recording and apparent intonation

[FS]

Does anyone have any information on the apparent intonation of a
musical ensemble when recorded as opposed to the intonation when
audited live?

Although our string ensemble is not remarkable for its intonation, it
always sounds much more in tune live, then when I listen to the
recordings that we are taking. I use an AT3202 mic which is fine for
solo work. Perhaps there is something lost in the digitizing (aliasing
etc), that leads to this apparent phenomenon?

Thanks,
Fritz

[Geoff]

FS wrote:
> Does anyone have any information on the apparent intonation of a
> musical ensemble when recorded as opposed to the intonation when
> audited live?
>
> Although our string ensemble is not remarkable for its intonation, it
> always sounds much more in tune live, then when I listen to the
> recordings that we are taking. I use an AT3202 mic which is fine for
> solo work. Perhaps there is something lost in the digitizing (aliasing
> etc), that leads to this apparent phenomenon?

No. What you are recording is what is actually being played.

It just sounds better at the time due to the ambience and emotional
immediacy of the performance.

geoff

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

FS wrote:

| Does anyone have any information on the apparent intonation of a
| musical ensemble when recorded as opposed to the intonation when
| audited live?

It is the same.

| Although our string ensemble is not remarkable for its intonation,

Go get some tuners to get the instruments absolutely correct. It is
important for the care of the instruments that they are used to being in
tune, it is my conviction that the wood resonances will adapt.

| it always sounds much more in tune live, then when I listen to the
| recordings that we are taking.

No, it doesn't, close your eyes when listening at the concert and the
difference will go away.

| I use an AT3202 mic which is fine for
| solo work. Perhaps there is something lost in the digitizing
| (aliasing etc), that leads to this apparent phenomenon?

A mic that produces extra harshness (x) will perhaps present a less than
optimally well performing instrument less flattering, it may also be that
you are too close or not high enough with it. Manfrotto 053 is a very useful
implement for live location work ... can't remember if that specific model
still exists, I think it has been replaced with one that can't go quite as
high, but that doesn't matter ...

[x] may or may not apply for your specific mic ... I have no experience with
it.

| Fritz

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Arny Krueger]

"FS" > wrote in message
...

> Does anyone have any information on the apparent intonation of a
> musical ensemble when recorded as opposed to the intonation when
> audited live?

> Although our string ensemble is not remarkable for its intonation, it
> always sounds much more in tune live, then when I listen to the
> recordings that we are taking. I use an AT3202 mic which is fine for
> solo work. Perhaps there is something lost in the digitizing (aliasing
> etc), that leads to this apparent phenomenon?

(1) Recordings never ever capture the full sonics of a live event.

(2) Playing musical instruments or singing often engage much of the
musician's body, so they hear their instruments or singing completely
differently from anybody else.

(3) Musicians intimately know what the music *should* sound like, and that
affects their perceptions.

(4) Musical instruments sound different depending on the listener's
orientation and distance.

(5) Performers don't know what any particular performance of theirs sounds
like from the perspective of the audience.

(6) People generally listen to recordings more than once, while a
performance can only be heard live once. On repeated hearings, we notice
more small details. IOW, we just naturally listen more critically.

[Scott Dorsey]

FS > wrote:
>Does anyone have any information on the apparent intonation of a
>musical ensemble when recorded as opposed to the intonation when
>audited live?

We are more sensitive to intonation on a recording, in part because
we can go back and listen to things a second time.

>Although our string ensemble is not remarkable for its intonation, it
>always sounds much more in tune live, then when I listen to the
>recordings that we are taking. I use an AT3202 mic which is fine for
>solo work. Perhaps there is something lost in the digitizing (aliasing
>etc), that leads to this apparent phenomenon?

Nope, you really _are_ that out of tune, it's just not as evident in
the original concert. That's why bands make practice tapes, so they
can sit down and realize where things are out.

I am assuming, of course, that you are making a normal recording without
any weird lossy compression. If you have created an mp3 file, all bets
are off. You can't judge pitch accurately on an mp3.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >,
Peter Larsen > wrote:
>FS wrote:
>
>| Does anyone have any information on the apparent intonation of a
>| musical ensemble when recorded as opposed to the intonation when
>| audited live?
>
>It is the same.
>
>| Although our string ensemble is not remarkable for its intonation,
>
>Go get some tuners to get the instruments absolutely correct. It is
>important for the care of the instruments that they are used to being in
>tune, it is my conviction that the wood resonances will adapt.

Violins don't have frets. The pitch comes from where you put your fingers
as much as how tight the strings are, so the pitch is under dynamic control
of the performer. It's not like a piano.... the violinist's pitch is
constantly adjustable. Playing violin and keeping it in tune is HARD.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Arny Krueger]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> FS > wrote:

> I am assuming, of course, that you are making a normal recording without
> any weird lossy compression. If you have created an mp3 file, all bets
> are off. You can't judge pitch accurately on an mp3.

Why not?

Are you under the impression that MP3s change frequencies?

They don't change the frequencies of audible tones.

[Scott Dorsey]

Arny Krueger > wrote:
>"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
>> FS > wrote:
>
>> I am assuming, of course, that you are making a normal recording without
>> any weird lossy compression. If you have created an mp3 file, all bets
>> are off. You can't judge pitch accurately on an mp3.
>
>Why not?
>
>Are you under the impression that MP3s change frequencies?
>
>They don't change the frequencies of audible tones.

Nope, but they'll change a lot of things that affect perceived pitch.

Some of the encoding algorithms _do_ also change frequencies, but only
in the lower octave.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Chris Whealy]

FS wrote:
> Does anyone have any information on the apparent intonation of a musical ensemble when recorded as opposed to the intonation when audited live?
>
> Although our string ensemble is not remarkable for its intonation, it always sounds much more in tune live, then when I listen to the recordings that we are taking. I use an AT3202 mic which is fine for solo work. Perhaps there is something lost in the digitizing (aliasing etc), that leads to this apparent phenomenon?
>
> Thanks,
> Fritz
>
I doubt very much that the digital encoding/decoding process is
introducing a problem here.

Multiple other factors are involved however:
o The recording can only capture the sound field as it existed at the
location of the microphone capsule(s)
o The listener's ears are always at a different location in the room to
the microphone(s)
o The ambient acoustics of the room contributes significantly the
overall perception of the live sound.
o A room with good horizontal diffusion will greatly enhance an effect
known as "Listener envelopment". This is just as important for the
musicians as it is any audience that might be present.
o When you play the recording back, the physical instruments are no
longer present, so the resonance from the instrument bodies no longer
contributes to the sound field.
o As a musician plays their instrument, they are continually responding
to what they hear from the musicians around them and dynamically adjust
at least the pitch and volume of their notes to produce an ensemble feel.
o What a musician perceives was a great a live performance may not
sound so great when you listen back to the recording. Assuming the
musician played their part correctly, this is often due mic placement
and ambient acoustics.
o The human perception of pitch varies with the intensity of the sound

With string ensembles, it is very important that the arrangement does
not place *two* instruments on the same part. If multiple fiddles are
to play the same part, then you must have (at the very least) three
players on that part. Four is better. The reason simply is that if two
players try to hit the same note at the same time, there will always be
minute pitch differences that will produce a beat frequency. Even if
there were able to hit exactly the same pitch, their vibrato would never
line up. This effect makes will *always* make two violins sound out of
tune - no matter how good the players are a individuals. This effect is
also particularly noticeable with trombones. The beat frequency
produced when two bone players don't quite hit the same note is known as
B52ing.

If you really are finding this a problem, then I suggest you probably
have your mics too close to the instruments. Assuming the room in which
you're making the recording has good/reasonable acoustics, try capturing
more of the ambient room sound and less direct instrument sound. In
other words, let the room do the mixing for you.

Hope that helps

Chris W

--
The voice of ignorance speaks loud and long,
But the words of the wise are quiet and few.
---

[Arny Krueger]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> Arny Krueger > wrote:
>>"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
>>> FS > wrote:

>>> I am assuming, of course, that you are making a normal recording without
>>> any weird lossy compression. If you have created an mp3 file, all bets
>>> are off. You can't judge pitch accurately on an mp3.

>>Why not?

>>Are you under the impression that MP3s change frequencies?
>>
>>They don't change the frequencies of audible tones.

> Nope, but they'll change a lot of things that affect perceived pitch.

Only if one were to use inappropriately low bitrates.

> Some of the encoding algorithms _do_ also change frequencies, but only
> in the lower octave.

Real world example?

I know numerous musicans who use MP3s interchangably with .wav files.


The statement "You can't judge pitch accurately on an mp3." verges on libel,
due to excess generality.

[Scott Dorsey]

Arny Krueger > wrote:
>
>> Some of the encoding algorithms _do_ also change frequencies, but only
>> in the lower octave.
>
>Real world example?

Record a Jaco Pastorius record with the Fraunhofer encoder. Play it back.
Listen.

>I know numerous musicans who use MP3s interchangably with .wav files.

So do I. I think this is a bad thing.

>The statement "You can't judge pitch accurately on an mp3." verges on libel,
>due to excess generality.

That, sadly, is the nature of the beast.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

|| Go get some tuners to get the instruments absolutely correct. It is
|| important for the care of the instruments that they are used to
|| being in tune, it is my conviction that the wood resonances will
|| adapt.

| Violins don't have frets.

I know and I stand by my statement.

| The pitch comes from where you put your
| fingers as much as how tight the strings are, so the pitch is under
| dynamic control of the performer.

Yes, you are right.

| It's not like a piano.... the
| violinist's pitch is constantly adjustable.

Yes.

| Playing violin and keeping it in tune is HARD.

Yes. I can not understand that it is at all possible and wouldn't want to
have to try. But square one still is that an open string should sound right.

| --scott

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[dwgriffi]

On Jun 8, 8:54*am, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "FS" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > Does anyone have any information on the apparent intonation of a
> > musical ensemble when recorded as opposed to the intonation when
> > audited live?
> > Although our string ensemble is not remarkable for its intonation, it
> > always sounds much more in tune live, then when I listen to the
> > recordings that we are taking. I use an AT3202 mic which is fine for
> > solo work. Perhaps there is something lost in the digitizing (aliasing
> > etc), that leads to this apparent phenomenon?
>
> (1) Recordings never ever capture the full sonics of a live event.
>
> (2) *Playing musical instruments or singing often engage much of the
> musician's body, so they hear their instruments or singing completely
> differently from anybody else.
>
> (3) Musicians intimately know what the music *should* sound like, and that
> affects their perceptions.
>
> (4) Musical instruments sound different depending on the listener's
> orientation and distance.
>
> (5) Performers don't know what any particular performance of theirs sounds
> like from the perspective of the audience.
>
> (6) People generally listen to recordings more than once, while a
> performance can only be heard live once. On repeated hearings, we notice
> more small details. IOW, we just naturally listen more critically.


This sums it all up. The last point is the one that people always
forget. Forget all the technical aspects, that's the crux of it.

dw

[William Sommerwerck]

> Does anyone have any information on the apparent intonation
> of a musical ensemble when recorded as opposed to the intonation
> when audited live?

This raises a closely related question I've wanted to ask for a long time...

Have you ever noticed how, on the sustained notes at the end of a movement,
there is sometimes severe pitch instability? It isn't common, but I've heard
it on recordings from all eras, using both analog and digital technology.

Is it the players? It is psychoacoustic?

PS: In general terms, almost everything about a performance "sounds worse"
in the recording.

[William Sommerwerck]

> Does anyone have any information on the apparent intonation
> of a musical ensemble when recorded as opposed to the intonation
> when audited live?

This raises a closely related question I've wanted to ask for a long time...

Have you ever noticed how, on the sustained notes at the end of a movement,
there is sometimes severe pitch instability? It isn't common, but I've heard
it on recordings from all eras, using both analog and digital technology.

Is it the players? It is psychoacoustic?

PS: In general terms, almost everything about a performance "sounds worse"
in the recording.

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Mon, 8 Jun 2009 08:00:39 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
> wrote:

>> Does anyone have any information on the apparent intonation
>> of a musical ensemble when recorded as opposed to the intonation
>> when audited live?
>
>This raises a closely related question I've wanted to ask for a long time...
>
>Have you ever noticed how, on the sustained notes at the end of a movement,
>there is sometimes severe pitch instability? It isn't common, but I've heard
>it on recordings from all eras, using both analog and digital technology.
>
>Is it the players? It is psychoacoustic?
>
>PS: In general terms, almost everything about a performance "sounds worse"
>in the recording.
>

Listen to some music loudly on headphones, then lift the cups away
from your head. The pitch will dip appreciably. This is quite normal,
as pitch (being something perceived rather than measured) is highly
level-dependent.

So pitch instability, certainly - but frequency instability? No,
probably not.

d

[Arny Krueger]

"William Sommerwerck" > wrote in message
...
>> Does anyone have any information on the apparent intonation
>> of a musical ensemble when recorded as opposed to the intonation
>> when audited live?
>
> This raises a closely related question I've wanted to ask for a long
> time...
>
> Have you ever noticed how, on the sustained notes at the end of a
> movement,
> there is sometimes severe pitch instability? It isn't common, but I've
> heard
> it on recordings from all eras, using both analog and digital technology.
>
> Is it the players? It is psychoacoustic?

I'm unsure what you are talking about. I'd like to hear a clip.

My first guess would be that it would be due to the players, based on how
pervasive you say it is.

[Chris Whealy]

Don Pearce wrote:
>
> Listen to some music loudly on headphones, then lift the cups away from your head. The pitch will dip appreciably. This is quite normal, as pitch (being something perceived rather than measured) is highly level-dependent.
>
I've often noticed this too
> So pitch instability, certainly - but frequency instability? No, probably not.
>
Agreed.

I think a confusion exists in some people's minds that frequency and
pitch are interchangeable. They are closely related, but not
interchangeable.

Frequency is an objective physical property of a wave that can be
quantified in absolute terms.
Pitch is the psychoacoustic perception created when an audible sound
wave enters our ear.

The perception of pitch is strongly, but not exclusively related to
frequency.

Chris W

--
The voice of ignorance speaks loud and long,
But the words of the wise are quiet and few.
---

[Geoff]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

>
> Violins don't have frets. The pitch comes from where you put your
> fingers as much as how tight the strings are, so the pitch is under
> dynamic control of the performer. It's not like a piano.... the
> violinist's pitch is constantly adjustable. Playing violin and
> keeping it in tune is HARD. --scott

Open strings are definitive for pitch.

geoff

[Geoff]

William Sommerwerck wrote:
>> Does anyone have any information on the apparent intonation
>> of a musical ensemble when recorded as opposed to the intonation
>> when audited live?
>
> This raises a closely related question I've wanted to ask for a long
> time...
>
> Have you ever noticed how, on the sustained notes at the end of a
> movement, there is sometimes severe pitch instability? It isn't
> common, but I've heard it on recordings from all eras, using both
> analog and digital technology.
>
> Is it the players? It is psychoacoustic?

You mean like how the pitch drops as you remove headphones ? Not sure if
that is Doppler or physcoacoustic.

But the OP's problem is that he has finally heard closser to what his
audiences hear.

geoff

[Geoff]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> I know numerous musicans who use MP3s interchangably with .wav files.

... and many do not hear or undertand that there is a quality difference !

geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

geoff > wrote:
>Scott Dorsey wrote:
>
>> Violins don't have frets. The pitch comes from where you put your
>> fingers as much as how tight the strings are, so the pitch is under
>> dynamic control of the performer. It's not like a piano.... the
>> violinist's pitch is constantly adjustable. Playing violin and
>> keeping it in tune is HARD.
>
>Open strings are definitive for pitch.

Yes, but sadly having open strings on pitch is necessary but not
sufficient for having notes on pitch.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Geoff]

Scott Dorsey wrote:
> geoff > wrote:
>> Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>
>>> Violins don't have frets. The pitch comes from where you put your
>>> fingers as much as how tight the strings are, so the pitch is under
>>> dynamic control of the performer. It's not like a piano.... the
>>> violinist's pitch is constantly adjustable. Playing violin and
>>> keeping it in tune is HARD.
>>
>> Open strings are definitive for pitch.
>
> Yes, but sadly having open strings on pitch is necessary but not
> sufficient for having notes on pitch.

Too true, but that's where you tune your fiddle to.

geoff

[Arny Krueger]

"geoff" > wrote in message
...

> Arny Krueger wrote:

>> I know numerous musicans who use MP3s interchangably with .wav files.

> ... and many do not hear or undertand that there is a quality difference
> !

IME most working musicans can be pretty tolerant about sound quality because
they listen to the music, not the sound.

You really have to trash a recording before the notes become wrong.
Allegedly really low bitrate MP3 can do that, but not true for decent
bitrates.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article >,
"Arny Krueger" > wrote:

> "geoff" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>
> >> I know numerous musicans who use MP3s interchangably with .wav files.
>
> > ... and many do not hear or undertand that there is a quality difference
> > !
>
> IME most working musicans can be pretty tolerant about sound quality because
> they listen to the music, not the sound.

True, in my experience, IRT how we listen to recordings at home. But as
musicians find out that better sound at home than they have been exposed
to is possible, many start being more picky about sound in the home.
Michael Tilson Thomas, for example, has a fine system and is a bit of an
"audiophile", as are Esa-Pekka Salonen, Doc Severinsen, Bill Waltrous,
Laurence Juber, Al Stewart, et al.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article >,
(Scott Dorsey) wrote:

> geoff > wrote:
> >Scott Dorsey wrote:
> >
> >> Violins don't have frets. The pitch comes from where you put your
> >> fingers as much as how tight the strings are, so the pitch is under
> >> dynamic control of the performer. It's not like a piano.... the
> >> violinist's pitch is constantly adjustable. Playing violin and
> >> keeping it in tune is HARD.
> >
> >Open strings are definitive for pitch.
>
> Yes, but sadly having open strings on pitch is necessary but not
> sufficient for having notes on pitch.
> --scott

There's an understatement! ;-)
For beginning and intermediate level orchestral string players,
intonation is a bear, because tiny changes in finger placement make such
a huge difference. And we're not even speaking of picking the finger up
and placing it a fraction of an inch differently; I mean just barely
rolling a planted finger a tiny amount. On the other hand (so to
speak), it's my contention that orchestra strings and trombone should be
the BEST in tune instruments in the orchestra, once the ears and the
technique is "mastered", because there are few mechanical restrictions
to perfect intonation than there are for valved brass, woodwinds, etc.

[micromoog]

On Jun 8, 7:59*pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>
> Yes, but sadly having open strings on pitch is necessary but not
> sufficient for having notes on pitch.
> --scott
>

Not quite necessary -- a good violinist can compensate for a string
going out of tune mid-piece ;)

[[email protected]]

Peter Larsen wrote:

>
> Go get some tuners to get the instruments absolutely correct. It is
> important for the care of the instruments that they are used to being in
> tune, it is my conviction that the wood resonances will adapt.

Once the open strings are in tune, practice playing--individually and as a
group--with the tuner playing the tonic drone of whatever piece you're
working on. Learn to hear what the intervals sound like when they're in
tune. This takes time, but even 10-15 minutes' practice a day will quickly
make a big difference.

Don't try to "play the tuner" by following the needle. That will not yield
the long-term results needed.

Intonation is a constant problem, to greater or lesser degree, for all
instrumentalists and ensembles. Recordings don't falsify intonation. Not a
happy thought, but nonetheless the truth.

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

| geoff > wrote:
|| Scott Dorsey wrote:
||
||| Violins don't have frets. The pitch comes from where you put your
||| fingers as much as how tight the strings are, so the pitch is under
||| dynamic control of the performer. It's not like a piano.... the
||| violinist's pitch is constantly adjustable. Playing violin and
||| keeping it in tune is HARD.
||
|| Open strings are definitive for pitch.
|
| Yes, but sadly having open strings on pitch is necessary but not
| sufficient for having notes on pitch.

The context was my assertion that good stage one is to have the instrument
tuned properly, each factor to be checked has to be correct as they say on
the Decca test record. Which is why I suggest that the ensemble should get
electronic tuners to get used to having their instruments in tune because it
makes it easier for all including easier to make minor adjustments of the
instuments tuning along the way.

| --scott

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[FS]

I want to thank all of you for your responses. You bring up a lot of
interesting points.
Most of the music played here is baroque period and the violins
are rarely over 3rd position, keeping the frequencies under about 1600
Hz. Of course the 3kHz, and 5kHz overtones play heavily into violins
with decent projection but all of these are well below the 44kHz
sampling rate and I assume, well accounted for by the Nyquist rule. I
assume that the comb effect is synonomous with aliasing and as such
would not play into the fundamental frequencies but what if the
overtones miss some of their samplings? I would think that this could
happen depending upon the quality of the sound card, software speed
etc.
I am not sure if a skewed frequency response might not play here,
but certainly the "psycho-acoustic" issue alluded to above could be
the prevalent issue as I am not used to dealing with recording vs live
listening .
The players are quite an assortment and I would assume that
the soloistic ones are more inclined to favor just intonation while
the orchestral ones, meantone, so I am certain that we sometimes off
by as much as 20 cents-still, the recordings sound a lot worse than
that. Open strings are not a good indicator here as the music is
highly polyphonic and fast moving (e.g. the Brandenburg III ) and
there are not a lot of open string stops among the instruments to make
this judgment.
At any rate I will continue to listen and record in our weekly
sessions and try to draw some conclusions. I always put down my viola
when recording so I am standing "outside" the group, not playing, and
near the recording mics. (At least I know that I am not contributing
to the problem (;> ) )

Cheers,
Fritz

PS-sorry for the double post on this topic at a later date. I had some
issues with the original post and it didn't appear on google for a few
days-maybe a caching sever problem perhaps.

[Richard Crowley]

"FS" wrote ...
> I am not sure if a skewed frequency response might not play here,
> but certainly the "psycho-acoustic" issue alluded to above could be
> the prevalent issue as I am not used to dealing with recording vs live
> listening .
> The players are quite an assortment and I would assume that
> the soloistic ones are more inclined to favor just intonation while
> the orchestral ones, meantone, so I am certain that we sometimes off
> by as much as 20 cents-

We were quite pleasantly surprised that the orchestras (string, brass,
woodwind and percussion) we collaborated with in Romania were
able to "bend" automatically to match their venues' period pipe-organs
which are maintained at their historic pitches (several Hz lower than
A=440). We were trying to sequence the programs with all the piano/
440Hz works before the intermission, and all the organ/33xHz stuff
after, etc. But they seemed to be able to switch seamlessly.

[Geoff]

Richard Crowley wrote:
> "FS" wrote ...
>> I am not sure if a skewed frequency response might not play here,
>> but certainly the "psycho-acoustic" issue alluded to above could be
>> the prevalent issue as I am not used to dealing with recording vs
>> live listening .
>> The players are quite an assortment and I would assume that
>> the soloistic ones are more inclined to favor just intonation while
>> the orchestral ones, meantone, so I am certain that we sometimes off
>> by as much as 20 cents-
>
> We were quite pleasantly surprised that the orchestras (string, brass,
> woodwind and percussion) we collaborated with in Romania were
> able to "bend" automatically to match their venues' period pipe-organs

They don't need to bend. They tune an open string to the fixed (in this
case organ) pitch, and the fretting positions do not require any adjustment
whatsoever.

geoff

[Richard Crowley]

"geoff" wrote ...
> Richard Crowley wrote:
>> "FS" wrote ...
>>> I am not sure if a skewed frequency response might not play here,
>>> but certainly the "psycho-acoustic" issue alluded to above could be
>>> the prevalent issue as I am not used to dealing with recording vs
>>> live listening .
>>> The players are quite an assortment and I would assume that
>>> the soloistic ones are more inclined to favor just intonation while
>>> the orchestral ones, meantone, so I am certain that we sometimes off
>>> by as much as 20 cents-
>>
>> We were quite pleasantly surprised that the orchestras (string, brass,
>> woodwind and percussion) we collaborated with in Romania were
>> able to "bend" automatically to match their venues' period pipe-organs
>
> They don't need to bend. They tune an open string to the fixed (in this
> case organ) pitch, and the fretting positions do not require any
> adjustment whatsoever.

Yeah, I expect that the strings would have the easiest time.
But for the brass and woodwinds to be able to "lip" flat
was a bit surprising.

[Geoff]

Richard Crowley wrote:
>
> Yeah, I expect that the strings would have the easiest time.
> But for the brass and woodwinds to be able to "lip" flat
> was a bit surprising.

Dunno about horns, but saxes and clarinets are tuned ( subtlely) by their
movable mouthpiece position.

geoff

[Laurence Payne[_2_]]

On Thu, 11 Jun 2009 16:29:44 -0700, "Richard Crowley"
> wrote:

>Yeah, I expect that the strings would have the easiest time.
>But for the brass and woodwinds to be able to "lip" flat
>was a bit surprising.

Are you sure they didn't just pull their tuning slides out a bit?

[Les Cargill]

geoff wrote:
> Richard Crowley wrote:
>> Yeah, I expect that the strings would have the easiest time.
>> But for the brass and woodwinds to be able to "lip" flat
>> was a bit surprising.
>
> Dunno about horns, but saxes and clarinets are tuned ( subtlely) by their
> movable mouthpiece position.
>
> geoff
>
>

Biting the reed changes pitch too - think of the "scoops"
the clarinets do in "Rhapsody in Blue". Brass horns,
embouchure can be used to affect pitch.

--
Les Cargill

[Les Cargill]

Laurence Payne wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2009 16:29:44 -0700, "Richard Crowley"
> > wrote:
>
>> Yeah, I expect that the strings would have the easiest time.
>> But for the brass and woodwinds to be able to "lip" flat
>> was a bit surprising.
>
> Are you sure they didn't just pull their tuning slides out a bit?

Yes. I used to date a basoonist.

How she got in the bassoon, I'll never know.

--
Les Cargill

[Richard Crowley]

Laurence Payne wrote:
> "Richard Crowley" wrote:
>> Yeah, I expect that the strings would have the easiest time.
>> But for the brass and woodwinds to be able to "lip" flat
>> was a bit surprising.
>
> Are you sure they didn't just pull their tuning slides out a bit?

They didn't have any time or reference to tune (except during
the applause between songs, etc.) If they did it by dead
reckoning, I'd be even more impressed.

[Laurence Payne[_2_]]

On Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:14:07 -0400, Les Cargill >
wrote:

>
>Biting the reed changes pitch too - think of the "scoops"
>the clarinets do in "Rhapsody in Blue". Brass horns,
>embouchure can be used to affect pitch.

But you wouldn't use these techniques to drop pitch globally. It
would be like playing guitar pulling the string to bend every note.

[FS]

"Baroque pitch" tends to hover around A430 to A435. If you don't have
a "period" instrument you must pull out the mouthpiece/slide or tune
down the strings. For strings this can throw the instrument out of
it's optimum tonality as the modern strings are not designed for this-
they become "ropey" meaning that they are rather loose under the
fingers and not responsive. The instruments sound dead at 430.
Organs further complicate things since they are often tuned to
something other than equal or well temperment. They don't follow
anything that modern players are used to tuning with. The players that
tune aurally, as opposed to with "finger memory" shine here.

[hank alrich]

brian l maccarty barfed:

> > wrote in message
>
>
> > Perhaps there is something lost in the digitizing (aliasing
> > etc), that leads to this apparent phenomenon?
>
> The explanation is very simple.

Yes, it is. Brian L. McCarty is without a life and lives as a parasite.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar

[hank alrich]

geoff > wrote:

> FS wrote:
> > Does anyone have any information on the apparent intonation of a
> > musical ensemble when recorded as opposed to the intonation when
> > audited live?
> >
> > Although our string ensemble is not remarkable for its intonation, it
> > always sounds much more in tune live, then when I listen to the
> > recordings that we are taking. I use an AT3202 mic which is fine for
> > solo work. Perhaps there is something lost in the digitizing (aliasing
> > etc), that leads to this apparent phenomenon?
>
> No. What you are recording is what is actually being played.
>
> It just sounds better at the time due to the ambience and emotional
> immediacy of the performance.
>
> geoff

Yep. In terms of cold, informative objectivity, a mic doesn't care what
I think I played; it shows me what really went down.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar

[dwgriffi]

I had a college roommate who'd listen to an album side many times
straight through. When I asked why he didn't just play something else
he said the first time he listened to the whole music, the next time
he'd listen to just the singing, the third just the bass, the third
just the drums, etc.

A live show is one listen, taken from whatever perspective one does at
the time, that's it,one "pass" and then we have only our memories. If
we have a question about something on a recording we can listen to it
50 times instead of just letting it go off into the sunset.

I'm sure there's not enough actual physical difference to account for
any real pitch difference.

[Geoff]

hank alrich wrote:
> geoff > wrote:
>
>> FS wrote:
>>> Does anyone have any information on the apparent intonation of a
>>> musical ensemble when recorded as opposed to the intonation when
>>> audited live?
>>>
>>> Although our string ensemble is not remarkable for its intonation,
>>> it always sounds much more in tune live, then when I listen to the
>>> recordings that we are taking. I use an AT3202 mic which is fine for
>>> solo work. Perhaps there is something lost in the digitizing
>>> (aliasing etc), that leads to this apparent phenomenon?
>>
>> No. What you are recording is what is actually being played.
>>
>> It just sounds better at the time due to the ambience and emotional
>> immediacy of the performance.
>>
>> geoff
>
> Yep. In terms of cold, informative objectivity, a mic doesn't care
> what I think I played; it shows me what really went down.

Likewise, a vocalist may swear he didn't get the word or phrasing wrong, and
it sure wasn't the recording ( digital analogue or whatever) that changed
it.

geoff