FORUM

Please have a look at our Forum Rules. Lets keep this forum an enjoyable place to visit.

A A A
Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —






— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
What temperament am I tuning in when I play double stops?
Topic Rating: 0 Topic Rating: 0 Topic Rating: 0 Topic Rating: 0 Topic Rating: 0 Topic Rating: 0 (0 votes) 
Avatar
ves
Member
Members
January 9, 2014 - 11:57 pm
Member Since: July 31, 2013
Forum Posts: 12
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

If I have not mistaken, if I tune using a chromatic tuner or a piano, I will be tuning my violin under an equal temperament. If I tune my A to 440 and play double open strings and listen, eliminating 'flutter' or dissonance (in other words, playing perfect fifths), the D and G I believe will be sharper than that in equal temperament while the E will be flatter. What temperament am I tuning under this method, Pythagorean, Just, or some other temperament?

 

Also, by how many cents do the notes usually vary in this tuning system compared to those in equal temperament?

 

PS: I always tune my violin like this (tune the A to 440 then tune the others by playing perfect fifths and listen) but I want to know more about it. 

PSS: I always see professionals tune like this but they always use small up-bows. I can only tune like this using long bow strokes (this serves as a good warm-up too, I might add). Is there any drawback to this?

Avatar
ves
Member
Members
January 10, 2014 - 12:18 am
Member Since: July 31, 2013
Forum Posts: 12
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Based on the ever so reliable wikipedia, the just perfect fifth is used under this system.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P.....fect_fifth

Avatar
RosinedUp
Honorary tenured advisor
Members

Regulars
January 11, 2014 - 2:43 am
Member Since: September 7, 2012
Forum Posts: 985
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

ves said
If I tune my A to 440 and play double open strings and listen, eliminating 'flutter' or dissonance (in other words, playing perfect fifths), the D and G I believe will be sharper than that in equal temperament while the E will be flatter.

No, the opposite is true. 

Under either Just or Pythagorean tuning, the pitches in a fifth are in the ratio 3:2, that is, exactly 1.5.  Under equal temperament, they are in the ratio of the twelfth root of two raised to the seventh power, approximately 1.4983071.  So a Just or Pythagorean fifth is a little bigger than an equal fifth.

That means that under Just or Pythagorean tuning, the D and G strings will be tuned farther from A, therefore flatter, and the E string will be tuned farther from A and sharper, than under equal temperament.

When A strings are tuned the same, the G string will be about 4 cents flatter, the D string 2 cents flatter, and the E string 2 cents sharper than under equal temperament.

Electronic tuners are usually set up for equal temperament, but it's a matter of software to set them up for Just or Pythagorean tuning.

Avatar
ves
Member
Members
January 12, 2014 - 7:17 am
Member Since: July 31, 2013
Forum Posts: 12
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Hi RosinedUp,

 

Yes, I realized this after further reading of the wiki article and checking my tuning against a tuner (in equal temperament). Thank you for verifying this.

Forum Timezone: America/New_York

Most Users Ever Online: 231

Currently Online:
38 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Members Birthdays
sp_BirthdayIcon
Today None
Upcoming Mad_Wed, Prudence, ButteryStuffs, kit, makinnoise

Top Posters:

coolpinkone: 3767

Mad_Wed: 2849

Barry: 2661

Fiddlestix: 2637

Oliver: 2439

DanielB: 2379

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 1

Members: 3563

Moderators: 0

Admins: 2

Forum Stats:

Groups: 16

Forums: 56

Topics: 6446

Posts: 80405

Newest Members:

bo, EKBanjo, charlieD, Folky fiddler, Morgenes42, stringo

Administrators: Fiddlerman: 11717, KindaScratchy: 1651