source file: m1452.txt Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 00:46:48 EDT Subject: Relative importance of tuning accuracy for fifths and major thirds From: I've read that accuracy of tuning of the fifth is more critical than accuracy of tuning of the major third for the overall harmoniousness etc. of the music. It's beyond much doubt that in many ways the fifth is a more "fundamental" consonance than the major third. It preceded the third historically and seems to be more central in world music than the major third, which seems to have become more important in western polyphonic music than elsewhere. I've had the experience of playing and listening to recordings of music played on a piano in three roughly equidistant tunings: 12 TET (fifths 2.0 cents flat, thirds 13.6 cents sharp), sixth comma mean tone (MT) (fifths 3.6 cents flat, thirds 7.2 cents sharp), and quarter comma MT (fifths 5.4 cents flat, thirds just). My overall impression is that in 12 TET, the piano has a characteristic "fine old burnished" sound - very lively with a lot of beating. To me, the beating and shrillness considerably detract from the pleasantness of the piano's sound. When the piano is tempered to sixth comma MT, the sound is more relaxed. The major and minor triadic harmonies seem more natural sounding and to me they sound better, warmer. Nevertheless, after having become used to hearing the piano in quarter comma MT, the sixth comma MT music still sounds somewhat strained and harsh to me, while it sounds to me much more harmonious and pleasant in quarter comma MT. When I listen closely to the piano's sound in these different tunings, I can discern in both the 12 TET and sixth comma MT music a subtle "liveliness" resulting from a lot of fast pulsatings in the sound. The effect is to give the sound a roughness or harshness which takes away from the pleasantness and somehow in a way the clarity of the music. By contrast, in the quarter comma MT tuning, there seems to be an almost complete absence of a certain "brand" of this "liveliness" which gives me a kind of sense of relief, as though the air had been cleared of smoke or as though the fog on my windshield had evaporated. Now there's another kind of inharmoniousness which remains in the quarter comma MT tuned piano. Now it's there and now it's not. Sometimes fourths in the bass seem to be a bit unpleasant. The fifths are a little flatter than would be ideal - not really nice and crisp. But by comparison with the sharp thirds temperaments, the piano sounds absolutely beautiful. The triadic harmonies are really sweet sounding while in 12 TET they sound strained and labored and pinched, and the same holds to a somewhat lesser degree for the sixth comma MT. I've thought about this and tried to figure out why these temperaments affect the sound of the piano I'm working with in this way. I've just listened to some of Bill Sethares' fascinating music on a CD which I just received from him. There is a delightful harmonious smooth feel to much of the sound, and believe it or not, there's something about it reminiscent of the way my piano sounded when it was in quarter comma MT - a very pleasant freedom from roughness giving the music a feel of clarity and definition. This makes me think that the beating and trembling which results from mistuning plays a big part in marring the sound of mistuned music. It may be that some kinds of beating actually enhance the music's sound. But the tremulous, fast and I believe largely synchronous, coherent, and piercing beating which mistuned thirds in particular give to the piano's sound seem to me to be really detrimental to the sound. If I listen for beating in the music of the piano tuned to quarter comma MT, I can hear some waviness. Generally it is not prominent and doesn't impose itself on my attention. It doesn't seem to give the sound any noticeable "muddiness". I thought about the beating phenomenon. Looking at a simple case, with fifths, the third partial of the root will beat against the second partial of the mistuned fifth above it and the beat rate will be proportional to the product of the frequency of the root note, the number 3, and the degree of mistuning in cents. In the case of mistuned thirds, the fifth partial of the root will beat against the fourth partial of the mistuned third above it and the beat rate will now be proportional to the product of the frequency of the root note, the number 5, and the degree of mistuning in cents. I've done some spectral analysis of piano string partials and I've found that for notes in the vicinity of middle C, the partials are quite strong up past the 10th or 20th or so. I believe that it is not totally missing the mark to suggest that there will be a tendency for a mistuning of thirds by X cents to cause beating with a beat frequency 5/3 times the beat frequency which results from a mistuning of fifths by X cents. I'm sure the matter is more complex than the above simplified picture would imply, but it would be in line with my impressions that mistuning of thirds seems to me to be more deleterious to piano music's sound than mistuning of fifths. Somewhat related to this is my sense that in quarter comma MT piano music, the narrowness of the minor thirds (they are theoretically narrow by 5.4 cents in this tuning) impresses itself on my attention somewhat more than the narrowness of the fifths, also by 5.4 cents, in harmonic contexts. The melodic quarter comma MT fifth sounds "tempered", but it still seems close enough to me to have the feel of a fifth, which rises (sails) high above the lower note. Still, in comparison with a true fifth, it falls short. It's clear, and Bill Sethares' work is demonstrating this, that specifics of an instrument's or of an ensemble's timbre will to a large extent determine how different kinds of tuning or mistuning will affect its overall sound. Dave Hill La Mesa, CA