From Tunrboy@aol.com
I'm now beginning to think it's the same note, B5, and that it
happens regardless of what tuning page I'm on, and regardless of
the piano being tuned.
Has this happened to anyone else? Lacking a better explanation,
I'm beggining to think the microphone has a dead spot at this
(approximate) frequency.
Jim,
I had the same problem with mine at B5. I showed it to Ray Chandler one day
and he thought I was just nuts and to prove it, he got it to work! I guess
he "charmed" it. I found that shifting the unit helped to at least "draw
out" the dead spot.
Eric Leatha
tunrboy@aol.com
From pianotech@ptg.org Sun, 04 Feb 1996 11:48:59 -0600 (CST)
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 1996 11:48:59 -0600 (CST)
From: Dave Doremus <dbd01@www.gnofn.org>
To: pianotech@byu.edu
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <pianotech@byu.edu>
Subject: Harpsichord stringing
>
> 1. What exactly is rag paper?
Good quality, acid free paper made from rags rather than all pulp.
Available from art and framing and conservation suppliers.
> 2. When removing and replacing a tuning pin on a harpsichord, do
you need
> to wear gloves (or something) to keep from getting any finger oils on the
> pin threads?
>
I have sometimes used white cotton gloves from photo supply houses, esp
in the summer when my hands were really damp and oily. I'm not sure that
it's crucial though.
Your best bet in doing any harpsichord or fortepiano work is to contact
the maker before doing anything. This is easy for Phillips,
Hubbard/Broekman, Wolf, Regier, Martin etc. Can be aproblem when the
maker is deceased or retired. It's is always best to respect the makers
wishes whenever possible, this will maintain the integrity of the
instrument, keeping it sounding and playing as intended.
Dave Doremus, RPT
dbd01@www.gnofn.org
New Orleans
***************************************************************************
Music came first; then the scales...; then...the theorists to explain them.
And as they knew more of mathematics than of musical history they laid down
laws which, in actual fact, no human being had ever obeyed. (Percy Buck)
***************************************************************************
From pianotech@ptg.org Sun, 04 Feb 1996 09:29:30 -0600 (CST)
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 1996 09:29:30 -0600 (CST)
From: David Porritt <dporritt@post.cis.smu.edu>
To: pianotech@byu.edu
Subject: Re: Accu-Tweaker anomoly
I get the same thing. As Ron said, I think that is the last note before
it jumps down an octave in the partial that it is listening to. I have
several tunings that I use often that I have tuned by ear, and reset the
partial that it listens to (2nd partial rather than 4th.) This really
helps. The next time I use that page I get a good readout on B5 as it is
listening to B5 rather than B6.
Dave Porritt
SMU - Dallas
________________________________________________________________________
On Sun, 4 Feb 1996, Ron Berry wrote:
>
> >
> > I've noticed that the LED's on my Accu-Tuner are reluctant to
> > "light up" on a certain note. I'm not talking about the
> > rotational pattern; rather, the lights don't come on at all.
> > Except for the note/octave LCD display, you'd think the machine
> > had been turned off!
> >
>
> > I'm now beginning to think it's the same note, B5, and that it
> > happens regardless of what tuning page I'm on, and regardless of
> > the piano being tuned.
>
> I have noticed this also and it is mainly B5. I think the reason it
> is hard to get a reading is that it is reading a higher partial than
> the C6 next to it. I think that the upper partials begin to get weak
> in the treble and makes it hard to get a reading. By moving the SAT
> I can usually get a better reading for that note. It is sometimes
> the A and A#5 as well.
>
> Ron
> ----------
> Ron Berry, RPT, Indianapolis, IN
> ronberry@iquest.net
> check out the Piano Page at:
> http://www.prairienet.org/arts/ptg/homepage.html
> for great information about Pianos
>
From pianotech@ptg.org Sun, 04 Feb 1996 09:23:59 -0600 (CST)
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 1996 09:23:59 -0600 (CST)
From: David Porritt <dporritt@post.cis.smu.edu>
To: pianotech@byu.edu
Subject: Re: Yamaha flanges (was hammer butt springs)
Jim:
I do (in addition to the work at SMU) all the pianos for the Plano
Independant School District (140 pianos in the district). I have done
this since 1980. You kind of have to go with the leadership you get.
Here they take the view that a school piano (particularly in secondary
schools) has a life of 15 years. At that point you replace it. In view
of that, I have done the work that needs to be done to keep the piano
alive for 15 years and nothing more. Occaisionally butt flanges need to
be replaced action parts repinned etc. But if I see in my inventory that
a piano that is starting to fade is 14 years old, I simply recommend it's
replacement. At the end of each school year I write up a summary of the
condition of the inventory and make my recommendation on replacement.
Last Summer they bought 15 new P22s.
At SMU I take a much different tack. Fortunately I've been there since
most of our pianos have been purchased so I can maintain them as needed
to keep them probably 30 years. I really think we can make them last
that long in spite of the abuse school pianos get.
I basically have to take the approach that fits with the management.
Dave Porritt
SMU - Dallas
From pianotech@ptg.org Mon, 05 Feb 1996 09:41:12 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 1996 09:41:12 -0500 (EST)
From: Walter Sikora <wsikora@email.unc.edu>
To: pianotech@byu.edu
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <pianotech@byu.edu>
Subject: Re: Voicing depth
Keith,
I learned a terrific alternative to deep needling at Wally Brooks'
excellent class this fall at the North Carolina state Ptg convention.
Wally uses Vise Grips to squeeze the sides of the hammer. This has the
same effect on the resilence of the hammer as a LOT of deep needling.
I learned this just in time to use it on a 1920's Steinway M that was
sounding very harsh and strident. About an hour's work with the Vise
Grips and some shallow needling removed the harshness and produced a
satisfying fullness and bloom.
The owner says the piano now sounds like he remembers it as a kid.
Walter Sikora, Chapel Hill, NC
RPT in the RTP
On Sat, 3 Feb 1996, Keith A. McGavern wrote:
> >Ok, Keith, here is a newbie question.
> >
> >I've been reading Reblitz about voicing hammers, in which he says to
> >needle deep on the sides and shallow on the striking surface. For
> >deep voicing, he says to have the needle sticking out 3/4", and for
> >shallow he says to have it sticking out 1/16". Are those two
> >distances the depth of the needling, i.e. the needles should go all
> >the way in? If not, how deep should they go in?
> >
> >/Allen
>
> That's how I would interpret what you have posted. However, it's only a
> starting place for someone who has limited or no experience with this
> activity. And the approach of depth can be different depending on which
> section of the piano you are needling (bass, tenor, or treble hammers).
>
> Another problem that can occur with accepting this method as a sure fire
> method is that it won't work with all types of hammers. I can recall one
> instance many years ago when I tried to follow the book like Reblitz, but
> discovered that I was physically unable to penetrate a particular set of
> hammers. That was a very frustrating experience. Broke 40+ needles and
> some of my spirit for voicing before I ended up using pliers as a last
> ditch effort to voice the hammers down. Now I'm not recommending pliers to
> you as a carte blanche method, but that's what I had to do in this given
> instance.
>
> Make no mistake, voicing hammers is an art and is approached in many
> different ways. Why, just as I sit here typing this to you, I have on my
> desk a five page letter dealing with voicing just one brand of hammers.
> This is a vast subject, Allen, but maybe what I have said will satisfy you
> for a little bit, and maybe some others on the list will have something to
> say on this subject as well.
>
> Keith A. McGavern, RPT
> Oklahoma Chapter 731
> Oklahoma Baptist University
> Shawnee, Oklahoma
>
>
>
From pianotech@ptg.org Sun, 04 Feb 1996 16:24:00 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 1996 16:24:00 -0500 (EST)
From: "Dean L. Reyburn, RPT" <75601.2765@compuserve.com>
To: pianotech listserver <pianotech@byu.edu>
Subject: Re: Accu-Tweaker anomoly
Jim Harvey writes:
> I've noticed that the LED's on my Accu-Tuner are reluctant to
> "light up" on a certain note. I'm not talking about the
> rotational pattern; rather, the lights don't come on at all.
> Except for the note/octave LCD display, you'd think the machine
> had been turned off!
>
> I'm now beginning to think it's the same note, B5, and that it
> happens regardless of what tuning page I'm on, and regardless of
> the piano being tuned.
>
Ron Berry writes:
>I have noticed this also and it is mainly B5. I think the reason it
>is hard to get a reading is that it is reading a higher partial than
>the C6 next to it. I think that the upper partials begin to get weak
>in the treble and makes it hard to get a reading. By moving the SAT
>I can usually get a better reading for that note. It is sometimes
>the A and A#5 as well.
Right, Ron. Assuming the tuner is using FAC partial series, the SAT
switches from using the 2nd partial (1 octave up) on B5 to using the 1st
partial (fundamental) on C6. The 2nd partial of B5 is readable but weak
on some pianos, on other pianos it can be almost non-existent.
Also there can be a "null" area where, if you put the SAT there, the
reflected sound waves cancel each other out partially or fully! This
happens more on grands than verticals, in my experience. Moving the SAT
out of the null place helps, as Ron indicated.
The microphone, or the internal circuitry in the SAT can be at fault, but
this is rare. The newer SAT's have better filter circuitry than some of
the earlier ones. I have seen some (older) SAT's that have trouble
reading the 4th partial of A4, A#4 and B4, which is very high (2 octaves
up) weak, and unstable on some pianos.
One solution is to re-record the offending notes using a listening note 1
octave lower, from A4-B4 or A5-B5. This is one of the problems I solved
with my Chameleon system. It creates tunings that change partials a
minor third lower than FAC, always between G# and A, instead of B and C.
(Chameleon 2 uses digital audio on a Mac to listen and record 5 notes on
the piano. Then it calculates a really accurate tuning based on the
(human) tuner's preferences)
Steve Fairchild has spent some time on this problem, and his conclusion
is that a much lower set of listening partials work much better. He
measured the relative strength of each partial on each note of uncounted
pianos to come up with this arrangement. His Aural Tuning Emulator
program produces tunings that use these partials:
6th partial from A0 up to E2
3rd partial up to E3
2nd partial up to G#4
1st partial to top
This is much lower than FAC or even Chameleon for most of the treble, and
it solves the above problem completely! These partials will be loud on
practically all pianos. The 3rd partial in the midrange gives nice
Perfect 5ths (3/2 partial matching). Notice Steve's layout doesn't even
use the 4th partial!
Another side benefit of Steve's partials is that A4 is tuned to the
fundamental, eliminating any guessing by the machine as to where A440 is.
Chameleon uses the 2nd partial for this and is always within 1/10 bps,
but FAC uses the 4th partial, which can commonly be 1/2 or more off!
(check it some time)
Steve and I are working on a system called the "Chameleon Aural Tuning
Emulator". In this program, the person just plays the notes from A1 thru
C7 for about 2-5 seconds each. The laptop computer records the partial
ladder (all the partials needed to tune) and calculates a tuning using
Steve's well tested (and incredible) formulae. The tuning it produces
may be the first to have a chance at surpassing aural tuning.
I have used some of Steve's tunings (produced by his DOS/spreadsheet
Aural Tuning Emulator) with this partial series, and they are first rate,
and the SAT pattern is always solid. One caution though, the speed that
the SAT lites turn at is always proportional to beat speed (NOT cents),
so the lower the partial, the slower they turn for the same cents error.
I also have the a beta version of a digital audio spectrograh built into
my Tuning Manager for Mac program. The final version of this will
display the cents offset, and a graph of decibel strength for all
relevant partials of the note played, right on the screen. I hope to be
using this in my class "The Digital-Aural Tuner" at the PTG national, in
Dearborn in July.
BTW, if you record aural (or any) tunings directly off a piano, try the
above partial set, I think you will be pleasantly surprised.
For those who didn't follow all the partial stuff, try getting your hands
on the book "On Pitch" by Rick Baldassin, RPT. The PTG home office
carries it for $20. It was my "Rosetta Stone" to make the switch from
all aural to aural-electronic tuning.
Dean
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Dean L. Reyburn, RPT Sanderson Accu-Tuner *
* REYBURN PIANO SERVICE, INC. Authorized Distributor *
* 2695 Indian Lakes Rd, NE "Software Solutions *
* Cedar Springs, MI 49319 for Piano Technicians" *
* Me: 616-696-0500 Fax: 616-696-8121 75601.2765@compuserve.com *
* (Watch this space for our WWW page soon!) or dean@reyburn.com *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
PIANOTECH Digest 209
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) tools
by Dave Doremus <dbd01@www.gnofn.org>
2) Re: Accu-Tweaker anomoly
by Gilreath@aol.com
3) Re: Steinway pitman
by Frederick G Scoles <scoles@Oswego.Oswego.EDU>
4) Singing rims
by RobertD429@aol.com
5) Re: Accu-Tweaker anomoly
by djohn@skypoint.com (Dennis Johnson)
6) Steinway pitman -Reply
by David Graham <U40DCG1@WPO.CSO.NIU.EDU>
7) Re: Petrof and Samick quality
by allen@pengar.com
8) Re: Yamaha flanges (was hammer butt springs)
by aquinas@pipeline.com (Thomas A. Sheehan)
9) Re: Pin Dope AND Hot Stuff AND Dampp-Chasers
by Dave Doremus <dbd01@www.gnofn.org>
10) Re: Accu-Tweaker anomoly
by kam544@ionet.net (Keith A. McGavern)
11) Re: Samick & Petrof quality
by "S. Brady" <sbrady@u.washington.edu>
12) Re: hammer butt springs
by Bob Simmons <bsimmons@wiley.csusb.edu>
13) #pianotech IRC
by Vanderhoofven <dkvander@clandjop.com>
14) Re: Accu-Tweaker anomoly
by Vince Mrykalo <REEVESJ@ucs.byu.edu>
15) Re: Harpsichord wire & supplies
by Dave Doremus <dbd01@www.gnofn.org>
16) Re: Samick quality
by PIANOBIZ@aol.com
17) re: Yamaha flanges
by "Barbara E. Richmond" <brichmon@e-tex.com>
18) Re: strike point
by A440A@aol.com
19) Re: strike point
by Newton Hunt <nhunt@rci.rutgers.edu>
20) Re: Hammer Voicing
by ATodd@UH.EDU
21) Steinway music racks
by RobertD429@aol.com
22) Re: Accu-Tweaker anomoly
by A440A@aol.com
23) Re: Yamaha flanges (was hammer butt springs)
by DaleP34429@aol.com
24) Re: Accu-Tweaker anomoly
by "Ken Hale kenhale@dcalcoda.com" <kenhale@nccn.net>
25) butt springs
by Barrie Heaton <piano@forte.airtime.co.uk>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 1996 13:03:08 -0600 (CST)
From: Dave Doremus <dbd01@www.gnofn.org>
To: pianotech <pianotech@byu.edu>
Subject: tools
I dont know if any one can help me with this but thought I'd ask anyway.
I'm trying to find a good radial arm drill press. All I see in the
catalogs are 1/3 horse with only a 10" swing. I used to work in a shop
with a wonderful old Delta mounted to a workbench and it was my all time
favorite tool. Anyone seen anything comparable available these days or do
I just keep studying the used tool and machunery ads?
Thanks,
Dave Doremus, RPT
dbd01@www.gnofn.org
New Orleans