Research on Intonation

[MikeW]

One factor that hasn't been discussed in a form I can recognize is overall pitch. If the tuner is set to A440 and the soloist has tuned to A442 or A445 or whatever (as seems to be common in the orchestral world) then the notes as reported by the tuner MUST be all over the map, especially so when they are actually in tune with each other.

Also, I vaguely remember a comment in a pre-internet text book that said that all skillful soloists tend towards just intonation unless pulled towards some other temperament by their musical environment, so an equal temperament tuner will tend to report the difference between just intonation and equal temperament (it will sound good, but look bad on the tuner). The same book also said something about strings wanting to play near just intonation (but sharp), while wood wind instruments are constructed to play at least near to equal temperament, and brass instruments use a scale based on equal temperament, but distorted by having to use the upper partials - the result being that in a large mixed ensemble the players have to somehow average out their different tendencies and arrive at a compromise that sounds "in tune". I interpret this to mean "forget about the tuner, use your ears".

[brassbow]

I may have mentioned this a time or two, but it bears repeating. When I was a sound man trying to "equalize" or "ring-out" a room I soon noticed that every room, hall, studio had a different resonant frequency. This means that the room itself will reflect certain frequencies and not others. Try this experiment. Play a chromatic scale slowly until a note envelops you (like when you sing a certain note in the bathroom) once you found that note play it with a tuner. I bet the tuner will NOT be “A=440”. Now adjust the tuner till the note is in tune and play chromatically and you may be surprised. In old churches organs had different tuning base note, because ( MY theory ) the tuner tuned to the resonance of the room. Remember A=440 was standardized in the 30’s by radio engineers not musicians. So while a note may be intune to a mechanical tuner, it may not be in tune with the room.

[Rick Denney]

Also, I vaguely remember a comment in a pre-internet text book that said that all skillful soloists tend towards just intonation...

Yes, I remember research showing that the great soloists playing without accompaniment tended to a Pythagoran scale.

I suspect that such falls into the category of "sounding right", which is their standard. The dynamics of group pitch are quite different than with solo voices, because the solo voices play intervals in time, while the group plays chords that either resonate or put up a fight.

But the question always remains: Does that string of intervals sound right because the soloist has trained their hearing to know what right sounds like, or does it sound right because they've heard their own instrument's unmanaged weirdnesses so much that it has become their new normal?

Rick "who, like everyone, strives for the former" Denney

[MaryAnn]

I may have mentioned this a time or two, but it bears repeating. When I was a sound man trying to "equalize" or "ring-out" a room I soon noticed that every room, hall, studio had a different resonant frequency. This means that the room itself will reflect certain frequencies and not others. Try this experiment. Play a chromatic scale slowly until a note envelops you (like when you sing a certain note in the bathroom) once you found that note play it with a tuner. I bet the tuner will NOT be “A=440”. Now adjust the tuner till the note is in tune and play chromatically and you may be surprised. In old churches organs had different tuning base note, because ( MY theory ) the tuner tuned to the resonance of the room. Remember A=440 was standardized in the 30’s by radio engineers not musicians. So while a note may be intune to a mechanical tuner, it may not be in tune with the room.

I'm going to bring this back to slots, which I had been thinking of posting about for the last week or so (funny bloke brought it up.) Once when I was watching Sam Pilafian up close at a horn workshop, he had a note he was sitting on, and he moved the slide through several inches of travel, back and forth, until he arrived where he wanted it and left it there. The pitch didn't change; I assumed he was listening to/feeling the resonance of his instrument and placed the slide so he was at the position in the slot that resonated the way he wanted it to.

I think that playing "at the edge of the slot," which is not a resonant place to play compared to the middle of the slot (my assumption,) may alter the perception of intonation because it's in a lousy spot for the resonance.

MA

[MaryAnn]

This topic has moved down the board, but....wrt bells, slots, resonance, etc.

All I know is that when I changed out my (screw) Schmid bell for a Lawson bell, my horn went from tinny sounding to being an instrument I had to be careful not to use as a weapon. Not only did the projection and sound quality change dramatically, but suddenly in the region where the partials start to keep close company with each other, the "notes were there" compared to before. This was verified by other people trying that particular bell on their own horns....I heard a very fine player (who said, "It's a cannon!") play through a difficult, very note-y concerto on his horn with his bell and my bell.....and he hit an amazingly higher number of the notes using my bell. His only negative comment was that the sound with my bell was slightly less focused than with his bell; I'm not sure if he noticed how many more of the notes he was hitting, consistently, with my bell.

So, slots? I'd say that my bell possibly made the slots wider, or more in tune, or whatever, because what his chops wanted to play came through with a lot more accuracy with the Lawson bell, which of course had different tapers than the Schmid bell did.

MA