Nick, Now why can't I just write this myself. What you've written is what I recognize as my method of information processing. You've written it so clearly - to me at least. As I said before, I feel like I've always used all those "tools" as PRJ calls them, to varying degrees, depending upon what is needed at the time. I will also admit to favoring the "Derivative" style of tuning over the "Integral" AS A PROCESS. That is, I tend to focus heavily on the analytical as I'm trying to position a particular note or interval, but before moving on to the next, it has to "sound good." Though, I believe I would arrive at the same destination - or close - either way. And, I'm open to learning to focus more on my kinder, gentler, "Integral" side. GR anyone? Can't wait to see everyone there. William R. Monroe William et al, > > > > I remember a tuning class held at a large chapter meeting. Intervals were > played and the beats were obvious to both newbies and veterans. Adjustments > were made and we could all hear the beats speeding up and slowing down. A > fine temperament was set by adjusting the beat rates for even thirds and > sixths, and “quiet” fourths and fifths. A young man asked about coincident > partials: “where exactly do they line up?” > > > > The instructor said he used to know but wasn’t sure; there was some > head-scratching in the room of 35 attendees, but a few had the answers. > “You’ve been reading Braid White’s book, haven’t you?” Virtually all the > veteran tuners adamantly opined that it is best to listen to the “obvious” > beats, those we had been listening to during the demonstration. These > obvious beats “sounding” at the fundamentals are what this list is now > calling “whole tone” or “whole sound” listening or tuning. > > > > That chapter meeting was held in New Jersey in 1973 and I was among the > newbies. I learned to tune by hearing the whole package, although later on I > was pleased to isolate the partials. Tuning then became a balancing act of > checking the whole sound with the partials of choice. > > > > Virgil Smith is not a mathematician, but he had latched onto the concept of > resultant forces. Ten forces of different magnitudes pulling an object in > many opposing directions can all be reduced to one significant force --- the > resultant force. And the object will move steadily in one direction and at > one speed. The energy force in a vibrating string divides itself up among > the multitude of partials; many sine waves superimpose themselves. The > famous French mathematician J. Fourier (1768 – 1830) analyzed this > phenomenon and gave us the famous Fourier curve, the single resultant > curve/force that essentially represented the integral (the whole) of the > many constituent superimposing partials, including the fundamental. The > single curve does not look like a simple sine wave; rather it is bumpy and > strange yet periodic. > > > > For fun, go to > http://id.mind.net/~zona/mstm/physics/waves/standingWaves/standingWaves1/StandingWaves1.html<http://id.mind.net/%7Ezona/mstm/physics/waves/standingWaves/standingWaves1/StandingWaves1.html>and see a violin string animation of the Fourier curve as the resultant wave > (the white wave) of partials. You have to build the Fourier pulse by > clicking on the partial selections. > > > > These curves do not simply exist for the convenience of study, they point > to the reality of our physical universe. The simple act of standing up > amounts to the resultant force of a multitude of smaller forces, > equilibriums and gravity. Fortunately, we do not need to analyze these to > simply stand up. What is true of physical mechanics is true of sound. > > > > Now if the temperament note F exists as a single resultant curve, and A > above it the same, then the superimposing of these two single waves running > along a time plot will indicate an interference of 7 bps, and all this will > be experienced by the ear at the fundamental level. Even more fascinating, > the F and A will coalesce into its own single resultant curve, also periodic > in nature. The relatively small energies that exist at the higher coincident > partials could not possibly affect the intensity of the beating effect we > have at the pitch frequencies unless the whole tone resultants are > interacting. > > > > And yet more mind boggling is that a single resultant curve exists for a > sustaining chord played in different positions up the keyboard. There comes > a whole brilliant swirling and shimmering sound, but shot through with tiny > laser beams. Only piano tuners and certain musicians can surgically dissect > these. It seems to me there must be a study or lab experiment that > demonstrates this reality. > > > > RicB: it is not a stretch to borrow from the world of higher mathematics > and refer to partials as “derivatives” and to the combining of all these > derivatives as the “integral”. Math purists might balk due to the implied > functions, but relative to our discussion, we would then have Derivative > tuning as partial-focused, and Integral tuning as whole tone, Fourier > tuning. These sterile terms lack warmth, but they point theoretically in the > right direction. > > > > Regards, > > > > *Nick Gravagne, RPT* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech_ptg.org/attachments/20090313/819c5e7a/attachment-0001.html>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC