Pianotech

Steven - I agree with you on many counts.

However, members might recall a somewhat inflammatory series of exchanges between Fred S and myself on the subject of historical authenticity as apparently Montal had the last word in the debate on unequal temperaments and the piano. A problem additionally is that the words "unequal temperament" sends many fleeing to their bunkers lest they hear something either heretical or hideous or merely something they don't know about or otherwise only associate with Purcell and earlier. So finding another less frightening description seemed to be a good idea.

Yes - when I came to the instrument it hadn't been top priority of the showroom's attention, but was certainly in the ordinary condition in which we find many instruments and I apologise for the lack of perfection of my own tuning. However, whether the instrument was perfectly or imperfectly equally temperament tuned in the first place doesn't actually in my experience alter the result of the demonstration. Whilst my playing is terrible for which I apologise, the singing that I'm aiming for in that piece really depends upon the pedalling and being able to hold down the sustain for long periods. This was the pedalling of both Chopin and Beethoven, and Chopin practicing on the Pantalon or Clavecin Royale https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NJJnOQbEn4 would have been familiar with the sounds of undamped infinite sustain. With Equal Temperament, the resonance is a mess. When we use, and therefore justifiably named, "High Definition tuning" we pull the energy out of the mush near tuned resonations and put that energy into the harmonic resonating sounds. The effect is in Fourier Transform terms as a "comb filter" as used to be used for instance in analogue colour television signal decoding.

When unisons are not entirely exactly tuned the energy of one string bounces into another neighbouring string so that the reverb time is increased as the strings are keeping the energy among themselves rather than giving it in unison vibrations to the soundboard. The equal temperament and its harmonics are constantly bouncing the energy between the strings and the notes, so they too lose energy slower and increase the reverb time of the instrument, often a measure used by many to assess the quality of the instrument.

But with the - OK I'll call it unequal temperament here . . . the harmonics are brought more into tune with the scale notes. This means that greater resonances happen on harmonic accordances, reducing the reverb time but increasing the energy given to the soundboard and therefore the instrument. And other notes less well related harmonically don't resonate. So it means that the sounds that do resonate do so more. Perhaps some time ago, members might remember a thread that I started giving the results of XLS spreadsheets analysing the concordance or otherwise of harmonics with scale notes in different tuning schemes, and the idea, the mathematics, and what we hear are all in agreement. The effect is to be able to contrast the sounds that are locked together amplified in resonance with the less harmonically locked sounds becoming less relevant. So this is why with the "high definition" tuning we're able more frequently to hold down the sustain for many notes in sequence, and even discordant ones. The result can lead to lingering sounds which are clear, the discordant ones dying away fast, so that we can paint tone colours and enter dreamstates, or misty scenes. And as demonstrated in the equal temperament as demonstrated, one can't as one isn't released in the mush. This leads to the way in which, for instance Angela Hewitt plays, entirely dry and missing the musical meaning entirely. Here's another competition winning pianist playing Haydn https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF64GPfYw0Y arguably entirely missing the singing that playing "wet" either with no dampers or inefficient ones can achieve. The equal temperament and the resulting mush in the use of the sustaining pedal has led to the demise of appreciation of Haydn, and the playing of so much music as mere technical challenge.

It also leads to the use of the sustain pedal merely as a kickdrum pedal used on every chord merely as an amplificator. Yes - really a LOUD pedal rather than the intended use as a sustain.

The 1819 instrument at Hammerwood, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjPDefnPQNU here played by a pianist who really understands use of the sustain pedal, has a split sustain, so three pedals - keyboard shift, bass sustain, treble sustain, and this is proof of the intended use to obtain harmonic and atmospheric effects. But to do so it has to be tuned harmonically and, indeed, when the instrument first arrived with us I found the sound underwhelming. It really requires that resonance that the tuning can bring to achieve its power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcmaebKSI6E is a demonstration of Haydn's F minor variations - F minor being the key of "Deep depression, funereal lament, groans of misery and longing for the grave" and apologies for the extent to which you can really hear that in Meantone on the 1802 instrument. Here https://youtu.be/pIneuz5ueDY are the Variations on a Steinway C in "High Definition" together with an extract of Debussy's Sunken Cathedral. The tuning giving the option of much freer use of the sustaining pedal broadens the tools of expressive communication at the disposal of the performer.

Apologies for rather a long reply on what appeared to be a simple, and accurate, observation, but thought that the expanded explanation might be of interest.

Since the abrogation of tuning responsibility by musicians to professional tuners as increasingly high tension stringing developed there appears to have been a chasm between the musicians and the instrument makers. Whilst many who maintain instruments are musicians, many are not. Whilst to my knowledge and experience Broadwoods in England who remained backwards and old fashioned throughout the 19th century could be tuned in equal and near equal temperaments "Broadwood's best" being documented for instance, because of the 3rd harmonic prevalence in preference to the 5th, they could take really strong unequal temperaments, demonstrated by the 1859 concert instrument in Kirnberger III https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 without it being particularly jarring. In contrast the German instruments which came in from the 1880s onwards, and in America probably with the Steinways and Chickerings coming along earlier, brought out the 5th harmonic in the sound, which was pitted to beat against the ET scale note and produce the glistening effect that we've always admired when we sit down to play a "Grande Marque" instrument. From here the piano became the end in itself producing an impressive sound, the music being rather less than relevant. Pianists had to adjust the music and their style to the instrument rather than have the instrument work with them towards the music. It's this that has led to the barren meaningless technicality that we hear from many far eastern musicians and a Fazioli loving Candadian lady who plays Mendelssohn as it might as well be Prokofiev, commercially hyped and in my opinion leading to the increasing disinterest in music in its failure of communication.

I appreciate that in making such comments I might be treading on a lot of toes but they're not intended to be rude, merely dispassionate passionate observations.

Whilst writing this I'm continuing to listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 and in this recording it's possible to hear the understanding and use of the sustain pedal by this particular pianist. So it's not about intune or out of tune, it's about resonance and separating the harmonic from the not.

Best wishes

David P 

--

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - David Pinnegar, B.Sc., A.R.C.S. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +44 1342 850594

Steven - I agree with you on many counts.

However, members might recall a somewhat inflammatory series of exchanges between Fred S and myself on the subject of historical authenticity as apparently Montal had the last word in the debate on unequal temperaments and the piano. A problem additionally is that the words "unequal temperament" sends many fleeing to their bunkers lest they hear something either heretical or hideous or merely something they don't know about or otherwise only associate with Purcell and earlier. So finding another less frightening description seemed to be a good idea.

Yes - when I came to the instrument it hadn't been top priority of the showroom's attention, but was certainly in the ordinary condition in which we find many instruments and I apologise for the lack of perfection of my own tuning. However, whether the instrument was perfectly or imperfectly equally temperament tuned in the first place doesn't actually in my experience alter the result of the demonstration. Whilst my playing is terrible for which I apologise, the singing that I'm aiming for in that piece really depends upon the pedalling and being able to hold down the sustain for long periods. This was the pedalling of both Chopin and Beethoven, and Chopin practicing on the Pantalon or Clavecin Royale https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NJJnOQbEn4 would have been familiar with the sounds of undamped infinite sustain. With Equal Temperament, the resonance is a mess. When we use, and therefore justifiably named, "High Definition tuning" we pull the energy out of the mush near tuned resonations and put that energy into the harmonic resonating sounds. The effect is in Fourier Transform terms as a "comb filter" as used to be used for instance in analogue colour television signal decoding.

When unisons are not entirely exactly tuned the energy of one string bounces into another neighbouring string so that the reverb time is increased as the strings are keeping the energy among themselves rather than giving it in unison vibrations to the soundboard. The equal temperament and its harmonics are constantly bouncing the energy between the strings and the notes, so they too lose energy slower and increase the reverb time of the instrument, often a measure used by many to assess the quality of the instrument.

But with the - OK I'll call it unequal temperament here . . . the harmonics are brought more into tune with the scale notes. This means that greater resonances happen on harmonic accordances, reducing the reverb time but increasing the energy given to the soundboard and therefore the instrument. And other notes less well related harmonically don't resonate. So it means that the sounds that do resonate do so more. Perhaps some time ago, members might remember a thread that I started giving the results of XLS spreadsheets analysing the concordance or otherwise of harmonics with scale notes in different tuning schemes, and the idea, the mathematics, and what we hear are all in agreement. The effect is to be able to contrast the sounds that are locked together amplified in resonance with the less harmonically locked sounds becoming less relevant. So this is why with the "high definition" tuning we're able more frequently to hold down the sustain for many notes in sequence, and even discordant ones. The result can lead to lingering sounds which are clear, the discordant ones dying away fast, so that we can paint tone colours and enter dreamstates, or misty scenes. And as demonstrated in the equal temperament as demonstrated, one can't as one isn't released in the mush. This leads to the way in which, for instance Angela Hewitt plays, entirely dry and missing the musical meaning entirely. Here's another competition winning pianist playing Haydn https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF64GPfYw0Y arguably entirely missing the singing that playing "wet" either with no dampers or inefficient ones can achieve. The equal temperament and the resulting mush in the use of the sustaining pedal has led to the demise of appreciation of Haydn, and the playing of so much music as mere technical challenge.

It also leads to the use of the sustain pedal merely as a kickdrum pedal used on every chord merely as an amplificator. Yes - really a LOUD pedal rather than the intended use as a sustain.

The 1819 instrument at Hammerwood, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjPDefnPQNU here played by a pianist who really understands use of the sustain pedal, has a split sustain, so three pedals - keyboard shift, bass sustain, treble sustain, and this is proof of the intended use to obtain harmonic and atmospheric effects. But to do so it has to be tuned harmonically and, indeed, when the instrument first arrived with us I found the sound underwhelming. It really requires that resonance that the tuning can bring to achieve its power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcmaebKSI6E is a demonstration of Haydn's F minor variations - F minor being the key of "Deep depression, funereal lament, groans of misery and longing for the grave" and apologies for the extent to which you can really hear that in Meantone on the 1802 instrument. Here https://youtu.be/pIneuz5ueDY are the Variations on a Steinway C in "High Definition" together with an extract of Debussy's Sunken Cathedral. The tuning giving the option of much freer use of the sustaining pedal broadens the tools of expressive communication at the disposal of the performer.

Apologies for rather a long reply on what appeared to be a simple, and accurate, observation, but thought that the expanded explanation might be of interest.

Since the abrogation of tuning responsibility by musicians to professional tuners as increasingly high tension stringing developed there appears to have been a chasm between the musicians and the instrument makers. Whilst many who maintain instruments are musicians, many are not. Whilst to my knowledge and experience Broadwoods in England who remained backwards and old fashioned throughout the 19th century could be tuned in equal and near equal temperaments "Broadwood's best" being documented for instance, because of the 3rd harmonic prevalence in preference to the 5th, they could take really strong unequal temperaments, demonstrated by the 1859 concert instrument in Kirnberger III https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 without it being particularly jarring. In contrast the German instruments which came in from the 1880s onwards, and in America probably with the Steinways and Chickerings coming along earlier, brought out the 5th harmonic in the sound, which was pitted to beat against the ET scale note and produce the glistening effect that we've always admired when we sit down to play a "Grande Marque" instrument. From here the piano became the end in itself producing an impressive sound, the music being rather less than relevant. Pianists had to adjust the music and their style to the instrument rather than have the instrument work with them towards the music. It's this that has led to the barren meaningless technicality that we hear from many far eastern musicians and a Fazioli loving Candadian lady who plays Mendelssohn as it might as well be Prokofiev, commercially hyped and in my opinion leading to the increasing disinterest in music in its failure of communication.

I appreciate that in making such comments I might be treading on a lot of toes but they're not intended to be rude, merely dispassionate passionate observations.

Whilst writing this I'm continuing to listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 and in this recording it's possible to hear the understanding and use of the sustain pedal by this particular pianist. So it's not about intune or out of tune, it's about resonance and separating the harmonic from the not.

Best wishes

David P 

--

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - David Pinnegar, B.Sc., A.R.C.S. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +44 1342 850594

Steven - I agree with you on many counts.

However, members might recall a somewhat inflammatory series of exchanges between Fred S and myself on the subject of historical authenticity as apparently Montal had the last word in the debate on unequal temperaments and the piano. A problem additionally is that the words "unequal temperament" sends many fleeing to their bunkers lest they hear something either heretical or hideous or merely something they don't know about or otherwise only associate with Purcell and earlier. So finding another less frightening description seemed to be a good idea.

Yes - when I came to the instrument it hadn't been top priority of the showroom's attention, but was certainly in the ordinary condition in which we find many instruments and I apologise for the lack of perfection of my own tuning. However, whether the instrument was perfectly or imperfectly equally temperament tuned in the first place doesn't actually in my experience alter the result of the demonstration. Whilst my playing is terrible for which I apologise, the singing that I'm aiming for in that piece really depends upon the pedalling and being able to hold down the sustain for long periods. This was the pedalling of both Chopin and Beethoven, and Chopin practicing on the Pantalon or Clavecin Royale https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NJJnOQbEn4 would have been familiar with the sounds of undamped infinite sustain. With Equal Temperament, the resonance is a mess. When we use, and therefore justifiably named, "High Definition tuning" we pull the energy out of the mush near tuned resonations and put that energy into the harmonic resonating sounds. The effect is in Fourier Transform terms as a "comb filter" as used to be used for instance in analogue colour television signal decoding.

When unisons are not entirely exactly tuned the energy of one string bounces into another neighbouring string so that the reverb time is increased as the strings are keeping the energy among themselves rather than giving it in unison vibrations to the soundboard. The equal temperament and its harmonics are constantly bouncing the energy between the strings and the notes, so they too lose energy slower and increase the reverb time of the instrument, often a measure used by many to assess the quality of the instrument.

But with the - OK I'll call it unequal temperament here . . . the harmonics are brought more into tune with the scale notes. This means that greater resonances happen on harmonic accordances, reducing the reverb time but increasing the energy given to the soundboard and therefore the instrument. And other notes less well related harmonically don't resonate. So it means that the sounds that do resonate do so more. Perhaps some time ago, members might remember a thread that I started giving the results of XLS spreadsheets analysing the concordance or otherwise of harmonics with scale notes in different tuning schemes, and the idea, the mathematics, and what we hear are all in agreement. The effect is to be able to contrast the sounds that are locked together amplified in resonance with the less harmonically locked sounds becoming less relevant. So this is why with the "high definition" tuning we're able more frequently to hold down the sustain for many notes in sequence, and even discordant ones. The result can lead to lingering sounds which are clear, the discordant ones dying away fast, so that we can paint tone colours and enter dreamstates, or misty scenes. And as demonstrated in the equal temperament as demonstrated, one can't as one isn't released in the mush. This leads to the way in which, for instance Angela Hewitt plays, entirely dry and missing the musical meaning entirely. Here's another competition winning pianist playing Haydn https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF64GPfYw0Y arguably entirely missing the singing that playing "wet" either with no dampers or inefficient ones can achieve. The equal temperament and the resulting mush in the use of the sustaining pedal has led to the demise of appreciation of Haydn, and the playing of so much music as mere technical challenge.

It also leads to the use of the sustain pedal merely as a kickdrum pedal used on every chord merely as an amplificator. Yes - really a LOUD pedal rather than the intended use as a sustain.

The 1819 instrument at Hammerwood, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjPDefnPQNU here played by a pianist who really understands use of the sustain pedal, has a split sustain, so three pedals - keyboard shift, bass sustain, treble sustain, and this is proof of the intended use to obtain harmonic and atmospheric effects. But to do so it has to be tuned harmonically and, indeed, when the instrument first arrived with us I found the sound underwhelming. It really requires that resonance that the tuning can bring to achieve its power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcmaebKSI6E is a demonstration of Haydn's F minor variations - F minor being the key of "Deep depression, funereal lament, groans of misery and longing for the grave" and apologies for the extent to which you can really hear that in Meantone on the 1802 instrument. Here https://youtu.be/pIneuz5ueDY are the Variations on a Steinway C in "High Definition" together with an extract of Debussy's Sunken Cathedral. The tuning giving the option of much freer use of the sustaining pedal broadens the tools of expressive communication at the disposal of the performer.

Apologies for rather a long reply on what appeared to be a simple, and accurate, observation, but thought that the expanded explanation might be of interest.

Since the abrogation of tuning responsibility by musicians to professional tuners as increasingly high tension stringing developed there appears to have been a chasm between the musicians and the instrument makers. Whilst many who maintain instruments are musicians, many are not. Whilst to my knowledge and experience Broadwoods in England who remained backwards and old fashioned throughout the 19th century could be tuned in equal and near equal temperaments "Broadwood's best" being documented for instance, because of the 3rd harmonic prevalence in preference to the 5th, they could take really strong unequal temperaments, demonstrated by the 1859 concert instrument in Kirnberger III https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 without it being particularly jarring. In contrast the German instruments which came in from the 1880s onwards, and in America probably with the Steinways and Chickerings coming along earlier, brought out the 5th harmonic in the sound, which was pitted to beat against the ET scale note and produce the glistening effect that we've always admired when we sit down to play a "Grande Marque" instrument. From here the piano became the end in itself producing an impressive sound, the music being rather less than relevant. Pianists had to adjust the music and their style to the instrument rather than have the instrument work with them towards the music. It's this that has led to the barren meaningless technicality that we hear from many far eastern musicians and a Fazioli loving Candadian lady who plays Mendelssohn as it might as well be Prokofiev, commercially hyped and in my opinion leading to the increasing disinterest in music in its failure of communication.

I appreciate that in making such comments I might be treading on a lot of toes but they're not intended to be rude, merely dispassionate passionate observations.

Whilst writing this I'm continuing to listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 and in this recording it's possible to hear the understanding and use of the sustain pedal by this particular pianist. So it's not about intune or out of tune, it's about resonance and separating the harmonic from the not.

Best wishes

David P 

--

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -David Pinnegar, B.Sc., A.R.C.S.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -+44 1342 850594

Steven - I agree with you on many counts.

However, members might recall a somewhat inflammatory series of exchanges between Fred S and myself on the subject of historical authenticity as apparently Montal had the last word in the debate on unequal temperaments and the piano. A problem additionally is that the words "unequal temperament" sends many fleeing to their bunkers lest they hear something either heretical or hideous or merely something they don't know about or otherwise only associate with Purcell and earlier. So finding another less frightening description seemed to be a good idea.

Yes - when I came to the instrument it hadn't been top priority of the showroom's attention, but was certainly in the ordinary condition in which we find many instruments and I apologise for the lack of perfection of my own tuning. However, whether the instrument was perfectly or imperfectly equally temperament tuned in the first place doesn't actually in my experience alter the result of the demonstration. Whilst my playing is terrible for which I apologise, the singing that I'm aiming for in that piece really depends upon the pedalling and being able to hold down the sustain for long periods. This was the pedalling of both Chopin and Beethoven, and Chopin practicing on the Pantalon or Clavecin Royale https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NJJnOQbEn4 would have been familiar with the sounds of undamped infinite sustain. With Equal Temperament, the resonance is a mess. When we use, and therefore justifiably named, "High Definition tuning" we pull the energy out of the mush near tuned resonations and put that energy into the harmonic resonating sounds. The effect is in Fourier Transform terms as a "comb filter" as used to be used for instance in analogue colour television signal decoding.

When unisons are not entirely exactly tuned the energy of one string bounces into another neighbouring string so that the reverb time is increased as the strings are keeping the energy among themselves rather than giving it in unison vibrations to the soundboard. The equal temperament and its harmonics are constantly bouncing the energy between the strings and the notes, so they too lose energy slower and increase the reverb time of the instrument, often a measure used by many to assess the quality of the instrument.

But with the - OK I'll call it unequal temperament here . . . the harmonics are brought more into tune with the scale notes. This means that greater resonances happen on harmonic accordances, reducing the reverb time but increasing the energy given to the soundboard and therefore the instrument. And other notes less well related harmonically don't resonate. So it means that the sounds that do resonate do so more. Perhaps some time ago, members might remember a thread that I started giving the results of XLS spreadsheets analysing the concordance or otherwise of harmonics with scale notes in different tuning schemes, and the idea, the mathematics, and what we hear are all in agreement. The effect is to be able to contrast the sounds that are locked together amplified in resonance with the less harmonically locked sounds becoming less relevant. So this is why with the "high definition" tuning we're able more frequently to hold down the sustain for many notes in sequence, and even discordant ones. The result can lead to lingering sounds which are clear, the discordant ones dying away fast, so that we can paint tone colours and enter dreamstates, or misty scenes. And as demonstrated in the equal temperament as demonstrated, one can't as one isn't released in the mush. This leads to the way in which, for instance Angela Hewitt plays, entirely dry and missing the musical meaning entirely. Here's another competition winning pianist playing Haydn https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF64GPfYw0Y arguably entirely missing the singing that playing "wet" either with no dampers or inefficient ones can achieve. The equal temperament and the resulting mush in the use of the sustaining pedal has led to the demise of appreciation of Haydn, and the playing of so much music as mere technical challenge.

It also leads to the use of the sustain pedal merely as a kickdrum pedal used on every chord merely as an amplificator. Yes - really a LOUD pedal rather than the intended use as a sustain.

The 1819 instrument at Hammerwood, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjPDefnPQNU here played by a pianist who really understands use of the sustain pedal, has a split sustain, so three pedals - keyboard shift, bass sustain, treble sustain, and this is proof of the intended use to obtain harmonic and atmospheric effects. But to do so it has to be tuned harmonically and, indeed, when the instrument first arrived with us I found the sound underwhelming. It really requires that resonance that the tuning can bring to achieve its power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcmaebKSI6E is a demonstration of Haydn's F minor variations - F minor being the key of "Deep depression, funereal lament, groans of misery and longing for the grave" and apologies for the extent to which you can really hear that in Meantone on the 1802 instrument. Here https://youtu.be/pIneuz5ueDY are the Variations on a Steinway C in "High Definition" together with an extract of Debussy's Sunken Cathedral. The tuning giving the option of much freer use of the sustaining pedal broadens the tools of expressive communication at the disposal of the performer.

Apologies for rather a long reply on what appeared to be a simple, and accurate, observation, but thought that the expanded explanation might be of interest.

Since the abrogation of tuning responsibility by musicians to professional tuners as increasingly high tension stringing developed there appears to have been a chasm between the musicians and the instrument makers. Whilst many who maintain instruments are musicians, many are not. Whilst to my knowledge and experience Broadwoods in England who remained backwards and old fashioned throughout the 19th century could be tuned in equal and near equal temperaments "Broadwood's best" being documented for instance, because of the 3rd harmonic prevalence in preference to the 5th, they could take really strong unequal temperaments, demonstrated by the 1859 concert instrument in Kirnberger III https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 without it being particularly jarring. In contrast the German instruments which came in from the 1880s onwards, and in America probably with the Steinways and Chickerings coming along earlier, brought out the 5th harmonic in the sound, which was pitted to beat against the ET scale note and produce the glistening effect that we've always admired when we sit down to play a "Grande Marque" instrument. From here the piano became the end in itself producing an impressive sound, the music being rather less than relevant. Pianists had to adjust the music and their style to the instrument rather than have the instrument work with them towards the music. It's this that has led to the barren meaningless technicality that we hear from many far eastern musicians and a Fazioli loving Candadian lady who plays Mendelssohn as it might as well be Prokofiev, commercially hyped and in my opinion leading to the increasing disinterest in music in its failure of communication.

I appreciate that in making such comments I might be treading on a lot of toes but they're not intended to be rude, merely dispassionate passionate observations.

Whilst writing this I'm continuing to listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 and in this recording it's possible to hear the understanding and use of the sustain pedal by this particular pianist. So it's not about intune or out of tune, it's about resonance and separating the harmonic from the not.

Best wishes

David P 

--

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -David Pinnegar, B.Sc., A.R.C.S.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -+44 1342 850594

Steven - I agree with you on many counts.

However, members might recall a somewhat inflammatory series of exchanges between Fred S and myself on the subject of historical authenticity as apparently Montal had the last word in the debate on unequal temperaments and the piano. A problem additionally is that the words "unequal temperament" sends many fleeing to their bunkers lest they hear something either heretical or hideous or merely something they don't know about or otherwise only associate with Purcell and earlier. So finding another less frightening description seemed to be a good idea.

Yes - when I came to the instrument it hadn't been top priority of the showroom's attention, but was certainly in the ordinary condition in which we find many instruments and I apologise for the lack of perfection of my own tuning. However, whether the instrument was perfectly or imperfectly equally temperament tuned in the first place doesn't actually in my experience alter the result of the demonstration. Whilst my playing is terrible for which I apologise, the singing that I'm aiming for in that piece really depends upon the pedalling and being able to hold down the sustain for long periods. This was the pedalling of both Chopin and Beethoven, and Chopin practicing on the Pantalon or Clavecin Royale https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NJJnOQbEn4 would have been familiar with the sounds of undamped infinite sustain. With Equal Temperament, the resonance is a mess. When we use, and therefore justifiably named, "High Definition tuning" we pull the energy out of the mush near tuned resonations and put that energy into the harmonic resonating sounds. The effect is in Fourier Transform terms as a "comb filter" as used to be used for instance in analogue colour television signal decoding.

When unisons are not entirely exactly tuned the energy of one string bounces into another neighbouring string so that the reverb time is increased as the strings are keeping the energy among themselves rather than giving it in unison vibrations to the soundboard. The equal temperament and its harmonics are constantly bouncing the energy between the strings and the notes, so they too lose energy slower and increase the reverb time of the instrument, often a measure used by many to assess the quality of the instrument.

But with the - OK I'll call it unequal temperament here . . . the harmonics are brought more into tune with the scale notes. This means that greater resonances happen on harmonic accordances, reducing the reverb time but increasing the energy given to the soundboard and therefore the instrument. And other notes less well related harmonically don't resonate. So it means that the sounds that do resonate do so more. Perhaps some time ago, members might remember a thread that I started giving the results of XLS spreadsheets analysing the concordance or otherwise of harmonics with scale notes in different tuning schemes, and the idea, the mathematics, and what we hear are all in agreement. The effect is to be able to contrast the sounds that are locked together amplified in resonance with the less harmonically locked sounds becoming less relevant. So this is why with the "high definition" tuning we're able more frequently to hold down the sustain for many notes in sequence, and even discordant ones. The result can lead to lingering sounds which are clear, the discordant ones dying away fast, so that we can paint tone colours and enter dreamstates, or misty scenes. And as demonstrated in the equal temperament as demonstrated, one can't as one isn't released in the mush. This leads to the way in which, for instance Angela Hewitt plays, entirely dry and missing the musical meaning entirely. Here's another competition winning pianist playing Haydn https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF64GPfYw0Y arguably entirely missing the singing that playing "wet" either with no dampers or inefficient ones can achieve. The equal temperament and the resulting mush in the use of the sustaining pedal has led to the demise of appreciation of Haydn, and the playing of so much music as mere technical challenge.

It also leads to the use of the sustain pedal merely as a kickdrum pedal used on every chord merely as an amplificator. Yes - really a LOUD pedal rather than the intended use as a sustain.

The 1819 instrument at Hammerwood, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjPDefnPQNU here played by a pianist who really understands use of the sustain pedal, has a split sustain, so three pedals - keyboard shift, bass sustain, treble sustain, and this is proof of the intended use to obtain harmonic and atmospheric effects. But to do so it has to be tuned harmonically and, indeed, when the instrument first arrived with us I found the sound underwhelming. It really requires that resonance that the tuning can bring to achieve its power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcmaebKSI6E is a demonstration of Haydn's F minor variations - F minor being the key of "Deep depression, funereal lament, groans of misery and longing for the grave" and apologies for the extent to which you can really hear that in Meantone on the 1802 instrument. Here https://youtu.be/pIneuz5ueDY are the Variations on a Steinway C in "High Definition" together with an extract of Debussy's Sunken Cathedral. The tuning giving the option of much freer use of the sustaining pedal broadens the tools of expressive communication at the disposal of the performer.

Apologies for rather a long reply on what appeared to be a simple, and accurate, observation, but thought that the expanded explanation might be of interest.

Since the abrogation of tuning responsibility by musicians to professional tuners as increasingly high tension stringing developed there appears to have been a chasm between the musicians and the instrument makers. Whilst many who maintain instruments are musicians, many are not. Whilst to my knowledge and experience Broadwoods in England who remained backwards and old fashioned throughout the 19th century could be tuned in equal and near equal temperaments "Broadwood's best" being documented for instance, because of the 3rd harmonic prevalence in preference to the 5th, they could take really strong unequal temperaments, demonstrated by the 1859 concert instrument in Kirnberger III https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 without it being particularly jarring. In contrast the German instruments which came in from the 1880s onwards, and in America probably with the Steinways and Chickerings coming along earlier, brought out the 5th harmonic in the sound, which was pitted to beat against the ET scale note and produce the glistening effect that we've always admired when we sit down to play a "Grande Marque" instrument. From here the piano became the end in itself producing an impressive sound, the music being rather less than relevant. Pianists had to adjust the music and their style to the instrument rather than have the instrument work with them towards the music. It's this that has led to the barren meaningless technicality that we hear from many far eastern musicians and a Fazioli loving Candadian lady who plays Mendelssohn as it might as well be Prokofiev, commercially hyped and in my opinion leading to the increasing disinterest in music in its failure of communication.

I appreciate that in making such comments I might be treading on a lot of toes but they're not intended to be rude, merely dispassionate passionate observations.

Whilst writing this I'm continuing to listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 and in this recording it's possible to hear the understanding and use of the sustain pedal by this particular pianist. So it's not about intune or out of tune, it's about resonance and separating the harmonic from the not.

Best wishes

David P 

--

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -David Pinnegar, B.Sc., A.R.C.S.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -+44 1342 850594

Steven - I agree with you on many counts.

However, members might recall a somewhat inflammatory series of exchanges between Fred S and myself on the subject of historical authenticity as apparently Montal had the last word in the debate on unequal temperaments and the piano. A problem additionally is that the words "unequal temperament" sends many fleeing to their bunkers lest they hear something either heretical or hideous or merely something they don't know about or otherwise only associate with Purcell and earlier. So finding another less frightening description seemed to be a good idea.

Yes - when I came to the instrument it hadn't been top priority of the showroom's attention, but was certainly in the ordinary condition in which we find many instruments and I apologise for the lack of perfection of my own tuning. However, whether the instrument was perfectly or imperfectly equally temperament tuned in the first place doesn't actually in my experience alter the result of the demonstration. Whilst my playing is terrible for which I apologise, the singing that I'm aiming for in that piece really depends upon the pedalling and being able to hold down the sustain for long periods. This was the pedalling of both Chopin and Beethoven, and Chopin practicing on the Pantalon or Clavecin Royale https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NJJnOQbEn4 would have been familiar with the sounds of undamped infinite sustain. With Equal Temperament, the resonance is a mess. When we use, and therefore justifiably named, "High Definition tuning" we pull the energy out of the mush near tuned resonations and put that energy into the harmonic resonating sounds. The effect is in Fourier Transform terms as a "comb filter" as used to be used for instance in analogue colour television signal decoding.

When unisons are not entirely exactly tuned the energy of one string bounces into another neighbouring string so that the reverb time is increased as the strings are keeping the energy among themselves rather than giving it in unison vibrations to the soundboard. The equal temperament and its harmonics are constantly bouncing the energy between the strings and the notes, so they too lose energy slower and increase the reverb time of the instrument, often a measure used by many to assess the quality of the instrument.

But with the - OK I'll call it unequal temperament here . . . the harmonics are brought more into tune with the scale notes. This means that greater resonances happen on harmonic accordances, reducing the reverb time but increasing the energy given to the soundboard and therefore the instrument. And other notes less well related harmonically don't resonate. So it means that the sounds that do resonate do so more. Perhaps some time ago, members might remember a thread that I started giving the results of XLS spreadsheets analysing the concordance or otherwise of harmonics with scale notes in different tuning schemes, and the idea, the mathematics, and what we hear are all in agreement. The effect is to be able to contrast the sounds that are locked together amplified in resonance with the less harmonically locked sounds becoming less relevant. So this is why with the "high definition" tuning we're able more frequently to hold down the sustain for many notes in sequence, and even discordant ones. The result can lead to lingering sounds which are clear, the discordant ones dying away fast, so that we can paint tone colours and enter dreamstates, or misty scenes. And as demonstrated in the equal temperament as demonstrated, one can't as one isn't released in the mush. This leads to the way in which, for instance Angela Hewitt plays, entirely dry and missing the musical meaning entirely. Here's another competition winning pianist playing Haydn https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF64GPfYw0Y arguably entirely missing the singing that playing "wet" either with no dampers or inefficient ones can achieve. The equal temperament and the resulting mush in the use of the sustaining pedal has led to the demise of appreciation of Haydn, and the playing of so much music as mere technical challenge.

It also leads to the use of the sustain pedal merely as a kickdrum pedal used on every chord merely as an amplificator. Yes - really a LOUD pedal rather than the intended use as a sustain.

The 1819 instrument at Hammerwood, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjPDefnPQNU here played by a pianist who really understands use of the sustain pedal, has a split sustain, so three pedals - keyboard shift, bass sustain, treble sustain, and this is proof of the intended use to obtain harmonic and atmospheric effects. But to do so it has to be tuned harmonically and, indeed, when the instrument first arrived with us I found the sound underwhelming. It really requires that resonance that the tuning can bring to achieve its power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcmaebKSI6E is a demonstration of Haydn's F minor variations - F minor being the key of "Deep depression, funereal lament, groans of misery and longing for the grave" and apologies for the extent to which you can really hear that in Meantone on the 1802 instrument. Here https://youtu.be/pIneuz5ueDY are the Variations on a Steinway C in "High Definition" together with an extract of Debussy's Sunken Cathedral. The tuning giving the option of much freer use of the sustaining pedal broadens the tools of expressive communication at the disposal of the performer.

Apologies for rather a long reply on what appeared to be a simple, and accurate, observation, but thought that the expanded explanation might be of interest.

Since the abrogation of tuning responsibility by musicians to professional tuners as increasingly high tension stringing developed there appears to have been a chasm between the musicians and the instrument makers. Whilst many who maintain instruments are musicians, many are not. Whilst to my knowledge and experience Broadwoods in England who remained backwards and old fashioned throughout the 19th century could be tuned in equal and near equal temperaments "Broadwood's best" being documented for instance, because of the 3rd harmonic prevalence in preference to the 5th, they could take really strong unequal temperaments, demonstrated by the 1859 concert instrument in Kirnberger III https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 without it being particularly jarring. In contrast the German instruments which came in from the 1880s onwards, and in America probably with the Steinways and Chickerings coming along earlier, brought out the 5th harmonic in the sound, which was pitted to beat against the ET scale note and produce the glistening effect that we've always admired when we sit down to play a "Grande Marque" instrument. From here the piano became the end in itself producing an impressive sound, the music being rather less than relevant. Pianists had to adjust the music and their style to the instrument rather than have the instrument work with them towards the music. It's this that has led to the barren meaningless technicality that we hear from many far eastern musicians and a Fazioli loving Candadian lady who plays Mendelssohn as it might as well be Prokofiev, commercially hyped and in my opinion leading to the increasing disinterest in music in its failure of communication.

I appreciate that in making such comments I might be treading on a lot of toes but they're not intended to be rude, merely dispassionate passionate observations.

Whilst writing this I'm continuing to listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 and in this recording it's possible to hear the understanding and use of the sustain pedal by this particular pianist. So it's not about intune or out of tune, it's about resonance and separating the harmonic from the not.

Best wishes

David P 

--

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -David Pinnegar, B.Sc., A.R.C.S.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -+44 1342 850594

Steven - I agree with you on many counts.

However, members might recall a somewhat inflammatory series of exchanges between Fred S and myself on the subject of historical authenticity as apparently Montal had the last word in the debate on unequal temperaments and the piano. A problem additionally is that the words "unequal temperament" sends many fleeing to their bunkers lest they hear something either heretical or hideous or merely something they don't know about or otherwise only associate with Purcell and earlier. So finding another less frightening description seemed to be a good idea.

Yes - when I came to the instrument it hadn't been top priority of the showroom's attention, but was certainly in the ordinary condition in which we find many instruments and I apologise for the lack of perfection of my own tuning. However, whether the instrument was perfectly or imperfectly equally temperament tuned in the first place doesn't actually in my experience alter the result of the demonstration. Whilst my playing is terrible for which I apologise, the singing that I'm aiming for in that piece really depends upon the pedalling and being able to hold down the sustain for long periods. This was the pedalling of both Chopin and Beethoven, and Chopin practicing on the Pantalon or Clavecin Royale https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NJJnOQbEn4 would have been familiar with the sounds of undamped infinite sustain. With Equal Temperament, the resonance is a mess. When we use, and therefore justifiably named, "High Definition tuning" we pull the energy out of the mush near tuned resonations and put that energy into the harmonic resonating sounds. The effect is in Fourier Transform terms as a "comb filter" as used to be used for instance in analogue colour television signal decoding.

When unisons are not entirely exactly tuned the energy of one string bounces into another neighbouring string so that the reverb time is increased as the strings are keeping the energy among themselves rather than giving it in unison vibrations to the soundboard. The equal temperament and its harmonics are constantly bouncing the energy between the strings and the notes, so they too lose energy slower and increase the reverb time of the instrument, often a measure used by many to assess the quality of the instrument.

But with the - OK I'll call it unequal temperament here . . . the harmonics are brought more into tune with the scale notes. This means that greater resonances happen on harmonic accordances, reducing the reverb time but increasing the energy given to the soundboard and therefore the instrument. And other notes less well related harmonically don't resonate. So it means that the sounds that do resonate do so more. Perhaps some time ago, members might remember a thread that I started giving the results of XLS spreadsheets analysing the concordance or otherwise of harmonics with scale notes in different tuning schemes, and the idea, the mathematics, and what we hear are all in agreement. The effect is to be able to contrast the sounds that are locked together amplified in resonance with the less harmonically locked sounds becoming less relevant. So this is why with the "high definition" tuning we're able more frequently to hold down the sustain for many notes in sequence, and even discordant ones. The result can lead to lingering sounds which are clear, the discordant ones dying away fast, so that we can paint tone colours and enter dreamstates, or misty scenes. And as demonstrated in the equal temperament as demonstrated, one can't as one isn't released in the mush. This leads to the way in which, for instance Angela Hewitt plays, entirely dry and missing the musical meaning entirely. Here's another competition winning pianist playing Haydn https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF64GPfYw0Y arguably entirely missing the singing that playing "wet" either with no dampers or inefficient ones can achieve. The equal temperament and the resulting mush in the use of the sustaining pedal has led to the demise of appreciation of Haydn, and the playing of so much music as mere technical challenge.

It also leads to the use of the sustain pedal merely as a kickdrum pedal used on every chord merely as an amplificator. Yes - really a LOUD pedal rather than the intended use as a sustain.

The 1819 instrument at Hammerwood, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjPDefnPQNU here played by a pianist who really understands use of the sustain pedal, has a split sustain, so three pedals - keyboard shift, bass sustain, treble sustain, and this is proof of the intended use to obtain harmonic and atmospheric effects. But to do so it has to be tuned harmonically and, indeed, when the instrument first arrived with us I found the sound underwhelming. It really requires that resonance that the tuning can bring to achieve its power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcmaebKSI6E is a demonstration of Haydn's F minor variations - F minor being the key of "Deep depression, funereal lament, groans of misery and longing for the grave" and apologies for the extent to which you can really hear that in Meantone on the 1802 instrument. Here https://youtu.be/pIneuz5ueDY are the Variations on a Steinway C in "High Definition" together with an extract of Debussy's Sunken Cathedral. The tuning giving the option of much freer use of the sustaining pedal broadens the tools of expressive communication at the disposal of the performer.

Apologies for rather a long reply on what appeared to be a simple, and accurate, observation, but thought that the expanded explanation might be of interest.

Since the abrogation of tuning responsibility by musicians to professional tuners as increasingly high tension stringing developed there appears to have been a chasm between the musicians and the instrument makers. Whilst many who maintain instruments are musicians, many are not. Whilst to my knowledge and experience Broadwoods in England who remained backwards and old fashioned throughout the 19th century could be tuned in equal and near equal temperaments "Broadwood's best" being documented for instance, because of the 3rd harmonic prevalence in preference to the 5th, they could take really strong unequal temperaments, demonstrated by the 1859 concert instrument in Kirnberger III https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 without it being particularly jarring. In contrast the German instruments which came in from the 1880s onwards, and in America probably with the Steinways and Chickerings coming along earlier, brought out the 5th harmonic in the sound, which was pitted to beat against the ET scale note and produce the glistening effect that we've always admired when we sit down to play a "Grande Marque" instrument. From here the piano became the end in itself producing an impressive sound, the music being rather less than relevant. Pianists had to adjust the music and their style to the instrument rather than have the instrument work with them towards the music. It's this that has led to the barren meaningless technicality that we hear from many far eastern musicians and a Fazioli loving Candadian lady who plays Mendelssohn as it might as well be Prokofiev, commercially hyped and in my opinion leading to the increasing disinterest in music in its failure of communication.

I appreciate that in making such comments I might be treading on a lot of toes but they're not intended to be rude, merely dispassionate passionate observations.

Whilst writing this I'm continuing to listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 and in this recording it's possible to hear the understanding and use of the sustain pedal by this particular pianist. So it's not about intune or out of tune, it's about resonance and separating the harmonic from the not.

Best wishes

David P 

--

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -David Pinnegar, B.Sc., A.R.C.S.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -+44 1342 850594

Steven - I agree with you on many counts.

However, members might recall a somewhat inflammatory series of exchanges between Fred S and myself on the subject of historical authenticity as apparently Montal had the last word in the debate on unequal temperaments and the piano. A problem additionally is that the words "unequal temperament" sends many fleeing to their bunkers lest they hear something either heretical or hideous or merely something they don't know about or otherwise only associate with Purcell and earlier. So finding another less frightening description seemed to be a good idea.

Yes - when I came to the instrument it hadn't been top priority of the showroom's attention, but was certainly in the ordinary condition in which we find many instruments and I apologise for the lack of perfection of my own tuning. However, whether the instrument was perfectly or imperfectly equally temperament tuned in the first place doesn't actually in my experience alter the result of the demonstration. Whilst my playing is terrible for which I apologise, the singing that I'm aiming for in that piece really depends upon the pedalling and being able to hold down the sustain for long periods. This was the pedalling of both Chopin and Beethoven, and Chopin practicing on the Pantalon or Clavecin Royale https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NJJnOQbEn4 would have been familiar with the sounds of undamped infinite sustain. With Equal Temperament, the resonance is a mess. When we use, and therefore justifiably named, "High Definition tuning" we pull the energy out of the mush near tuned resonations and put that energy into the harmonic resonating sounds. The effect is in Fourier Transform terms as a "comb filter" as used to be used for instance in analogue colour television signal decoding.

When unisons are not entirely exactly tuned the energy of one string bounces into another neighbouring string so that the reverb time is increased as the strings are keeping the energy among themselves rather than giving it in unison vibrations to the soundboard. The equal temperament and its harmonics are constantly bouncing the energy between the strings and the notes, so they too lose energy slower and increase the reverb time of the instrument, often a measure used by many to assess the quality of the instrument.

But with the - OK I'll call it unequal temperament here . . . the harmonics are brought more into tune with the scale notes. This means that greater resonances happen on harmonic accordances, reducing the reverb time but increasing the energy given to the soundboard and therefore the instrument. And other notes less well related harmonically don't resonate. So it means that the sounds that do resonate do so more. Perhaps some time ago, members might remember a thread that I started giving the results of XLS spreadsheets analysing the concordance or otherwise of harmonics with scale notes in different tuning schemes, and the idea, the mathematics, and what we hear are all in agreement. The effect is to be able to contrast the sounds that are locked together amplified in resonance with the less harmonically locked sounds becoming less relevant. So this is why with the "high definition" tuning we're able more frequently to hold down the sustain for many notes in sequence, and even discordant ones. The result can lead to lingering sounds which are clear, the discordant ones dying away fast, so that we can paint tone colours and enter dreamstates, or misty scenes. And as demonstrated in the equal temperament as demonstrated, one can't as one isn't released in the mush. This leads to the way in which, for instance Angela Hewitt plays, entirely dry and missing the musical meaning entirely. Here's another competition winning pianist playing Haydn https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF64GPfYw0Y arguably entirely missing the singing that playing "wet" either with no dampers or inefficient ones can achieve. The equal temperament and the resulting mush in the use of the sustaining pedal has led to the demise of appreciation of Haydn, and the playing of so much music as mere technical challenge.

It also leads to the use of the sustain pedal merely as a kickdrum pedal used on every chord merely as an amplificator. Yes - really a LOUD pedal rather than the intended use as a sustain.

The 1819 instrument at Hammerwood, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjPDefnPQNU here played by a pianist who really understands use of the sustain pedal, has a split sustain, so three pedals - keyboard shift, bass sustain, treble sustain, and this is proof of the intended use to obtain harmonic and atmospheric effects. But to do so it has to be tuned harmonically and, indeed, when the instrument first arrived with us I found the sound underwhelming. It really requires that resonance that the tuning can bring to achieve its power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcmaebKSI6E is a demonstration of Haydn's F minor variations - F minor being the key of "Deep depression, funereal lament, groans of misery and longing for the grave" and apologies for the extent to which you can really hear that in Meantone on the 1802 instrument. Here https://youtu.be/pIneuz5ueDY are the Variations on a Steinway C in "High Definition" together with an extract of Debussy's Sunken Cathedral. The tuning giving the option of much freer use of the sustaining pedal broadens the tools of expressive communication at the disposal of the performer.

Apologies for rather a long reply on what appeared to be a simple, and accurate, observation, but thought that the expanded explanation might be of interest.

Since the abrogation of tuning responsibility by musicians to professional tuners as increasingly high tension stringing developed there appears to have been a chasm between the musicians and the instrument makers. Whilst many who maintain instruments are musicians, many are not. Whilst to my knowledge and experience Broadwoods in England who remained backwards and old fashioned throughout the 19th century could be tuned in equal and near equal temperaments "Broadwood's best" being documented for instance, because of the 3rd harmonic prevalence in preference to the 5th, they could take really strong unequal temperaments, demonstrated by the 1859 concert instrument in Kirnberger III https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 without it being particularly jarring. In contrast the German instruments which came in from the 1880s onwards, and in America probably with the Steinways and Chickerings coming along earlier, brought out the 5th harmonic in the sound, which was pitted to beat against the ET scale note and produce the glistening effect that we've always admired when we sit down to play a "Grande Marque" instrument. From here the piano became the end in itself producing an impressive sound, the music being rather less than relevant. Pianists had to adjust the music and their style to the instrument rather than have the instrument work with them towards the music. It's this that has led to the barren meaningless technicality that we hear from many far eastern musicians and a Fazioli loving Candadian lady who plays Mendelssohn as it might as well be Prokofiev, commercially hyped and in my opinion leading to the increasing disinterest in music in its failure of communication.

I appreciate that in making such comments I might be treading on a lot of toes but they're not intended to be rude, merely dispassionate passionate observations.

Whilst writing this I'm continuing to listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 and in this recording it's possible to hear the understanding and use of the sustain pedal by this particular pianist. So it's not about intune or out of tune, it's about resonance and separating the harmonic from the not.

Best wishes

David P 

--

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - David Pinnegar, B.Sc., A.R.C.S. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +44 1342 850594

Steven - I agree with you on many counts.

However, members might recall a somewhat inflammatory series of exchanges between Fred S and myself on the subject of historical authenticity as apparently Montal had the last word in the debate on unequal temperaments and the piano. A problem additionally is that the words "unequal temperament" sends many fleeing to their bunkers lest they hear something either heretical or hideous or merely something they don't know about or otherwise only associate with Purcell and earlier. So finding another less frightening description seemed to be a good idea.

Yes - when I came to the instrument it hadn't been top priority of the showroom's attention, but was certainly in the ordinary condition in which we find many instruments and I apologise for the lack of perfection of my own tuning. However, whether the instrument was perfectly or imperfectly equally temperament tuned in the first place doesn't actually in my experience alter the result of the demonstration. Whilst my playing is terrible for which I apologise, the singing that I'm aiming for in that piece really depends upon the pedalling and being able to hold down the sustain for long periods. This was the pedalling of both Chopin and Beethoven, and Chopin practicing on the Pantalon or Clavecin Royale https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NJJnOQbEn4 would have been familiar with the sounds of undamped infinite sustain. With Equal Temperament, the resonance is a mess. When we use, and therefore justifiably named, "High Definition tuning" we pull the energy out of the mush near tuned resonations and put that energy into the harmonic resonating sounds. The effect is in Fourier Transform terms as a "comb filter" as used to be used for instance in analogue colour television signal decoding.

When unisons are not entirely exactly tuned the energy of one string bounces into another neighbouring string so that the reverb time is increased as the strings are keeping the energy among themselves rather than giving it in unison vibrations to the soundboard. The equal temperament and its harmonics are constantly bouncing the energy between the strings and the notes, so they too lose energy slower and increase the reverb time of the instrument, often a measure used by many to assess the quality of the instrument.

But with the - OK I'll call it unequal temperament here . . . the harmonics are brought more into tune with the scale notes. This means that greater resonances happen on harmonic accordances, reducing the reverb time but increasing the energy given to the soundboard and therefore the instrument. And other notes less well related harmonically don't resonate. So it means that the sounds that do resonate do so more. Perhaps some time ago, members might remember a thread that I started giving the results of XLS spreadsheets analysing the concordance or otherwise of harmonics with scale notes in different tuning schemes, and the idea, the mathematics, and what we hear are all in agreement. The effect is to be able to contrast the sounds that are locked together amplified in resonance with the less harmonically locked sounds becoming less relevant. So this is why with the "high definition" tuning we're able more frequently to hold down the sustain for many notes in sequence, and even discordant ones. The result can lead to lingering sounds which are clear, the discordant ones dying away fast, so that we can paint tone colours and enter dreamstates, or misty scenes. And as demonstrated in the equal temperament as demonstrated, one can't as one isn't released in the mush. This leads to the way in which, for instance Angela Hewitt plays, entirely dry and missing the musical meaning entirely. Here's another competition winning pianist playing Haydn https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF64GPfYw0Y arguably entirely missing the singing that playing "wet" either with no dampers or inefficient ones can achieve. The equal temperament and the resulting mush in the use of the sustaining pedal has led to the demise of appreciation of Haydn, and the playing of so much music as mere technical challenge.

It also leads to the use of the sustain pedal merely as a kickdrum pedal used on every chord merely as an amplificator. Yes - really a LOUD pedal rather than the intended use as a sustain.

The 1819 instrument at Hammerwood, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjPDefnPQNU here played by a pianist who really understands use of the sustain pedal, has a split sustain, so three pedals - keyboard shift, bass sustain, treble sustain, and this is proof of the intended use to obtain harmonic and atmospheric effects. But to do so it has to be tuned harmonically and, indeed, when the instrument first arrived with us I found the sound underwhelming. It really requires that resonance that the tuning can bring to achieve its power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcmaebKSI6E is a demonstration of Haydn's F minor variations - F minor being the key of "Deep depression, funereal lament, groans of misery and longing for the grave" and apologies for the extent to which you can really hear that in Meantone on the 1802 instrument. Here https://youtu.be/pIneuz5ueDY are the Variations on a Steinway C in "High Definition" together with an extract of Debussy's Sunken Cathedral. The tuning giving the option of much freer use of the sustaining pedal broadens the tools of expressive communication at the disposal of the performer.

Apologies for rather a long reply on what appeared to be a simple, and accurate, observation, but thought that the expanded explanation might be of interest.

Since the abrogation of tuning responsibility by musicians to professional tuners as increasingly high tension stringing developed there appears to have been a chasm between the musicians and the instrument makers. Whilst many who maintain instruments are musicians, many are not. Whilst to my knowledge and experience Broadwoods in England who remained backwards and old fashioned throughout the 19th century could be tuned in equal and near equal temperaments "Broadwood's best" being documented for instance, because of the 3rd harmonic prevalence in preference to the 5th, they could take really strong unequal temperaments, demonstrated by the 1859 concert instrument in Kirnberger III https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 without it being particularly jarring. In contrast the German instruments which came in from the 1880s onwards, and in America probably with the Steinways and Chickerings coming along earlier, brought out the 5th harmonic in the sound, which was pitted to beat against the ET scale note and produce the glistening effect that we've always admired when we sit down to play a "Grande Marque" instrument. From here the piano became the end in itself producing an impressive sound, the music being rather less than relevant. Pianists had to adjust the music and their style to the instrument rather than have the instrument work with them towards the music. It's this that has led to the barren meaningless technicality that we hear from many far eastern musicians and a Fazioli loving Candadian lady who plays Mendelssohn as it might as well be Prokofiev, commercially hyped and in my opinion leading to the increasing disinterest in music in its failure of communication.

I appreciate that in making such comments I might be treading on a lot of toes but they're not intended to be rude, merely dispassionate passionate observations.

Whilst writing this I'm continuing to listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 and in this recording it's possible to hear the understanding and use of the sustain pedal by this particular pianist. So it's not about intune or out of tune, it's about resonance and separating the harmonic from the not.

Best wishes

David P 

--

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - David Pinnegar, B.Sc., A.R.C.S. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +44 1342 850594

Steven - I agree with you on many counts.

However, members might recall a somewhat inflammatory series of exchanges between Fred S and myself on the subject of historical authenticity as apparently Montal had the last word in the debate on unequal temperaments and the piano. A problem additionally is that the words "unequal temperament" sends many fleeing to their bunkers lest they hear something either heretical or hideous or merely something they don't know about or otherwise only associate with Purcell and earlier. So finding another less frightening description seemed to be a good idea.

Yes - when I came to the instrument it hadn't been top priority of the showroom's attention, but was certainly in the ordinary condition in which we find many instruments and I apologise for the lack of perfection of my own tuning. However, whether the instrument was perfectly or imperfectly equally temperament tuned in the first place doesn't actually in my experience alter the result of the demonstration. Whilst my playing is terrible for which I apologise, the singing that I'm aiming for in that piece really depends upon the pedalling and being able to hold down the sustain for long periods. This was the pedalling of both Chopin and Beethoven, and Chopin practicing on the Pantalon or Clavecin Royale https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NJJnOQbEn4 would have been familiar with the sounds of undamped infinite sustain. With Equal Temperament, the resonance is a mess. When we use, and therefore justifiably named, "High Definition tuning" we pull the energy out of the mush near tuned resonations and put that energy into the harmonic resonating sounds. The effect is in Fourier Transform terms as a "comb filter" as used to be used for instance in analogue colour television signal decoding.

When unisons are not entirely exactly tuned the energy of one string bounces into another neighbouring string so that the reverb time is increased as the strings are keeping the energy among themselves rather than giving it in unison vibrations to the soundboard. The equal temperament and its harmonics are constantly bouncing the energy between the strings and the notes, so they too lose energy slower and increase the reverb time of the instrument, often a measure used by many to assess the quality of the instrument.

But with the - OK I'll call it unequal temperament here . . . the harmonics are brought more into tune with the scale notes. This means that greater resonances happen on harmonic accordances, reducing the reverb time but increasing the energy given to the soundboard and therefore the instrument. And other notes less well related harmonically don't resonate. So it means that the sounds that do resonate do so more. Perhaps some time ago, members might remember a thread that I started giving the results of XLS spreadsheets analysing the concordance or otherwise of harmonics with scale notes in different tuning schemes, and the idea, the mathematics, and what we hear are all in agreement. The effect is to be able to contrast the sounds that are locked together amplified in resonance with the less harmonically locked sounds becoming less relevant. So this is why with the "high definition" tuning we're able more frequently to hold down the sustain for many notes in sequence, and even discordant ones. The result can lead to lingering sounds which are clear, the discordant ones dying away fast, so that we can paint tone colours and enter dreamstates, or misty scenes. And as demonstrated in the equal temperament as demonstrated, one can't as one isn't released in the mush. This leads to the way in which, for instance Angela Hewitt plays, entirely dry and missing the musical meaning entirely. Here's another competition winning pianist playing Haydn https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF64GPfYw0Y arguably entirely missing the singing that playing "wet" either with no dampers or inefficient ones can achieve. The equal temperament and the resulting mush in the use of the sustaining pedal has led to the demise of appreciation of Haydn, and the playing of so much music as mere technical challenge.

It also leads to the use of the sustain pedal merely as a kickdrum pedal used on every chord merely as an amplificator. Yes - really a LOUD pedal rather than the intended use as a sustain.

The 1819 instrument at Hammerwood, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjPDefnPQNU here played by a pianist who really understands use of the sustain pedal, has a split sustain, so three pedals - keyboard shift, bass sustain, treble sustain, and this is proof of the intended use to obtain harmonic and atmospheric effects. But to do so it has to be tuned harmonically and, indeed, when the instrument first arrived with us I found the sound underwhelming. It really requires that resonance that the tuning can bring to achieve its power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcmaebKSI6E is a demonstration of Haydn's F minor variations - F minor being the key of "Deep depression, funereal lament, groans of misery and longing for the grave" and apologies for the extent to which you can really hear that in Meantone on the 1802 instrument. Here https://youtu.be/pIneuz5ueDY are the Variations on a Steinway C in "High Definition" together with an extract of Debussy's Sunken Cathedral. The tuning giving the option of much freer use of the sustaining pedal broadens the tools of expressive communication at the disposal of the performer.

Apologies for rather a long reply on what appeared to be a simple, and accurate, observation, but thought that the expanded explanation might be of interest.

Since the abrogation of tuning responsibility by musicians to professional tuners as increasingly high tension stringing developed there appears to have been a chasm between the musicians and the instrument makers. Whilst many who maintain instruments are musicians, many are not. Whilst to my knowledge and experience Broadwoods in England who remained backwards and old fashioned throughout the 19th century could be tuned in equal and near equal temperaments "Broadwood's best" being documented for instance, because of the 3rd harmonic prevalence in preference to the 5th, they could take really strong unequal temperaments, demonstrated by the 1859 concert instrument in Kirnberger III https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 without it being particularly jarring. In contrast the German instruments which came in from the 1880s onwards, and in America probably with the Steinways and Chickerings coming along earlier, brought out the 5th harmonic in the sound, which was pitted to beat against the ET scale note and produce the glistening effect that we've always admired when we sit down to play a "Grande Marque" instrument. From here the piano became the end in itself producing an impressive sound, the music being rather less than relevant. Pianists had to adjust the music and their style to the instrument rather than have the instrument work with them towards the music. It's this that has led to the barren meaningless technicality that we hear from many far eastern musicians and a Fazioli loving Candadian lady who plays Mendelssohn as it might as well be Prokofiev, commercially hyped and in my opinion leading to the increasing disinterest in music in its failure of communication.

I appreciate that in making such comments I might be treading on a lot of toes but they're not intended to be rude, merely dispassionate passionate observations.

Whilst writing this I'm continuing to listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QaW4rrjkd0 and in this recording it's possible to hear the understanding and use of the sustain pedal by this particular pianist. So it's not about intune or out of tune, it's about resonance and separating the harmonic from the not.

Best wishes

David P 

--

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - David Pinnegar, B.Sc., A.R.C.S. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +44 1342 850594