source file: m1401.txt
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 09:27:44 -0500 (CDT)

Subject: RE: Difficulties in Piano Construction

From: Paul Hahn <Paul-Hahn@library.wustl.edu>

On Fri, 1 May 1998, A440A wrote:
>      Oddly enough,  I have found that ET is the most perishable tuning on a
> piano, and I don't know why. Perhaps it is that ET is already so "out of tune"
> that changes are quite evident, whereas on a well temperament, all the keys
> are different anyway,so the change in tuning is only a change in degree.  On
> equal temperament, a shift in the tuning destroys the only unique thing that
> ET has. 
>     Perception aside,  well temperaments and meantone tunings on modern pianos
> are more stable than ET, after the initial string alterations are relaxed.   

Sorry if I seem to be nitpicking, but I want to be clear on this.  Ed,
is this a reasonable paraphrase of what you are saying?

(1) The same degree of more or less random detuning that happens with
time would be more noticable with ET than with an unequal temperament,
because you can immediately hear when the ET becomes non-equal.

(2) However, the same degree of detuning does _not_ happen with time;
measured in cents (or whatever), pianos tuned in ET tend to go farther
out of tune in the same amount of time than those tuned in unequal
temperaments (or go out the same distance in less time).

I'm particularly interested in (2); I think I'm fairly clear on (1).

>     Yes, I have read Fletcher, but it doesn't explain why the inharmonicity of
> a piano wire measures higher as the tension is increased.  Perhaps there is a
> point of reversal, inre tension/inharmonicity.  

This is something I've not heard before, and it sounds very interesting.
Could you go into greater depth about this?

--pH <manynote@lib-rary.wustl.edu> http://library.wustl.edu/~manynote
    O
   /\        "Churchill? Can he run a hundred balls?"
  -\-\-- o                                                           
             NOTE: dehyphenate node to remove spamblock.          <*>