Tuning: Train your ears...

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 23 Jul 2005 10:13 am

(Apon Edition, Yeah, but Pete it's bad enough having a roving peanut gallery hunt me down with flash cards without being stalked by a 250lb cross dresser even if he has a voice like Dale Evans or Jo Stafford...)

(2nd Ed. So.. Roger plays in "JI"? He sounded pretty close to "ET" to me..)

I think b0b posted a site that had a real time "JI" processor on the keyboards. It proved to me that my preferences were indeed toward "ET".

I'm hoping I have more time myself and can get a good relationship with my Podxt WRT levels, mixing etc. We'll see how much time I get this fall. In the meantime I always pay the cover and don't panhandle those that come to see and hear me.

*** Rambling Alert***

Last night was a good example of tuning issues. Both myself and Ron Ferrante, a great local guitar player had put on new strings. I had put them on the night before but had not worked in any of my changes.

Many of my changes needed readjusted on my Marrs, and I did it as I had time between songs in the two hour first set we usually play. It was nerve wracking to say the least, but it did't keep us from playing. It eventually resolved song by song to a point where we were both within a "comfort zone". I realized long ago that until I get everything within a couple cents of what I want to hear, it's not a fun thing, and I find it hard to "fly".

It reminded me of a couple years of playing next to or across from one of the worst intoned guitar players I have ever played with. There's a guy in town that still plays with him, and spends his weekend nights walled off behind plexiglass. I don't envy him in the least, bless his heart.

A lot of these things like tuning etc, Its really easy to get a wrong mental picture of who you are talking to and just as easy to marginalize hundreds or thousands of gigs' experience, or blow up a miniscule experience observation into something "written in stone". Some of my idols have minds of clay to match their feet.

Unfortunately many players after playing enough years with horrible intonated guitar players, vocalists, or even yes, keyboards find their senses dulled to the point of "it" not mattering. I have always maintained that playing with a lousy band is not harmful for a couple of years, and have always mercifully outlived the worst of them with few exceptions.

The ones I miss are the good ones like Kurt Radtke, and Buster, and my limited chances to play with the ones like Kevin Neal, Shawn O'Connnor, Monty Moss, Artie Bechtel when he wasn't throwing a little-girl fit or beating up a drummer that deserved it, Casey Waite, and others.

For now, I really like playing with Ron Ferrante, whose mentor Floyd Julian ( whom I played with twenty years ago briefly) taught him the chord progressions I am now re-learning, and plays IN TUNE. I can finally break into "Deep Water" as an instrumental and not have a bunch of half wits look at me when the five becomes the one and clam up..

The fact that my ears are always ringing on Saturday morning, and I always know whether I had a "good night" or a "bad night" the night before shows me that I still have a handle on "what's what".

I pray that I never lose it though I know it eventally slips away.

I think my goal is to look at the sun as much as I can without going blind, and listen to as much music as I can as loud as I can without going deaf, playing along as much as god allows..

My ears are ringing like every other saturday that I can remember...

Maybe if I live right I can have some more incredible "flying dreams" this week.

We all have different things that we like, I suppose.

Anyhow, back to the regularly scheduled programme...

I'm off to an afternoon of 86 Ford Ranger mechanics, and the Greatful Dead. Maybe with some Robt Hunter....

("To the town of Agua Fria, came a stranger one fine day..."...)

EJL [This message was edited by Eric West on 23 July 2005 at 11:26 AM.]

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 23 Jul 2005 10:20 am

Pete.

I'll do it as I get time.

I rarely miss the opportunity to invite, aid and/or abet my own doom..

EJL[This message was edited by Eric West on 23 July 2005 at 12:50 PM after realizing that he was doomed..] [This message was edited by Eric West on 23 July 2005 at 02:12 PM.]

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 23 Jul 2005 12:48 pm

There are some great old threads on the JI/ET issue (links listed below). One of them quotes the same article as the link that started this thread. Some of the old threads are more readable before my um...extended prose and Eric's gonzo ridicule got at each other's troats. Buddy Emmons, Paul Franklin and Ricky Davis participated very interestingly in some of them. The very top players do not agree on this issue, although almost none of them seem to tune pure JI or pure ET.

There are many misconceptions and false statements in these threads, but if you keep reading, they mostly get corrected. One caution is that people sometimes use the term "temper" for exactly opposite meanings. The correct meaning is that any adjustment away from pure JI is tempering. But some players mistakenly call adjustments away from an ET meter as tempering. The safest term is probably to speak of "adjusting" intonation, which could apply to adjusting away from JI or adjusting away from ET.

The other misconception that popped up was the idea some finicky classical piano player's idea of "in tune" could be the final word on what is perfectly in tune, and more authoritative than any steeler's idea. Nothing could be further from the truth. Piano players are simply accustomed to playing stretch ET-tuned pianos, that are usually tuned by professional tuners, not the piano players themselves. Thus, their idea of what is "in tune" is just as compromised as ET itself, which anyone can get from a meter. String and horn players play each note JI by ear, or may match by ear to some ET instrument they are accompanying. I would trust their ears before a piano player's ears. The conductor of a symphony orchestra would be more likely to want a steel guitar to match the JI playing of the strings and horns than to attempt to always play ET like a piano. Conductors are not particularly fond of ET and pianos.

Here are a few tuning threads:
http://steelguitarforum.com/Forum5/HTML/003833.html
http://steelguitarforum.com/Forum5/HTML/003912.html
http://steelguitarforum.com/Forum5/HTML/003992.html
http://steelguitarforum.com/Forum5/HTML/004051.html [This message was edited by David Doggett on 23 July 2005 at 02:35 PM.]

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 23 Jul 2005 1:10 pm

Well one man's extended prose...

In the beginning I had to type much more.

Now it's your turn.

My take on it and explanation of tuning ET has gotten simpler.

I knew it would.

You're going to be needing a "Wiley Coyote model Acme Word Processor™" before long..

Beep... beep...

EJL

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 23 Jul 2005 1:20 pm

"Let me hear you play. It'll be obvious whether you can play in tune or not."

I like the sound of Larry's logic. It must be tempered, however, with the fact that the ears of some are more forgiving.

Some avoid 3 note chords or certain voicings that rub the wrong way. Others tune closer to ET, opening up more intervals. Each has its pros and cons. Can EITHER be played in tune? Sure. Depends on how you play.

Once again, Larry has the inside track!

Some very famous steelers play mostly 2 note intervals because they can be made to sound perfect more easily. Additionally, a couple of other famous steelers play 2 note intervals that are, well, far from perfect.

Some, I'm sure would find no fault with their work, and that's the strange part.

Charlie McDonald · Post by **Charlie McDonald** » 24 Jul 2005 3:11 am

I hear ya, David. No problems there.

JETI

Larry Bell · Post by **Larry Bell** » 24 Jul 2005 6:47 am

One thing from the references that Dave quoted in his last post (2nd one in the list) for the ET guys who insist that Emmons tunes EVERYTHING to 440:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Buddy Emmons
From: Hermitage, TN USA
posted 02 May 2002 12:44 PM
Dennis:
I tune my thirds to 438 just to compensate for a possible drift of that note a cent or two sharp.

For everybody else, no matter how much you quibble over two cents, harmonics, fundamentals, or any other rationale, when your 434 clashes with a 440 in the band, you're gonna lose. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nuff said. No matter how badly one wants to reduce this to black hats and white hats, the fact remains that most guys wear grey hats.

------------------
Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page
2003 Fessenden S/D-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 197? Sho-Bud S-12 7x6, 1971 Dobro, Standel and Peavey Amps

Reece Anderson · Post by **Reece Anderson** » 24 Jul 2005 7:10 am

To help me understand the rationale of ET, I have a few questions based on what little I have read by the proponents.

1. Must those who play ET, retune their guitars when playing by themselves to make the intonation musically palatable?

2. How can a guitar considered "out" of tune to the ear when played by itself, be considered "in" tune when playing with other instruments?

3. When playing either ET or JI we have to adjust to the intonation characteristics of other instruments. In so doing how does one then defferentiate the attributes or define the differences of JI and ET?

4. If someone uses ET and does not tune the 3rd and 6th intervals to 440, why is it still considered ET, when that in itself is JI?

5. If ET has JI,is that not a contradiction?

6. If the 3rd and 6th intervals are not tuned 440, (which would appear to represent inconsistency) why would it not be prudent to tune the entire guitar to JI so it sounds musically palatable with and without other instruments?

7. Would someone who plays ET please submit a sound file?

I have never heard anyone who plays with total ET. If a sound file has been presented in the past, I would appreciate someone providing a link.

My questions are not intended to be argumentative, divisive or directed toward anyone, they represent only an inquiring and open mind.

Larry Bell · Post by **Larry Bell** » 24 Jul 2005 7:24 am

I'll take a shot at it, chief

1. No. I'm not one of them, but have it on good authority they just learn to accept what it sounds like. (I yield here to those who use ET)
2. It DOES happen. When I tuned to the Newman or Emmons charts, a long time ago, I had several sessions where I played a steel part with a rh gtr, bass, drums, and vocal. When the piano (electronic kbd, tempered to ET) was added it would raise the hairs on the back of your neck. I retracked after splitting the difference between ET and JI (4-8 cents flat on thirds instead of 16, for example) and it sounded fine. From that point on, that's how I've tuned.
3. Probably less adjustment the closer you come to ET, IF you're playing with an ET keyboard or other equally tempered instruments. That's what Buddy has said. You still gotta use your EARS.

4. NO. It's not ET. There are terms for several systems like meantone, but I prefer TAMPERED myself.

Actually, not tuning to 440 doesn't make it JI. JI is a prescribed set of offsets from ET (440, whatever). If one tunes thirds to 438 or 439, it's NEITHER ET nor JI.
5. Of course it is.
6. Not necessarily, because of the fact that the E to F change on E9 ends up almost a THIRD OF A FRET FLAT when one uses true JI.
7. I don't tune ET, but I may record some examples of ET, JI, and TAMPERED, just for grins. Gimme a day or two.

------------------
Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page
2003 Fessenden S/D-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 197? Sho-Bud S-12 7x6, 1971 Dobro, Standel and Peavey Amps

[This message was edited by Larry Bell on 24 July 2005 at 08:28 AM.]

Jeff Lampert · Post by **Jeff Lampert** » 24 Jul 2005 9:35 am

I may record some examples of ET, JI

I'd love to hear that Larry. That would be a lot of fun and once all the opinions are done, this thread may end up 200 posts long!! In your hands, I already know the answer. Both the ET and JI will be in tune. There will be TEXTURAL differences in the sound. I bet the JI will sound creamy, and the ET gritty, sort of like smooth versus crunchy peanut butter. But they'll both taste yummy. .. I'm hungry all of a sudden.

------------------
Jeff's Jazz

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 24 Jul 2005 12:03 pm

I'll take a shot at it Reece.

1. When I play by myself, inbetween every weekend gigs in the basement I don't spend any time at all "retuning". I hit it as necessary. Sometimes the keys get bumped. If I change to a different guage string I'll adjust the change accordingly and "square it in" with a tuner. So shoot me.

2.It either is or it isn't. "Averaging" has been discussed at length. I forget the equatiion, but I didn't understand it anyway.

3.When you are playing it is too late, and is done by motor function. I don't know of a "tuning issue" with another instrument that can't be solved with a Standard Conn Strobe or it's more modern and accurate counterparts.

4. It is not.

5. If it is in relation to Q#4 it is.

6. If so, you might as well. A person can't be "a little bit pregnant".

7. Here's a short clip I posted a couple years ago, and I'd hoped to get some more input and trade, but all I got was nonsense. Believe me, I'll post more, and expect more.

7a. You might give according to Mr Emmons, a listen to his playing over the last twenty one years. His quotes on the subject are crystal clear.

Lloyd's quote from the email I just got this morning was "Just get a "good" E note from someone and learn to tune the "durn" thing."

He also mentioned that Paul Franklin, to his ears, plays perfectly in tune. I'm so glad he put that to rest. (I'm sure Paul is relieved too.) I enjoyed his E9 speed picking courses, and found that I was able to play "in tune" with them myself. Gee, how was that possible since sometimes I didn't even tune my guitar?

From the beginning I found it astounding that if you want to play the psg, you have to have this note "so flat", or this note "so sharp", and this pedal or knee lever thus and such, and use "this chart" or tune like "this guy".

I'll go on with this because my method of tuning is so simple, solid, and easy for even a beginner to understand. That is actually the ONLY reason I care at all. I've been thanked by more than a couple of them that would have otherwise accoring to them "gone nuts" with all this nit picking overcomplicated BS.

If it had been represented that way to me by Mr Charleton in 77 I think I'd have quit instead of playing steadily for 26 years and wearing a ProIII down to a bloody nub.

I learned to play in tune and with deliberation about 5 years into the process, and have never looked back.

It doesn't need to be do dingedy damned ( can I say that) complicated.

(I think people should think about it a little more before posting all this rubegoldbergian hocus pocus in front of new players. That's all.)

It can be if you want, but only for you.

( Reece, I am not meaning you but only in the general sense of steel players.)

A person can always find reasons to hesitate, or quit I guess.

The opposite sadly is not necesarily true.

I've managed to find them, and god willing will continue to, with now my body wearing out faster than my new guitar.

Nobody on this earth is going to make me doubt my method of tuning, and that it is right for me.

It's too late.

EJL

[This message was edited by Eric West on 24 July 2005 at 01:07 PM.]

Pete Burak · Post by **Pete Burak** » 24 Jul 2005 12:20 pm

Can we get ya to doubt your method of Reverb application?
That might be a start.

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 24 Jul 2005 12:24 pm

Well Pete, you can post your stuff yourself and see if I have the poor manners to make stupid comments on it.

Or not.

EJL

Pete Burak · Post by **Pete Burak** » 24 Jul 2005 12:31 pm

Eric, I told you before, if you're going to dish it out, ya gotta be able to take it, too! (without calling people names).

You would have to admit though, add enough reverb to any tuning method and no one would ever notice JI, ET, whatever, on a given gig (or 25 years worth of gigs).
No?

Reece Anderson · Post by **Reece Anderson** » 24 Jul 2005 12:45 pm

Larry B....I appreciate your response and personal courtesy. To further the discussion:

1. It's hard for me to imagine anyone having the ability to force the mind to consciously and subconsciously erase pitch discrepancies to the point it never again enters their mind.

It would seem to me that IF it were possible to attain that seemingly insurmountable ability, they would never know if they were in tune in the first place.

It would also seem to me that were it even possible to attain the mental blockout of pitch references, one would have to believe in something more important than pitch itself to convince themselves of the validity of compromising it, and that specific thing is what I'm trying to understand and define.

2. Since I have never played total ET I have not had the opportunity to experience that which you refer too. Many years ago I pulled up my 3rd and 6th intervals to ET, and it was so far out of tune to my ear I immediately pulled them back, never to go there again.

3. Over the years I have been fortunate to have played most kinds of music with different bands including symphonies, and I never felt I was out of tune. It could of course be argued my ear is not good enough to hear it.

4. I too tune my 3rd and 6th just ever so slightly sharp, so with this said, (to use your termonology) TAMPERED is something most do, which to me is an aside from what I was understanding from the ET players perspective.

My question still remains....why do ET players tune so far from pleasing in the first place, when a more dramatic pitch compromise has the ability to fill the complete musical spectrum.

5. We agree.

6. Your response to this is of course true, but poses the question as to why ET players may be opposed to compromising the difference, which has the potential of making them sound in tune in all playing instances and environments, and not just a band situation!

Thank you again for your response and I will be looking forward to hearing the sound files from you and anyone who has samples of the ET approach of tuning.

Jeff L....I too suspect a compromise between the two will emerge, and at this time I believe, in the end the ET believers will come closer to JI, then we can live happily ever after.

I thank each of you for responding and referring to my questions and again respectfully hope my comments are not taken as devisive or defensive by anyone.

Reece Anderson · Post by **Reece Anderson** » 24 Jul 2005 12:50 pm

Eric....Please don't think I was ignoring your response. You posted as I was writing my response.

I have a commitment for the next few days, but I thank you for your response, and I will respond.

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 24 Jul 2005 1:47 pm

Well Mr A, I appreciate any response you post.

I'm just answering off the top of my head, and maybe you appreciate the off the cuffness of my answers. I'm not making stuff up.

I've heard all kinds of stuff more out of tune than I like to think I'd have played it, and a durn site of it more in tune.
I try to keep it simple and focus more on the "playing" if it.

Here's a for instance.

Last few weeks I have been playing with a good band that does stuff I'm not familiar with.

A great example was "Why am I drinking" that has an "excess" of "IV chords". I was really tickled that I could take a full instrumental and be comfortable with playing a solo that followed chords that haven't yet been burned into my brain. I was't thinking of "tuning" at all. I hadn't looked at my "meter" for more than an hour. On "Night life" I was in heaven because the band waited for me to resolve the II chord into a major before they did.

To me "that's the joy and challenge of live playing. Not nit picking about how many cents your thirds are detuned from "440".

Thanks for your reading, forbearance, your genuine questions, answers, our emails, and your manners above all.

I shoot for the best I find in my idols.

You provide much.

Respectfully.

EJL

Pete,

There'll be more stuff for you to make fun of as time goes by.

Your stuff to me will as always, usually sound better than no playing at all.

Post it yourself from now on. I'm busy.

Good luck with the gig thing. I'm putting on "Lipstick and Beer" as I type.

Great stuff.

Dish out whatever you wish. We'll see how my appetite holds up.

Your "wit" is entertaining if nothing else.

Jeff. I told you it wouldn't go well, but now I see that it will if I take a little more time than I had budgeted.

Sheesh..

EJL [This message was edited by Eric West on 24 July 2005 at 03:02 PM.]

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 24 Jul 2005 2:01 pm

Reece, I think Larry covered about any answers I would have for your questions (I don't tune ET either, so really don't have any business answering them). But I'm not sure he fully addressed question 3. I think your implication is correct, that once we start playing, whether tuned ET or JI, we are placing the bar by ear to match the other instruments, so the differences between ET-tuned and JI-tuned instruments would be harder to distintuish than if the instruments were compared alone. Of course playing open at the nut would make the differences more obvious.

As for the F lever, while the stop on the F lever (strings 4 and

would be 32 cents flat of ET, and might be even further flat because of cabinet drop, the root of that chord is the C# on the A pedal (strings 5 and 10), which would only be 16 cents flat of ET, if it was tuned pure JI as the 3rd of the A chord. Thus the bar needs to be only 1/6 of a fret above the fret for correct intonation. Many competent players get that bar placement in tune by ear all the time. As Lloyd Green, the inventor of the F lever, apparently tunes by ear, not ET, I assume this is the way we have always heard him play that combination.

I don't think it is above the heads of beginners to teach them the simple facts of the JI/ET dilemma. A good teacher would show them how to tune each way, and let them hear the difference. Suggest that, for convenience in playing with keyboards and ET-tuned guitars, they should learn how to split the difference (the way most steelers seem to do), and show them how to to that with a meter. This would take about the first 15 minutes of the first lesson. Frankly, no matter the system, you are probably going to have to show a beginner how to tune their particular guitar. That might take another 15 minutes. Spending a half hour to learn how to tune your 10- to 20-string instrument with dozens of pedal and knee stops does not seem like too much to ask of a beginner. If we all got that instruction when we started, these tuning threads would be on a whole other level.

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 24 Jul 2005 2:23 pm

Ahem...

Mr Dogget. My esteemed fellow from across the planetary aisle:

I don't believe that Mr Green has mentioned, and I've scoured his emails to me, that just because he tunes "by ear" that he is using the "JI" system in any form represented here.

It's no more accurate than somebody's assuming that because he tunes "by ear" that he tunes his thirds closer if not to "ET".

Are there any more clearer ways I can put this? He tunes "by ear" from what he's told me, from an E on his old circular pitch pipe.

Much as I love and respect him, bless his heart, I'd have to say that even if he invented the F lever and told me that it was way flat from a "meter" I'd still not flatten mine a cent, though I wouldn't tell him probably.. (I might ask him, but mostly we talk about the civil war, egyptology, and I her gret stories about his playing career.)

Considering what his ears have been through, I'd trust them a lot more music than mine, (if not heavy machine noise) and would deign to say "what they hear".

Mine have not been through as much, but I trust them as long as they hold out. (They ring every saturday and sunday mornings down from every morning for years and years.)

Most assuredly, he doesn't follow any complex "Tuning Chart". I CAN tell you that much, besides his consternation at all these players not being able to tune their friggin' instruments and eight grade arguing about it (* maybe it was ninth grade). That's as close to the direct quote as forum policy will permit, I'm afraid.

As always, these incrimental assumptions start innocently enough, kind of like Mr. Emmons' comments and clear quotes being at first ever so slightly misrepresented, widened, and turned into the opposite of what they clearly state. ("I may go a cent or so flat in some cases but strictly to handle temp changes under certain conditions.")

Spending a half hour to learn how to tune your 10- to 20-string instrument with dozens of pedal and knee stops does not seem like too much to ask of a beginner.

Oh-my-god....

EJL

[This message was edited by Eric West on 24 July 2005 at 03:49 PM.]

Charlie McDonald · Post by **Charlie McDonald** » 24 Jul 2005 2:25 pm

Eric, all I can say is , that's how a pedal steel is supposed to sound, to me.
I don't know what you'd call the tuning,
but I'd call it in tune.

frank rogers · Post by **frank rogers** » 24 Jul 2005 2:29 pm

All samples here are tuned "straight up". I'm not saying everything here is "perfect" as I can spot some occasional intonation issues as I've picked these tracks apart many times but, overall I think they blend in well with the keyboards, fiddle etc. Ck. out "Shenendoah" it is loaded with 3rds. and 6ths. and ends with an "open" A chimed at the 12th fret. http://www.geocities.com/frsteel/

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 24 Jul 2005 2:41 pm

Oh, and Mr Dogget.

I'd spend much less time than that.

Much like some of the things Mr Charleton would tell me.

"Tune it before you come back, or you're wasting both our time."

10 seconds tops.

I tuned mine, in fact, before my first lesson on it and the subject never came up.

I never had the urge, the calling, or the chutzpah to teach, not even after 26 years.

About the time you find a student that makes it all worthwhile, they break your heart. I know. I broke my classical guitar teacher's 35 years ago, though he didn't let on.

I've spent a lot of time trying not to break BC's. If he was smart, he forgot about me and went bass fishing.

I think he is, and I think he did..

EJL

Larry Bell · Post by **Larry Bell** » 24 Jul 2005 3:07 pm

Not to further clutter this thread, I'll start another. I'll post drone chord and 'real life' tune examples of Equal Temperament (REALLY EQUAL -- everything to 440); Just Intonation (tuned by harmonics); and 'Tampered Tuning' (neither JI nor ET -- somewhere in between).

Thread will be titled
"Tuning: Some Examples"

Peace

------------------
Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page
2003 Fessenden S/D-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 197? Sho-Bud S-12 7x6, 1971 Dobro, Standel and Peavey Amps

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 24 Jul 2005 3:19 pm

Eric, Lloyd has said he takes his Es from a pitch pipe and tunes the rest by ear. That is the same way all steelers tuned before inexpensive hand-held chromatic tuners became available and confused the issue with their keyboard-based ET. I don't know if Lloyd tunes pure JI, but it is apparent he does not tune pure ET by a meter, and seems to hold some disdain for those who have to use chromatic meters instead of their ears to tune "the durn thing." I would have thought his statement that he only takes his Es from a tuner would speak for itself. So I don't even know why you brought him into this discussion. What's up?

For those just tuning in, tuning all strings and stops straight up to a chromatic meter, as Eric advocates, is tuning pure ET (equal temper). Taking the only the root of an open tuning from a standard source (pitch pipe, tuning fork, electronic meter, keyboard, etc) and tuning the beats out by ear is pure JI (just intonation). One can also look up a JI chart and use a chromatic meter to tune pure JI. In practice, there are some technical difficulties in tuning a pedal steel with several pedals and knee levers to pure JI for every conceivable string, pedal and knee combination. So typically an "ear tuner" will make some compromises and end up with some strings or stops tuned somewhere between pure JI and pure ET. But different people will make different degrees of compromise. So when someone says they take their Es and tune by ear (as Lloyd Green has said), it is not possible to know exactly how close they are to either JI or ET.

However, most people's ears lead them as close to JI (minimized beats) as they can get. But it is also possible to train oneself to tune ET by ear. One can do this by repeatedly using a chromatic meter and getting use to how ET sounds, or by using a complicated system of timing beats, the way piano tuners do. Having said that, I will leave it to the reader to decide what it means when a steeler who learned decades before ET chromatic meters became popular says he takes his Es from a standard source, and tunes by ear.

Pete Burak · Post by **Pete Burak** » 24 Jul 2005 3:57 pm

I think Eric is doubting his tuning method.
Bless His Heart.