Tuning and this probably sounds rediculous !

[hfmadopter]

I guess by now just about everyone who hangs out here knows that I own a very old Henry F Miller grand piano. It's circa 1889 vintage. Over the last year I've kept it tuned to A440. A good part of it after summer dropped to A 438, so my most recent tuning I just went ahead from A 438. So the question, since 2 cents is not supposed to be noticable to the human ear, why then does this piano sound so fantasitic tuned from A438 compared with A440 ? Even my wife noticed it and my visiting son the other night noticed it as well. He wondered where had it been tuned to back when Chris Brown our tuner was doing it, which I do not recall.

And does anyone know where this piano might have been tuned to back in 1889 ? I'm thinking A 435 ?

So I guess besides the questions, I'm here to say that indeed to us 2 cents is noticable.

[p2u_]

So the question, since 2 cents is not supposed to be noticable to the human ear, why then does this piano sound so fantasitic tuned from A438 compared with A440 ?

I'm not a technician, so I can only go on intuition:
1) Since on the piano ALL notes are not absolute, but actually a compromise of frequencies (when compared to the voice or string instruments), at A438 your instrument reaches the "ideal compromise", which is clearly perceivable by ear.
2) Besides, the whole construction with all its elements needs a certain tension to keep it in good shape. I guess the tension of the strings with A438 as the reference is exactly the norm the piano constructors had in mind.
P.S.: Now that sounds really ridiculous, no?

Reason for editing: changed A440 to 438 because I misunderstood at first.

Paul

[iansinclair]

Not ridiculous at all!  It probably was a little lower (435? 438? uh...  ) when it was built.  It just might be -- not saying it is -- that the overall dimensions of the instrument -- frame, sounding board, odd bits of string beyond stops, etc. etc. is "happier" at a lower frequency, or a slightly different frequency overall.

After all, virtually all wind orchestral instruments do have what might be thought of as a "sweet spot" where one doesn't have to bend the pitch with the lips and the instrument is in tune with itself.  I believe that strings do this too.

Organs certainly do -- trying to bring an A 430 instrument up to A 440, for instance, is not only very difficult (it can be done) but upsets the balance between ranks -- and for some stops, such as an harmonic flute -- can really mess up the tone.

[richard black]

2Hz is not 2 cents - just under 8 cents (a cent is 1/100 of a semitone or about 0.26Hz at 440Hz). And yes, the answer is almost certainly that something in the instrument just resonates nicely at a centre frequency of 438Hz. Indeed, it could well be worth trying any piano out a few cents either side of A440, but it's a lot of bother and how many owners are prepared to put up with that? In addition, for those who (like me!) play with a lot of wind players, it's a route to rapid unpopularity, sadly.

[ionian_tinnear]

Interesting stuff.

Brings to mind a question, however.  I have a 1923 Steinway M.  Is there a source of information that tells us what frequency of A pianos were tuned to in the eras they were made?  It might be interesting to have our old pianos tuned to the pitch they manufactured for.

[hfmadopter]

2Hz is not 2 cents - just under 8 cents (a cent is 1/100 of a semitone or about 0.26Hz at 440Hz). And yes, the answer is almost certainly that something in the instrument just resonates nicely at a centre frequency of 438Hz. Indeed, it could well be worth trying any piano out a few cents either side of A440, but it's a lot of bother and how many owners are prepared to put up with that? In addition, for those who (like me!) play with a lot of wind players, it's a route to rapid unpopularity, sadly.

Of course, of course ! The answer is so obvious once pointed out, I feel a bit less than brilliant at the moment I must say. I do thank you guys though and especially Richard for pointing this out.

[hfmadopter]

Interesting stuff.

Brings to mind a question, however.  I have a 1923 Steinway M.  Is there a source of information that tells us what frequency of A pianos were tuned to in the eras they were made?  It might be interesting to have our old pianos tuned to the pitch they manufactured for.

The standard of A440 was put in place internationally in 1925, from accounts that I had found online a few weeks ago ( I also believe that is in my tuners and rebuilding book as well, as is Richards info about Hz vs Cents). Manufacturers prior to that used various frequencies in a range from about 432 to 438 prior to that ( which is why I asked if anyone knew about the frequency of my Miller from circa 1889). I'm sure some pianos from some makers somewhere were also set to A440 prior to 1925.

On my Henry F Miller in the past  I have experimented with tuning from A435 and did not like it. However, my piano obviously doesn't like 440 or not so in this room at least ! So I thought why not do this tuning from A438 since more notes are relatively harmonizing with that range than 440 after the summer humidity had gone away. And we, me, I, the family, love it there. Again, as Richard points out though, we do not have to sync with an orchestra as he does.

This is a round about way of saying I don't know anything about your Steinway ! On the other hand, if your Steinway sounds great at A440 then so be it. In the case of  my Miller I get various different sounds at 440 than I do now at 438. Who knows why, it could be any number of reasons from lamp shades and light bulbs in the room to the harp, sound board etc, stray strings. The thing is, if you drop it or have it dropped and don't like it then you have to pay to have it brought back up. It's not a huge move in HZ but it is a move through out the entire keyboard. Good chance with an 1800's piano that it was not ever intended to be tuned from A440, IMO.

I'm just so pleased I can't see me changing from this setting. Really, I hit on it out of laziness though and knowing that next summer it probably will pull itself back up ! And incidentally, I in no way claim to be a professional tuner, I just work on my own piano and have for quite a long time as I have mentioned in other posts along the way.

[indianajo]

Great point. If I do acquire a pre-depression upright for the tinkly tone, I wouldn't now try to pull it up to 440 based on your research.  I wouldn't play one of those in a duet anyway;  I have the postwar Sohmer & Steinway to play duets with each other and the Hammond organ.  The Hammond has been my tone reference for tuning, I'd have to put a variable frequency motor drive on it to drop the pitch.  But, cool enough, I have one surplus from a conveyor tearout at my last job. 

[lhorwinkle]

... the answer is almost certainly that something in the instrument just resonates nicely at a centre frequency of 438Hz.

Huh? That makes no sense at all.

When a piano is tuned to 440 (or 438), that means that the middle A note is set to 440 (or 438). The piano cabinet might have a nice resonance at that pitch (or not). But that is not relevant to the other notes, the ones that have no harmonic relationship to the A note.

Anyway, the OP gave no indication that the A note sounded better when tuned to A438 vs. A440. Rather, the piano overall sounded better at 438. That cannot be the result of a resonance at 438.

More likely: The piano's scale design was meant for a pitch other than 440. Perhaps it was meant for 438, or some other pitch. (A lower design-pitch is virtually certain for such an old piano, built before the A440 standard. Some pianos were meant to be tuned as low as A415.)

Based on the scale design, the string resonances and inharmonicities sound good when the piano is tuned to the designed pitch, and not so when tuned to A440.

[hfmadopter]

Huh? That makes no sense at all.

When a piano is tuned to 440 (or 438), that means that the middle A note is set to 440 (or 438). The piano cabinet might have a nice resonance at that pitch (or not). But that is not relevant to the other notes, the ones that have no harmonic relationship to the A note.

Anyway, the OP gave no indication that the A note sounded better when tuned to A438 vs. A440. Rather, the piano overall sounded better at 438. That cannot be the result of a resonance at 438.

More likely: The piano's scale design was meant for a pitch other than 440. Perhaps it was meant for 438, or some other pitch. (A lower design-pitch is virtually certain for such an old piano, built before the A440 standard. Some pianos were meant to be tuned as low as A415.)

Based on the scale design, the string resonances and inharmonicities sound good when the piano is tuned to the designed pitch, and not so when tuned to A440.

I agree, if I'm getting correctly what you are describing, in the case of harmonic relationship to A at least and also the scaling design for sure..  For clarification sake though, people should know that the whole of all registers are now at a lower frequency in my piano. In that respect there is a relationship to the A being 2 Hz lowered.

The result is satisfying is all I can say. I'm still very glad I did this. Also, there is the possiblility that besides the lower Hz, I may just have done a better tuning overall as well.

 I do have a top register problem though. Always a tough place to tune but I believe that register may need restringing. It's good to F#, the G barely sounds and I can't seem to get it to sound clearly. I'm not done yet though !

[indianajo]

The top octave is such a hash of overtones I had a ****of a time getting the 1941 Steinway 40 console to sound good. It hadn't been tuned in 44 years, Tuning it in octaves from the middle notes didn't do it on the top octaves. I kept doing it over and over.   When I bought a Hammond H100 organ with pitch locked tonewheels to the power company,  and started tuning to the sine wave one drawbar tones, is when the top octave of the Steinway started sounding good. Brilliant and bell like, actually.  So that is why I think the absolute tuning of A matters. Compromises were made to get the upper notes to sound okay, if the center key tune is moved, those compromises are all wrong, not artistic at all. 
Good luck with your older grand. 

[benzwm02]

Some older pianos such as yours were often not meant to be tuned at 440. The whole idea of standard pitch being 440 is a 20th century concept.

[hfmadopter]

The top octave is such a hash of overtones I had a ****of a time getting the 1941 Steinway 40 console to sound good. It hadn't been tuned in 44 years, Tuning it in octaves from the middle notes didn't do it on the top octaves. I kept doing it over and over.   When I bought a Hammond H100 organ with pitch locked tonewheels to the power company,  and started tuning to the sine wave one drawbar tones, is when the top octave of the Steinway started sounding good. Brilliant and bell like, actually.  So that is why I think the absolute tuning of A matters. Compromises were made to get the upper notes to sound okay, if the center key tune is moved, those compromises are all wrong, not artistic at all.  
Good luck with your older grand.  

I worked on it some more today, I have the G ringing a bit now, I accomplished this by very rapid hammer strikes for no particular count. In my mind I was setting the hammer to the strings ( I had lightly lacquered them last Saturday, that upper register hammer section). Then I plucked each string with my fingernail to get the unison to sound somewhat even from string to string. I had one that sounded correct, one too high and one too low. Low and behold I started to get a ring out of the G.. Now the A is dead, if I get that I'm golden because from there up it sounds decent and Sat I had gotten the F and F# fixed up..