Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
You may find it helpful to study what a company can and cannot exclude from their warranty. The FTC has a guide here: https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/businesspersons-guide-federal-warranty-law. I am not a lawyer, but an owner of a company that manufactures instruments (not harps).
You have the right to an implied warranty of merchantability, which they cannot change. They are within their right to require you to transport or ship to their facility–as annoying as that is. They may also refuse to pay for warranty repairs by non-authorized technicians–but they can’t void the warranty just because someone else worked on it. Why are they saying you should pay for the repairs?
Following up to Carl’s question, I’m wondering “how” they are not engaging properly? Are the natural and sharp discs not centered under each other? It seems like you could get the adjustable lined up with the center of at least the natural disc.
You are rightly frustrated, and feel wronged. Yet one wonders if the company misunderstands the true nature of the problem. Is it possible there is too much anger in the air for clear communication?
So, assuming he means quarter-comma meantone (which is most common), I would assume the specification of “E” means that the E-G# major third is pure (without beats), and the E-B-F#-C#-G# sequence of fifths are altered enough to space that syntonic comma equally among the four intervals of a fifth (hence quarter-comma).
Any and all unequal temperaments end up different depending on where you start the sequence. In meantone, the largest problem would be where the “wolf” interval ends up. Hence my question about what key the piece was actually in. The most common quarter-comma meantone is centered on D, so the wolf is G# to Eb, there being no Ab note. I’m guessing he means to construct it two semitones higher, centered on E. So instead of the “black” notes being C#, Eb, F#, G#, and Bb, they would be C#, D#, F#, G#, and A#, and there would be no flats available at all. Seems an odd thing to do to a pedal harp.
Charles Nix
I can’t help with the music–but if you need a chart of cents variation for each note from equal temperament, I can probably get that for you. Is meantone-e the whole description?
Is the piece also in E major? Are there pedal changes in the part? One thing that bothers me on first thinking about the concept is that the harp would have to be tuned to the key with all strings open. Any discs you close would immediately put that interval out of meantone because the discs are set to equal temperament semitones.
Would any of that help?
Charles Nix
Especially at the beginning, you need an instructor. Hand and finger position is everything when making sound on a harp. Small differences make a major difference in sound. I don’t think most people will learn the right habits from a book alone. It is critical to learn hand, finger, (and thumb!) position correctly right now from the first, or you will be fighting over and over to unlearn and relearn when you start using three-finger placements, and then again with four-finger placements, and then again with scales. Much easier to drive a couple of hours and learn it right from the start. You will spend much less time overall and will enjoy it more. You can progress quickly if you already read music. (Source-personal experience, watching many other beginners start without a teacher. My community has gone for years at a time without anyone in the area in the past.)
For first books, I like Kathy Bundock Moore’s book. There are other great choices, including what your teacher is used to working with.
If you don’t mind sharing your area, perhaps someone will have teacher suggestions for you.
Charles Nix
You may find lots of info on this in a recent thread on tuning: https://harpcolumn.com/forums/topic/tuning-by-ear-vs-electronic-tuner/
I also use Peterson, mostly the StroboPlus. Also use VS-1, 450 and 590, and the StroboPlus app for the iPhone, and a bunch of Korgs, etc. Needing an external microphone is almost universal for accurately sensing the upper notes though friends who have the iPhone apps (both Peterson and ClearTune) do pretty well with that one built in mic.
Charles Nix
I remember the discussion about stretch tuning. So, here is what stretching means, at least for keyboard instruments: the octaves are a little wider than a pure octave. How much depends on the instrument. Organs are not stretched at all. Pianos, I understand, stretch around 30-35 cents over their range.
The usual explanation for pianos is that they have irregular overtones, caused by the relative stiffness of the wire, so the stretched tuning allows the irregular overtones to sound better.
I have always understood it to be a very different animal from the pure fifth and octaves pythagorean tuning. We still hear fifths beating (on the flat side) when stretching.
I’ve always heard of stretching as a modification of equal temperament–but the temperament is still fully equal, all fifths and thirds have beats of equivalent speed, and it does not matter where you start. A really good equal temperament is also, by far, the hardest one to set properly by ear, because everything beats with everything else, and you are comparing the relative speed of beat sets, which also increases with increasing pitch.
Have to think more about this pythagorean and stretch connection. Had always thought they were completely unrelated. Interesting.
Charles
Elettaria:
As Tacye suggests, the older temperaments would be first tries. I don’t know much about historical wire practice.
If you’re going to be playing more complex music, you might listen to quarter-comma meantone. Like any temperament (except equal) you need to know which key you are starting from so that the wolf interval is in a good place for you.
The easier place by ear, and with only one key to play in, might be a pythagorean or a just tuning. It will sound very different to our modern ears that are so accustomed to equal temperaments. Again, just is different for every key–it is not as simple as setting the tuner to “just”.
Resources on how to set any of the above are easily found with a search engine. Basically Pythagorean is pure fifths, and the thirds fall where they may. Just picks the main fifths and thirds that you will be using, and makes them pure (without beats). Which ones are the “main” ones is up to you.
You may like it–you may not. A lot of that will depend on what type of music you are playing.
Charles
Biagio:
I think I know the tuning system you are talking about. It is reproduced in one of Bochsa’s student books on IMSLP.
As I remember, it uses octaves and fifths over a roughly 1-1/2 octave span, copying down octaves when out of range. Then it checks with tonic, dominant, and dom-7th chords.
It seems I remember that the accompanying instructions are a little sketchy. The fifths would have to be a little flat in almost any well temperament, but no mention was made of that. I think it was intended to be accompanied by instruction by the teacher.
Personally, I prefer a fourths and fifths temperament method–probably because I learned that way. The fifths are flat and the fourths are sharp (because they are inverted fifths). Then there is no transferring octaves with the accompanying inaccuracy. But it is a lot harder to keep track of which way to move what string.
Today, I always rough in with an electronic and use the ear methods for refinement.
Charles Nix
Biagio:
I think I know the tuning system you are talking about. It is reproduced in one of Bochsa’s student books on IMSLP.
As I remember, it uses octaves and fifths over a roughly 1-1/2 octave span, copying down octaves when out of range. Then it checks with tonic, dominant, and dom-7th chords.
It seems I remember that the accompanying instructions are a little sketchy. The fifths would have to be a little flat in almost any well temperament, but no mention was made of that. I think it was intended to be accompanied by instruction by the teacher.
Personally, I prefer a fourths and fifths temperament method–probably because I learned that way. The fifths are flat and the fourths are sharp (because they are inverted fifths). Then there is no transferring octaves with the accompanying inaccuracy. But it is a lot harder to keep track of which way to move what string.
Today, I always rough in with an electronic and use the ear methods for refinement and as a double check.
Charles Nix
Good to know about Cleartune.
If equal works for you, use it. My Eb lever harp is fully levered and used in most of the keys possible for it. I have it regulated in Brad Lehman’s Bach temperament. It leaves keys around F and C the most consonant, with increasing dissonance in more distant keys. It is a “well” temperament, with no wolf intervals in any key.
If the harp were only levered for say three keys, or I only played in three keys, I would make a different choice — unless — you play with other instruments, especially modern keyboard instruments. Then you must use something matching what the keyboard is tuned in.
Temperament changes absolutely require that the instrument be regulated in that temperament. Tuning a levered instrument in a different temperament is only correct until you move the first lever. Western temperaments have 12 (usually) pitches in each octave. You are only setting seven strings. The other five are set in the regulation of the levers. It is not something one can casually change unless you tune to the temperament while levered for the key you are playing in and change no levers afterward–meaning you can test out a temperament in a key on an instrument and that’s about it until you regulate.
Temperament choice requires knowing the capabilities of the instrument, and which keys it would be used in, and what period of literature it is to be used for. If in doubt, use equal.
Charles Nix
I need to add one thing about all the Peterson products: their customer support is excellent beyond all expectation. We have tuners over thirty years old that are still supported. They are US based, a relatively small company, and when you call for support, you are talking to the people who design the products and run the company, not a CSR reading stock answers off a screen.
Charles Nix
Bill: Yes, a couple of our techs use it. I use the standalone predecessor (the VS-1), and use the new standalone StroboPlusHD on a daily basis. It is what I set pitches and start tuning with.
It is a virtual strobe, not a true strobe effect. Essentially, it is a set of bars on the display that looks like a strobe. Sensitivity depends on how good the mic in your device is.
It is not a replacement for the true strobes. It is a very good standard electronic tuner with a “needle” that looks like a strobe effect. That being said, I use mine regularly for setting up a tuning. Our techs use theirs for setting up tunings and checking pitches. Everything is finished in by ear, though, to get it really right.
We also use the Cleartune app. It is easier to use than the Peterson, but has many fewer options, (I don’t think Cleartune can do unequal temperaments, for instance) and the display has less usable resolution than the Peterson virtual strobes. Neither compares with a true strobe for precision work. Both work better than many of the Korgs, et al. that are out there.
The guitarist friend I play with regularly uses Cleartune. Then he works through a set of chords, with and without a capo, and finishes things off for the best compromise on the intervals in the keys we will be playing in.
Charles Nix
Absolutely, Tacye. My lever harp is always in an unequal temperament. Who cares if it sounds awful in B major–I can’t play it in B major anyway.
For pedal, I leave it in equal. Most of the literature was written after equal was expected. Unequal would also rule out an enharmonic substitution, if you needed to. I’m not really sure a pedal could be regulated unequal, with the natural to sharp distance being fixed. It would be a lot of work and disc changes, and you wouldn’t ever be changing back and forth. Of course, you could tune for the predominant key of each piece the way you wanted to.
Not being a music major, I would be interested in whether the whole temperament concept and theory is really widely understood. I’ve talked to many, many musicians who assume that F# and Gb are always the same pitch and always have been and must be by definition. Most of my musician friends are organ or piano, so there may be some sample error there. Perhaps violinists usually do understand the difference, since they can actually do something with the information.
Charles
I would say mellow is in the “ear of the beholder” Ideally, both ways would produce the exact same result–the frequency of each ascending semitone is (approx) 1.059 times what the note below is, assuming equal temperament. Both ways can produce really poor results. They each have different strengths and limitations. Tuning by ear, to really get it nailed, takes practice. A lot of practice. And a lot of music instrument theory to learn if you want to be able to understand and correct what you are hearing with the different intervals. But remember, less than 50 years ago everything was tuned by ear–that is all there has been for centuries–though with very mixed results, as old recordings often witness to.
Electronic tuners have limitations of display resolution. How can you read fractions of a cent on most tuners? Electronic tuners have microphones that don’t pick up well for low and high notes. Electronic does not supply nearly as much accuracy in pitch comparison as a good ear, with the exception of the full-strobe Peterson tuners. An additional problem is any string attacks sharp when plucked, and decays flat. So, how long after plucking should the pitch cross “0”? Is that time the same in bass and treble? Those questions are generally resolved naturally when tuning by ear.
I think electronic tuner problems are worst from roughly 3rd octave C and up. It is difficult to get the notes really nailed on the pitch: one will be a cent or two flat, and the next a cent or two sharp. The octaves end up out with each other, and the temperament is a mess.
In answer to your last question, here is how I tune: I set the temperament with the electronic from 4th A up to about 3rd C or D. All the time, I am cross-checking ear with the electronic by listening to fourths, fifths, thirds, and sixths. I am speaking of pedal harp, in equal temperament; lever harp can be different. You have to learn what to listen for: some intervals need slow beats, some need fast, some need to be dead in. Then I go down by ear, stretching very slightly flat with each octave, and cross-checking with fourths, fifths, and thirds, and also double-checking with the electronic. Then re-check the temperament section, and go up, stretching with each octave a bit more. Stretching the octaves keeps the upper fifths a bit more reasonable, without hurting the octave. Then check everything playing three or four parallel octaves.
For all this to make any difference at all, your regulation needs to be perfect, or it won’t matter–unless you’re playing in Cb major.
So that’s a complex tuning routine–if it takes you an hour or two to do, its pointless–the harp will change. I think anyone with normal hearing and enough patience to learn to play the harp could learn to tune by ear well–but maybe, for you, the time would be better spent practicing. My day job includes tuning for a living. I probably had 5 or 6 thousand hours actually spent tuning pipe organs before I took up the harp. It takes me about 8 minutes to do the tuning above if I’m starting off pretty close. Our staff tuners probably get at least 600-800 hours before we turn them loose on their own. I recognize that is a lot of time–but one can work toward it gradually–we all have to tune harps frequently, so we can begin gradually incorporating some tuning listening by ear into the regular routine.
So what might be practical? 1) At least learn to listen to the octaves played two, and then three or four at a time, picking up and correcting the notes that “beat”. 2) Invest in a really good electronic tuner–so you can really tell when your ears are right. The true strobes are big, have to plug into the wall, usually need an external mic, and they are expensive–but there is a reason people still use them. 3) If the harp pitch on any string has to move much, don’t plan on getting the harp stable in one time through. Do a rough tuning, then a fine tuning.
If you want experience with a really good electronic tuner, find a nearby pipe organ or piano technician. They are ubiquitous in our industry, particularly Peterson 450s, 490s and 590s. Piano tuners tend to have models specific to the needs of their industry, but they will work on a harp. I would think most technicians would be willing to let you borrow the use of their tuner in their shop so you can get a feel for whether it will work for you before you make the investment.
Even if you choose not to tune fully by ear, you can learn to hear and correct the upper octaves as a starting point–that would eliminate the most objectionable sounds–and might be good enough to solve your problem.
Charles Nix
Not sure if this will help you–especially in two weeks–but try a piano/lead sheet version. If you find one for early piano, you may be OK as is, or with minor edits.
Or you can find one with simple guitar chords in a key that matches the harp tuning (if lever harp). The song is in 4/4, with an eighth note rhythm, so she would play something like 1-3-5-8-3-8-5-8. Or if that is too advanced for her try 1-5-8-10 or 1-3-5-8. All of this in the left hand, and then the melody with the right hand.
On the long notes at the end of phrases, listen to his original, and add in some quarter note scales in parallel thirds or sixths to move to the next chord. You’ll hear that happening in the piano in the original.
If you’re not a musician, this might have gone right over your head. It is a lot easier to demonstrate than to write. Much of the early intermediate arranging uses some variation of this–but with the notes fully written out. The harmony on that song is simple enough that it is an ideal candidate.
Will be glad to continue the conversation if needed. It might make an interesting thread for others to reference. (Source: I play about intermediate level and arrange all the music for a weekly Episcopal church service. Along with a guitarist friend and another harpist and a flutist, we are the entire music for this evening service every week. We work entirely from lead sheet–mostly because it would be a full time job to arrange and write out the 8-12 separate pieces in a given service)
