in an intended ET tuning is just > fine, and that "I'm listening as a technician, not a musician." Well, yeah, > and musically there are problems with this tuning. And to be clear, I do > not claim to be anything other than adequate at my tuning skills. These are > really basic errors I'm speaking of. > > To be clear, I KNOW that this is not what you are saying, but I think the > phrasing gets hijacked for lesser purposes. > Ah, I can see where there could be confusion here. In the "listening musically" above, I do not primarily refer to the setting of an equal temperament. There is no room for error in ET. (And I do know the difference.) What I mean in the above is how Virgil taught in his classes. I won't repeat the particulars, as they've been discussed here often. I listen musically mainly to octaves -- but also double octaves, octave fifths (12ths), double octave-fifths (19ths), and triple octaves. But it's mainly in the octave itself, 'cause if you tune great octaves, everything else generally works quite well. And I utilize tests all the time -- to prove a P12 or triple octave ... I test what my ear is hearing. Yes, with the same tests that one uses to verify coincident partials -- cause that's what causes the beats, Paul <G>. But it's different when you're tuning unisons as you go. Much fuller and richer ... if you do it right. And I'm not trying anymore to listen to an isolated pair of partials -- to put 4:2 octaves in this region, then blend to 2:1 at F6, and 6:3 octaves in the upper bass, etc. I'm listening for the big picture, for everything I can hear as the sounds blend together to produce that sweetest spot. I try to take it all in, forgetting about partial pairs, and listening for how music will sound. And if you do that, the piano tells you how it's supposed to be tuned. I'm assuming David Andersen teaches the same thing as Virgil, though I haven't yet had the opportunity to attend one of his classes. I did observe him while he was tuning his B at Rochester. I think it's safe to say we're on the same page. I don't have his personality or panache, but I can still feel the vibes, brother D. <G> -- JF -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech_ptg.org/attachments/20090309/b655d402/attachment.html>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC