Talk:Musical tuning

message: Well, I've done .oggs for equal temperament and Pythagorean tuning. I decided to do them as harmonized C major scales to try and kill several birds with one stone. I've thrown a couple of squiffy chords in there (a supertonic major seventh and a diminished seventh) so we have a variety of intervals. The differences are quite subtle, but audible - the third in the pythagorean scale is clearly sharper than the equally tempered version, and the whole thing is not quite so "busy" to my ears. I'll do the other tunings some other time. I will probably also do different versions of these files with an instrument with a simpler timbre. And I still like the idea of retuning a snippet of a "proper" piece of music, something by Chopin or somebody, as alternative examples.
I'm not entriely happy with the quality of the files - they're 100 times bigger than the MIDIs, and don't sound so good. Can we upload midi files? Is there any reason to avoid them? Any comments? --Camembert
: I don't see why we can't have MIDI alongside the OGGs. Those are about 30Kb each, which is tiny (and I'm on a modem, so I appreciate these things!). These are great, by the way. The wolf fifth really howls, it's painful! -- Tarquin 20:32 Nov 1, 2002 (UTC)
::We actually can't upload Midi's right now. See: Wikipedia talk:Sound. Hyacinth 19:16, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: .oggs

message: I've created a Category:Tuning examples on wikicommons (see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Tuning_examples). Have a look and feel free to use some of it! --84.151.133.24 00:02, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sound 

message: Ummm, can someone tell me why my adding of a link to the Piano Technicians Guild article was reverted? Thanks. --TrustTruth 15:13, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My guess is that you put it in the links for Tuning Systems, and it belongs to Tuning Practice (which doesn't yet have a links section). Even still, I don't think it's directly related to tuning, so probably doesn't deserve a link anyway. (This is my guess as to why Hyacinth reverted your edit.) - Rainwarrior 18:59, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

text: It belongs at piano tuning, where it is prominently featured. Hyacinth 19:06, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Piano Technicians Guild 

message: I have recently uploaded Bach's Prelude #1, played in different musical tunings, see , , , , , . --Pete
::They are pretty good. I suggest using them within the article in order to illustrate each tuning's section.--Isacdaavid (talk) 01:23, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: For some reason the Werckmeister/well temperament one was never added, so I just did it. For consistency I labeled it as "Prelude No. 1, C major, BWV 846, from the Well-Tempered Clavier by Johann Sebastian Bach. Played in well temperament." but it might be a good idea to describe Werckmeister temperament in particular and how this was the well temperament Bach refers to in the title. 65.34.183.218 (talk) 02:38, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sound examples of musical tunings 

message: Does this really have a place on this page? It seems quite trivial to me. Why give a detailed description of how to do something that can no longer be done? It's interesting that people would have ever practiced this, but I don't think there's an appropriate place on this page for trivia. Perhaps if we had a detailed history of tuning practice at some point? - Rainwarrior 16:18, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tuning to a telephone 

message: The reasons for my cleanup of this section are the following:
# Removing the technical terms "hemitonic" and "anhemitonic" which are obscure and relevant only to pentatonic scales.
# If Pelog is a fusion of three pentatonic modes (is there a source for this?), that information belongs at the Pelog page. (Again, it's technical detail which doesn't really belong in a links section.)
# Removing the "Longitude" nickname, this just seems silly.
I also have a question about the following: this system was first promoted by al-Farabi using a 25 tone scale. What is a 25 tone scale, and in what way does it use quarter tones? Should this not be 24 tones? (Was the octave counted by mistake?) - Rainwarrior 18:00, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other scale systems 

message: I'm suggesting we merge Tuning theory to this page. It currently has little content, but its purpose is not significantly distinct from "Tuning systems" outlined on this page. - Rainwarrior 23:19, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: With no objections after several weeks, I have done this merge. - Rainwarrior 05:46, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tuning theory merge 

message: Should Bernhard Stopper's tuning system be listed here?  I don't know much about it, but he sells products based on this special tuning.  Is he and/or his tuning system well-respected? Dallasvaughan (talk) 21:46, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stopper Tuning 

message: The article states: "It is impossible to tune the twelve-note chromatic scale so that all intervals are "perfect" - I'd be very grateful if anyone knows enough about the subject to explain why it is impossible?  Or if such an explanation exists elsewhere? Joeflintham (talk) 11:47, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, BUT:  if one were to say "because my dog doesn't like the sound", such an explanation would be unsatisfying -- though technically correct -- if the definition of "perfect" were to involve whether my dog found the sound pleasing...  What seems to be missing from the simple answer above is an explanation for why 2^(7/12) and 3/2 are relevant to the issue and why "BOTH of these" make any sense for being a "correct definition".  It would be much appreciated by many of us if some sort of explanation could be given in sufficient depth so as to be understandable as making sense...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.125.235.136 (talk) 18:14, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

text: That's true, but the tempered fifth is quite close to a pure 3/2. So, depending on the timbre and musical context, it might not be that noticeable, just a slow beating sound. A better example, because more extreme is to look at pure major thirds. In the twelve tone system three major thirds stack up to make the octave 2/1. But if you use the fifth harmonic just intonation 5/4, then three of them stack up to make 125/64 which at 1158.9411 cents is a long way away from an octave, nearly a quarter tone away from it. So there is no way to have the octave and the major third even close to just intonation in the twelve tone system. I'll put this into the article, it would be good to have something to explain that comment which won't be easy for a newbie to understand. Robert Walker (talk) 19:56, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just made that edit. Also ended up rewriting the just intonation summary as well. It's a little longer than the other sections now, but I think perhaps it is worth doing it like that as the issues involved in just intonation help to make the motivation for the other tunings clearer. Robert Walker (talk) 20:45, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Impossibility of perfect tuning 

message: Sox (in Linux) makes it very easy to synthesise some chords in the different tunings. 
5ths (first in  equal-temperament, then in just-intonation). They sound quite similar.
  play -n -c1 synth sin 440 sin 659.255 fade q 0.1 3 0.1
  play -n -c1 synth sin 440 sin 660 fade q 0.1 3 0.1
3rds (first in  equal-temperament, then in just-intonation). These sound VERY different.
  play -n -c1 synth sin 440 sin 544.599 fade q 0.1 3 0.1
  play -n -c1 synth sin 440 sin 550 fade q 0.1 3 0.1
--RichardNeill (talk) 07:18, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it depends on how demanding and permissive you are in and of your ear, as it opens the question to what extent perfect pitch exists. It tends to be an instrumentalist's psychosis, as they become increasingly sensitive to pitch beat over years of tuning - particularly with fixed-interval instruments like woodwind, who can only change their root tuning by adjusting the length between the mouthpiece and key-holes. For example, I tune my harp that way - which can generate the kind of circular recursion you talk about above working on half-length harmonics to generate fifths above and below, iteratively to cover the entire scale. At least that way the beast is internally consistent, until some joker plays an A-440 which is about A-440.85673 or whatever and expects you to retune fifty-odd strings in musical in twenty seconds - the answer is to slip the oboist a pint beforehand! Some very popular bands are quite wild (for no particular reason André Réus springs to mind, probably quite unfairly) because they can get away with it by their stage presence. The key is keeping the customer satisfied, not yourself, as if you pursue that route you can get into some almost Gouldesque introversions.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.129.84.66 (talk) 22:06, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some audible examples 

message: I came here to find information about a simple question, but couldn't. Why is the most frequently use reference for tuning (and for instance the one used to define the international standard concert pitch) the "A above the middle C", which is also the pitch of the vast majority (at least in my experience) of tuning forks. Of course the answer could be that one needs to choose some note, and this one is no worse than any other. Maybe it has to do with the way violins are usually tuned; this would at least explain why it is not the middle C, which in other respects seems to be a more common reference point. (But then D seems a good candidate as well.) I think if some reliable information on this is known, this article would be a good place... Marc van Leeuwen (talk) 09:33, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Stringed instruments must tune open strings. Violins (and double basses) could therefore settle for G, D, A, or E, but have no C string. Violas and cellos have C G D and A, but no E string.  Of the three notes they have in common, the A is the highest (for the violin, viola, and cello) and therefore in a slightly more favourable range than G or D for the ear to discriminate pitch. All this is purely Original Research, of course. Perhaps a source can be found to confirm this, and it could then be added to the article.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 22:15, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why A? 

message: Are South Asian drums such as the tabla or mridangam considered pitched or unpitched? I'd like to mention them in the subsection on percussion instruments. These drums are "tuned" with an added mass, the syahi, in the middle of the head. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 15:00, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: According to Randel, Don Michael (2003). The Harvard Dictionary of Music, p.864. : "The conical right-hand drum (tablā or dāhinā)...is tuned to a definite pitch. The kettle-shaped left-hand drum (bāyā)...is tuned to a lower but indefinite pitch." The right hand drum appears to be tuned to Sa. Hyacinth (talk) 23:27, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking further, it seems that the black spot is more about timbre, and is applied when the drum is made. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 04:20, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The black spot is about timbre but is also connected to pitch, in that it suppresses the inharmonic overtones, making it possible (and important) to tune the drum to a degree of the scale. See vibrations of a drum head. Andrewa (talk) 06:49, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Tabla]]: pitched or unpitched? 

message: The page in the Spanish Wikipedia this article points to is about absolute tuning and corresponds to concert pitch, as opposed to the tuning systems used to define intervals.
I couldn't find a similar article page covering musical tuning systems in Spanish, so the link should be removed. I'm posting this as a warning before I delete it, just in case that someone comes up with a better idea. --Isacdaavid (talk) 01:18, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you going to add it to Concert pitch? Hyacinth (talk) 03:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to Spanish wiki is wrong 

message: Tone system and musical tunings are two different things!
I changed the alias link. An entry "tone system" should also refer to the Ancient Greek and various other tone systems used since Byzantium until today. It is a completely different subject, because its structure is not a direct subject of intervals (only in a very eurocentric concept of music theory). Any objections? Platonykiss (talk) 13:29, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong alias 

message: I've rewritten the syntonic tuning section of Musical tuning#Systems for the twelve-note chromatic scale along the lines of the new Regular Diatonic Tunings page for the reasons discussed in the talk page of that page. Robert Walker (talk) 01:49, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrote Syntonic Tuning to Regular Diatonic Tunings

message: Where do you get this idea that a piano is even tempered? What nonsense. Play a tune on a piano, then transpose it up a semitone. Aas well as obviowsuly being a semitone higher, it actually sounds "different". Why - because the frequency ration of the semitones is different  - that is, it is not equitemepred.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.175.43.237 (talk) 01:06, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we have a case here of psychological "key characters" run wild. To be sure, once there is a reference key, a melody can feel more dissonant in the large-scale sense if played in the Neapolitan instead of the tonic, but in the absence of such an existing reference any key would serve equally well as a tonic, because pianos are specifically tuned by counting beats to give equal temperament. Double sharp (talk) 09:00, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps your piano is not tuned the same as 101.175.43.237's? Can you recommend a good piano tuner, perhaps?—Jerome Kohl (talk) 16:00, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Google can easily help with that. ^_^ (For simplicity I am ignoring octave stretching, as it is essentially negligible at a distance of a semitone.) Double sharp (talk) 03:27, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

text: Octave stretching also has little if anything to do with equal tempering. The stretched octaves are still, in theory, divided into twelve equal semitones. If you tune a piano in quarter-comma mean tone, or in Ptolomy's syntonic diatonic, or are just plain sloppy about tuning, then obviously it won't be in equal temperament, will it? If we were to enlist the opinions of a few experienced piano tuners, we would probably find that at least some of them skew equal temperament slightly in one way or another. This is of course wholly separate from the issue of fixed resonances in the piano body, which will give distinctive colours to different keys even supposing the instrument is tuned equally.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 05:06, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding the resonances, if we are talking about a tonal phrase played on the piano in different keys, I would imagine that the differences in resonance would be mentally ironed out as they have nothing to do with the musical language being employed, just like we mentally tend to ignore the decay of notes struck on the piano. Furthermore, these differences could arise even with pure equal temperament, so clearly this is irrelevant to the actual tuning. I haven't seen anything about piano tuners today altering equal temperament in any way other than stretching the octaves; it would be useful to know if any reliable sources claim that this is still done, and  to know the details. Double sharp (talk) 08:47, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: We "mentally iron out" all sorts of things when we listen. This can be a problem if we are expecting one thing but are given something else. This does not mean, however, that we cannot learn to turn off these filters and hear what is actually there. You are quite right that the resonances have nothing to do with the tuning system; what I was trying to say is that the piano does not come from the factory with equal temperament built in, but it does come with those fixed resonances, which we are free to notice or to ignore. However, we should not confuse the one thing with the other. I cannot say about "today", but I recall hearing a story back in the late 1970s about a piano tuner at the music department of a major state university in the US who confessed to slightly favoring F major when he tuned the pianos in the teaching studios, and got complaints when he once tuned one of the pianos in straight equal temperatment, just to see if anyone could tell the difference. The complaints were that that particular piano was not in tune, as all the others were.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 22:59, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Piano is certainly NOT even tempered. 

message: This article claims: "Interference beats are used to objectively measure the accuracy of tuning." Are beats really used in tuning? Other articles related to instrument tuning like electronic tune mention nothing about it. Expert articles about tuning on other sites also don't seem to speak about beats. It is hard to be sure since I am not a musician and this article has virtually no references. Keministi (talk) 21:22, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Beats are certainly used in tuning, at least by piano and organ tuners. Players of other instruments and singers tend more to use a lack of beats as a criterion, though this gets into the muddy waters of just intonation. References are vital on Wikipedia, and we need to find some on this subject. Thanks for bringing this up.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 21:26, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The article piano tuning has a clear description of the use of beats and contains pertinent references. −Woodstone (talk) 05:33, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are beats used in tuning? 

message: You tune the bass strings lower, you keep the middle as they are, and the high-frequencies higher.
These deviations are small (no bigger than 25 cents).
Fan tuning is performed because the strings of the instruments do not generate a single sinusoidal waveform when analyzed with Fourier analysis; each plucked string generates many harmonics which does not match any musical system. Thus a professional tuner tunes the sum of the harmonics and not based only on the fundamental frequency displayed by the tuning organs. Each harmonic has a different volume; in most instruments the fundamental harmonic is louder, but in some wind instrument the second harmonic is louder.
Practically what you do as a guitarist: You tune the bass strings lower (a puny bit), you keep the middle as they are, and the high-frequencies higher (a puny bit). And you do that with other musicians to find the best compromise (no ideal tuning exists).
:It's described in WP article Stretched tuning.−Woodstone (talk) 07:31, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''make paragraph'': [[fan tuning]] = [[fan tuning (music)]] (all piano tuners/people who tune do it) 

message: This article is clearly about two separate topics.  I propose we split to "Musical tuning (practice)" and "Tuning systems."  Note that this has already been discussed with no consensus reached at Talk:Musical_tuning#Proposed_merge. --Of the universe (talk) 04:08, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Of the universe (talk) 04:13, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't feel connected to this question. The comment I made in 2006 was about a proposed merge of content that existed then, which was carried out at the time. The responses to it are from more than a decade later and not relevant to the state of things in 2006. If you want to split the current version of this page I've got no opinion, sorry. - Rainwarrior (talk) 08:44, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

text: Jerome Kohl (†Aug 2020 RIP) will not comment here. He is still missed. Just plain Bill (talk) 15:13, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm very sorry to hear that. My condolences. Of the universe (talk) 02:03, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Split