Tuning a Fender Rhodes (equal temperment or stretch tuning?)

[Jimbroni]

That is the question. Fender Rhodes pianos came from the factory in equal temperment, however many people and in fact even the Rhodes service manual reccomends stretch tuning.

 

Equal temperment will make all the notes ring true with 440 tuning, and be more comparable to guitars and basses. But the relative pitch for the rhodes to itself will be off. (i.e. If you hit an A way down in the hole and then go all the way up top and hit an A it will be flat.)

 

I just had my upright acoustic piano tuned by a professional tuner, this was tuned proper "stretch tuned" Its sounds pretty good with guitars and basses. But there are microtonal differences, I think they sound great and add life to an acoustic piano. But I've always had my Rhodes tuned to equal temperment, which I'm used to with an electric.

Per my other thread I'm fixing my old rhodes up and am curious if anybody has had experience tuning a rhodes to (true temperment vs equal temperment), and which you prefer and why?

 

Thanks.

[blue2blue]

The relative tuning of the Rhodes to itself will be off under 12TET? (12 tone equal temperament)

 

This doesn't seem to jive with my understanding of octaves and Pythagorean math. (Of course, I'm allowing for the whole out-of-tune-intervals thing within 12TET. But to my tonal voodoo-challenged brain, it seems like a precise doubling of frequency should produce in tune octaves. But I'll admit, the notion of stretch tuning already challenges my presumptions as well as my not all that limited tonal noodling over the years.)

 

I know that folks who advocate stretch tuning say that the upper octaves of a piano in strict 12TET sound flat (which I don't quite get but I don't have a strech tuning to fool around with)... but it was still my (perhaps wildly ignorant) understanding that the actual octaves (assuming strict 12TET) would sound as true octaves if they were so-tuned.

 

But, like I hinted at, the whole business seems like more everything-you-know-is-wrong stuff... (whereas when I started learning about just intonation, it immediately started answering questions and dissolving seeming paradoxes that had long bugged me).

[Jimbroni]

 

The relative tuning of the Rhodes to itself will be off under 12TET? (12 tone equal temperament) This doesn't seem to jive with my understanding of octaves and Pythagorean math. (Of course, I'm allowing for the whole out-of-tune-intervals thing within 12TET. But to my tonal voodoo-challenged brain, it seems like a precise doubling of frequency should produce in tune octaves. But I'll admit, the notion of stretch tuning already challenges my presumptions as well as my not all that limited tonal noodling over the years.) I know that folks who advocate stretch tuning say that the upper octaves of a piano in strict 12TET sound flat (which I don't quite get but I don't have a strech tuning to fool around with)... but it was still my (perhaps wildly ignorant) understanding that the actual octaves (assuming strict 12TET) would sound as true octaves if they were so-tuned. But, like I hinted at, the whole business seems like more everything-you-know-is-wrong stuff... (whereas when I started learning about just intonation , it immediately started answering questions and dissolving seeming paradoxes that had long bugged me).

 

 

 

I don't claim to be an expert on this either, which is why I'm asking. I'm inclined to leave it equal temperment simply because it will be in the context of an electric jam band kinda setting as opposed to an orchestral setting. However my understanding is that doubling of octaves mathmetically only works for the first octave after that it will start getting flat and beat harmonically.. 440 to 880 fine 880 to 1760 fine but 440 to 1760 will be flat. So piano tuners tune middle C and that octave to a tuning fork or electric tuner then tune the rest of the piano by ear reference to the middle C octave. At least If I remember right. I may have mistated somethings due to my lack of understanding, but I do know that a properly tuned piano will ring not true to an electronic tuner in the extreme registers. High notes will be sharp and low notes will be flat.

 

 

 

But yeah I'm with you, I was first exposed to this in an acoustics class. The professor said successive doubling of octaves doesn't line up with the musical scale. I didn't believe because it didn't make sense, but he played doubled octaves, and then played the musical scale. It immediately sounded different but then he played both over top of each other and it was apparent anybody.

 

I also remember being shocked and dismayed the first time I tried integrating a sax player into one of my projects. I had to transpose every by a step and a half. WTH. This stuff boggles the mind sometimes.

[Jimbroni]

I would have been better off saying, yep this makes my head hurt too. But does anybody have any experience with tuning a rhodes up into stretch tuning or (std piano tuning)?

 

On the side, I have a hammond spinnet organ which some of the note were not ringing true to something we were playing. After trying to figure how to tune the hammond, we realized after some research that a hammond spinnet is not tuneable, and follows a special scale that is specific to hammond organs. And if you wanted it to ring true all the way up the scale with a piano you could replace such and such resistor and/or capitor to make it so.

 

Which leaves me with another question. How are electronic keyboards tuned? Equal or stretch? Or does it vary from patch to patch?

[blue2blue]

Well, certainly 12 Tone Equal Temperament does not agree with Just Intonation across any given octave, but as I understand it, stretch tuning isn't about that... or something. But, hey, I happen to have access to this new internets business, so maybe I'll go see if I can't fill in some gaps in my knowledge.

[cooterbrown]

I used to have a Mk I 88-key Stage Piano (1973-vintage).

I would tune it in equal, then give it a bit of a stretch, totally by ear, since I didn't have a strobe, back then.

I didn't worry too much about the bottom and top 8ve. I just tried to make sure the middle 61, or so, sounded sweet.

[blue2blue]

Well, certainly 12 Tone Equal Temperament does not agree with Just Intonation across any given octave, but as I understand it, stretch tuning isn't about that... or something. But, hey, I happen to have access to this new internets business, so maybe I'll go see if I can't fill in some gaps in my knowledge.

 

 

Here's some more detailed info: http://www.postpiano.com/support/updates/tech/Tuning.htm

[slight-return]

Pretty much

 

Tempering to a comma is done b/c just intervals run into the product of primes (2:1^n and 3:2^n' for instance ain't going to factor out the same way)problem with definition of the pitch

 

whereas stretch tuning is compensating for physical inconsistency (internal friction and Y will cause imperfect resonators...with percussed instruments you have all the motive force up front so the internal properties of the resonating body are going to really define what's going on, esp as the sound decays)

[slight-return]

 

I used to have a Mk I 88-key Stage Piano (1973-vintage). I would tune it in equal, then give it a bit of a stretch, totally by ear, since I didn't have a strobe, back then. I didn't worry too much about the bottom and top 8ve. I just tried to make sure the middle 61, or so, sounded sweet.

 

 

I think that's a good way to go -- you really do get to decide where you want to put the inelegancies -- the wife plays a mki 73 and does abt the same thing...sets it "straight" then tweaks by ear to get it as straight or as "wet" as she wants

[Jimbroni]

 

Here's some more detailed info: http://www.postpiano.com/support/updates/tech/Tuning.htm

 

 

Yeah from what I gather it has nothing to do with just intonation which hasn't been common in western or european music since bach, though I've always been fascinated by that stuff and its link to our systems of architecture and math. The more I've been digging into this, Stretch tuning seems to have more to do with compensating for the speed of soundwaves traveling through the strings of a piano or the tines due to mechanical inefficiency. This will be impacted most by the extremes of the piano, where you have either alot of mass or alot of tension. Except the problem is the fundamental is infact altered thus creating another scale, from what I've been reading this stretch tuning has more to do with fixing the harmonics. Apparently when you tune a piano by ear properly it is already stretch tuned as a result. Which seems strange but there is whole lot of harmonics in an acoustic piano that would cause beats, sounds like a balancing act between the fundamental and the harmonics. Which leads me to the notion that I'm simply gonna have to tune my rhode by ear instead of using a tuner and a chart, which would be quicker. But hey whatever it takes.

[Jimbroni]

I used to have a Mk I 88-key Stage Piano (1973-vintage). I would tune it in equal, then give it a bit of a stretch, totally by ear, since I didn't have a strobe, back then. I didn't worry too much about the bottom and top 8ve. I just tried to make sure the middle 61, or so, sounded sweet.

 

That makes sense the stretch in the middle is very minimal a couple a cents here and there, but the extremes is where the curve really gets crazy.

 

I was just curious about rhodes players out there and if they like their rhodes to be more in line with guitar tuning as opposed to piano tuning.

 

Sounds like you were a tweener.

[Music Calgary]

The best Rhodes VSTis such a Lounge Lizard and Elektrik Piano offer both stretch and normal -- but real Rhodes were not stretch tuned at the factory, they were tuned to equal temperament.

 

TUNING THE RHODES PIANO:

http://www.fenderrhodes.org/org/manual/ch5.html

 

[Jimbroni]

The best Rhodes VSTis such a Lounge Lizard and Elektrik Piano offer both stretch and normal -- but real Rhodes were not stretch tuned at the factory, they were tuned to equal temperament. TUNING THE RHODES PIANO: http://www.fenderrhodes.org/org/manual/ch5.html

 

cept I can't just randomly click a mouse button to switch back and forth with the old skoolah.

[Music Calgary]

cept I can't just randomly click a mouse button to switch back and forth with the old skoolah.

 

Hee. Yeah...

 

On the other hand there's no sound quite like a real Rhodes being played by someone with "that touch". As awesome as Elektrik Piano is, it's just not the same.

[slight-return]

 

Yeah from what I gather it has nothing to do with just intonation which hasn't been common in western or european music since bach

 

 

Keep in mind temperament ain't merely a Just v Equal thing, even in the (JS Bach) day, various species of meantone and well-temperng were being used for claviers

[FWIW - I returned the harpsichord back to Kirnberger III ]

 

 

I was just curious about rhodes players out there and if they like their rhodes to be more in line with guitar tuning as opposed to piano tuning.

 

That's a tough one...guitars wind up having imperfect (part of the nature of the beast with having a string responsible for >1 note) and semi-dynamic intonation (while it's fretted, we still modulate the pressure, even on gut which changes the intonation slightly)...so we get all those "sweetened" systems, "True Tempering" frets,etc -but even so, players will tend to "drag" a string into intonation

 

Zappa brought up this problem with overloading the synclavier

For one thing, on the guitar, you get to wiggle the intonation a little bit to make more subtle things happen. The tradeoff there, though, is that as you wiggle the strings and intonate it -- all that nuance stuff -- you generate masses and masses of numbers that fill your sequencer up very fast. That's certainly a liability because you can't do as many tracks of information. The bulk of the sequence is being filled up with inaudible data dealing with microtonal pitch adjustments.

 

http://home.online.no/~corneliu/gp86.htm

 

 

I vaguely remember around that time, talk of a special "string midi" protocol (which, AFIK, never got air under its wings) to deal with that kind of stuff. Man, I remember turning on the chromatic mode on some of the 24-pin Roland stuff (like the GR-700 or Ibanez MC-1) and how it'd really make that apparent.

[blue2blue]

 

Pretty much Tempering to a comma is done b/c just intervals run into the product of primes (2:1^n and 3:2^n' for instance ain't going to factor out the same way)problem with definition of the pitch whereas stretch tuning is compensating for physical inconsistency (internal friction and Y will cause imperfect resonators...with percussed instruments you have all the motive force up front so the internal properties of the resonating body are going to really define what's going on, esp as the sound decays)

 

Yeah... I think I finally got that sorta between the wikipedia article on stretch tuning and the last link in my post a few above. Apparently this resistance to bending effect is higher in metal strings (reasonably enough, I suppose) and that's why (I guess) classical guitars do not have a 'stretch' bridge, whereas steel string instruments tend to.

 

 

So... if I've got this straight, the second harmonic of a steel string is actually not a perfect double, hence a perfect octave, but it's that tone (and not the fundamental) that is going to cause beating against a true octave tone?

 

Is that right?

[Jimbroni]

 

Yeah... I think I finally got that sorta between the wikipedia article on stretch tuning and the last link in my post a few above. Apparently this resistance to bending effect is higher in metal strings (reasonably enough, I suppose) and that's why (I guess) classical guitars do not have a 'stretch' bridge, whereas steel string instruments tend to. So... if I've got this straight, the second harmonic of a steel string is actually not a perfect double, hence a perfect octave, but it's that tone (and not the fundamental) that is going to cause beating against a true octave tone? Is that right?

 

 

I think so. At least thats the way I'm reading it as well. Its starting to make a little sense, as the harmonic series is much stronger in a piano than say a guitar. That could explain at least in my mind why when you tune a piano by ear, it ends up not lining up to a guitar. Watching the guy who tuned my piano, he did a lot of tuning in octaves followed by specific intervals and kinda balanced it all out. Not really sure what he was listening for but I'm starting to think it had a lot to do with these 2nd, 3rd, etc harmonics summing properly in a chord so they don't clash, then balancing that with fundamental. Probably starts to explain why certain pianos are worth more than my car.

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

Kirnberger I, II or II well tempered, and you can play Bach on it

[St. Mallarmé]

Werckmeister's I temperament based on 1/4 comma divisions is even slightly better to modulate to distant keys, said Johann

[Jimbroni]

Kirnberger I, II or II well tempered, and you can play Bach on it

 

Knock that crap out, Rudy!!! I need another intonation scheme like I need a hole in the head.

[slight-return]

 

Is that right?

 

 

pretty much (happens in other things like bells, wood blocks, etc too -- internatal friction, Young's modulus, etc -- like so much else in physics "discounting friction, assume 100% efficiency, in an ideal gas" is great to simplify calcs...but then on race day, you actual DO have to worry abt drag and friction and all the rest)

 

I mean, as you start moving into playing 13's on your guitfiddle, think about how ornery an unwound G of that size starts getting

[slight-return]

Kirnberger I, II or II well tempered, and you can play Bach on it

 

 

I use Kirn III on the harpsichord (well, that might not be entirely accurate...it's not like you can keep those things in tune anyhoo ... really ) -- funky thing is, there is some evidence that they disagreed on temperaments (Kirnberger was a student of JS) - but I think K-III was developed after JS's passing [in the last 4-5 years of Kirnberg's life]

[blue2blue]

pretty much (happens in other things like bells, wood blocks, etc too -- internatal friction, Young's modulus, etc -- like so much else in physics "discounting friction, assume 100% efficiency, in an ideal gas" is great to simplify calcs...but then on race day, you actual DO have to worry abt drag and friction and all the rest) I mean, as you start moving into playing 13's on your guitfiddle, think about how ornery an unwound G of that size starts getting

Ah... I'm starting to see the shape of this thing in the mist. The cant of steel-string saddles (I said bridge earlier, I think, sorry) and the (for me) long noted but barely understood difficulties in the transition between wound and unwound strings.

 

OK... I guess I believe you guys aren't making this stuff up after all.

[slight-return]

It's a very beneficial area to study because the time spent studying acts as a justifiable excuse to not practice!

[the stranger]

Watching the guy who tuned my piano, he did a lot of tuning in octaves followed by specific intervals and kinda balanced it all out.

 

That's exactly how I tune guitar. I've never used a guitar tuner that worked.