Electronic Tuning

Here is my first piano tuning experience using PianoSens. I am using Verituner for Android on a 2023 Moto G Play running Android 12.

Having reviewed the instructions in advance, I connected the devices and wires in the order given in the written instructions and confirming the gain setting on the preamp as 8. I then opened Verituner and everything was running as it should be, with the Verituner receiving the signal from PianoSens.

The piano was a Kawai GE-1. So it is an older, and a very small scale grand. Since I needed to create a new tuning file, as usual I had to allow for some extra time for Verituner to acquire the inharmonicity data. I did notice that on average, the time needed for the inharmonicty "I" indicator to fill up was less than when using the microphone. A couple notes did hang up a bit, but fewer than usual. On average, without a doubt it took Verituner less time to get all the inharmonicty data into memory. Reviewing the inharmonicity data afterward, none of the notes had any spurious values they occasionally get using the mic indicating they need to be remeasured. So some time was saved there.

Since I work the tuning strictly with mutes rather than a temperament strip, in this short piano it was sometimes a bit crowded because due to the plate shape I wanted to sometimes put the mutes in the same place the sensor needed to be, but I can see I will be able to figure out ways of adjusting my technique,using different mutes, and getting it into my body memory so it all works. I am not worried about it. And on a different piano the mute positions will be different.

This particular piano had its share of pitch oscillations caused by less-than-perfect terminations or other issues. Throughout most of the middle I felt I was getting pretty similar pitch readings with the sensor as I get using the mic. There were sometimes oscillations or jittery readings, but you could hear they were really happening at the string, and the sensor was just transmitting what the string was doing. If it were in mic mode it would have been worse, because it would have also been picking up various "in the air" acoustic effects also. For instance my Android device has microphones top & bottom, while the bottom mic is aimed at the soundboard, the top mic is hearing reflections off the underside of the lid. That has to be creating acoustic confusion with all kinds of phase cancellation or comb filtering effects. So overall, the PianoSens pickup with its focus on only the string just has to work better in that regard.

It also became clear what a pleasure it was to place my ETD wherever I wanted to based on visibility rather than having to take into account whether it is also well positioned for the microphone to pick up the sound.

The biggest "aahhhh moment" however was in the high treble. Up where your ear is hearing all kinds of beating you can't tune out of it, and the indicators on the tuning device are having the hardest time locking in. With the PianoSens, despite all the aural confusion, I was getting nice steady readings on the ETD. Really a pleasure. Then the capper was the top few notes where my device is just all over the place and unable to lock on anything in mic input mode. And aurally there is so much false beats confusion. With the sensor working I was getting not only a clear, locked-on pitch signal, but it was actually sustaining a bit and remaining locked onto the pitch.

So overall, based on my first tuning using PianoSens, I feel kind of like it is "worth it for the top octave alone" but with so many other improvements over aural or mic input ETD, it's kind of a "no-brainer". Can I get a great sounding tuning without it? Yes. But it feels like I will be preferring it, for sure.

Hi Rick:

Nice review.  It's good to hear that you're getting good results with the Pianosens and Veritune. 

Yes, the placement of the sensor is important.  Near the termination points of the string is where the partials are most prominent. 

 I have found that the sensor must be against the bridge pins in the upper treble to give a reliable reading.  The sensor can't be placed at the capo bar because that's where the hammer hits the string.  I usually put the sensor near the agraffes or capo in the midrange, and where there is a strut near the agraffes that prevents placing the sensor, I"ll put it against the bridge.  That's usually in the last few notes in the tenor before the treble break.  From there on up, I put it against the bridge.  This is very important for a reliable result.  Even if it's a half inch away from the bridge pins, it improves if you push it all the way against the bridge.

The Pianosens is only picking up the string vibration, so it won't be "fooled" by acoustic reflections, aliquats or other noises.  But if there is a false beat coming from the string itself, it will not be able to discriminate.  You'll get some jitters.  This is most noticeable in the treble area around c5 and up, especially on lesser pianos.  Your Kawai is a nice piano, with less false beats than most.

As far as comparing a mic to the Pianosens, I have found that there is often little difference in the lower areas of the scale.  But again, I have to be sure not to place it near the dampers.

I made the mistake of not putting it at the termination point first time around. Mostly because I DID NOT READ THE INSTRUCTIONS THOROUGHLY. Once I corrected that blunder all went well.  

Peter Grey Piano Doctor 

I posted this over on the CAUT forum but I will repeat it verbatim here:

From an examination perspective, the accuracy, consistency, and repeatability that pianosens brings to the electronics table should make it mandatory equipment for administering an exam. If we want to make things truly fair to the applicant, it's a no brainer. 

Peter Grey Piano Doctor