FEAT U R E
INTONATION ON A STRING INSTRUMENT:
THREE SYSTEMS OF TUNING
AND TEMPERAMENT
by Benjamin Whitcomb
Do your students—even some of the best among them—frequently play the following chord out of tune?
The third of the chord is frequently too sharp, is it not? Why
do they do it? Are they just inconsistent with their intonation
of first finger? No, most likely, they are placing their finger on a
pitch that is in tune, but only in a different key.
Chicago-area cellist Patricia White posted the following on
the Internet Cello Society website:
In order to teach my students to realize that intonation is
relative I have them conduct the following experiment:
First, play an E on the D string in first position with the first
finger. Second, add an open G underneath so that you create the
interval of Major 6th. Once that interval is nicely in tune, stop
playing but DO NOT MOVE the first finger on the D string.
Next, play the same E, but add the open A as the double-stop so
that you create the interval of Perfect 4th. You will find that the
very E that was beautifully in tune with open G is FLAT with
open A. Raise the E a bit, and you have a wonderful P4 and a
new awareness of just how relative pitch really is (White 2000).
I have been having my students do this same exercise for
many years and perhaps many of you do, too. What is the
significance of it? Does it mean merely that pitch is relative or
does it indicate something more specific than that? The thing
that makes intonation so complex is that different standards
of intonation apply in different circumstances. I maintain that
string players essentially use three different systems of tuning
and temperament.
Just Intonation
There have been many systems of tuning and temperament
proposed over the centuries, but the ones we use most often
are just intonation, equal temperament, and what I will call
an inflected melodic intonation. Just intonation, in a nutshell,
is a system whereby the frequencies of the various intervals
correspond to small interval ratios. For example, against a
given pitch of 400 cycles per second, a major third would be
500 (5:4), a perfect fifth would be 600 (3:2), etc. Knowledge of
the exact ratios is not necessary for playing in just intonation—
all you need to do is listen to the way pitches interact in the
ear and adjust them until the sensation of “beats” goes away or
20 | AMERICAN STRING TEACHER | MAY 2017
Figure 1.
is minimized. (For some intervals, there are always a certain
number of beats present even when they are in tune.)
Equal Temperament and Inflected Melodic
Intonation
Equal temperament is a system in which every half step within
an octave has exactly the same frequency ratio as every other
half step (which is the 12th root of 2, as opposed to 16:15
in just intonation). What I call inflected melodic intonation
(actually a form of temperament) does not designate specific
frequency ratios among the constituent pitches. This is an
approach to tuning in which the performer bends a pitch
slightly in order to give it more melodic directionality. Pablo
Casals referred to this as “expressive intonation.”
Using the Three Systems
So, how do we know what tuning system to use at any given
time? We use just intonation when we are playing harmonies.
An exception can be made of chords of short duration—ones
that do not last long enough for us to hear any “beats” among
the constituent pitches.
We use equal temperament when we have to, such as when
performing with a piano (especially when we are in unison
with it). Equal temperament also is very useful in atonal music
or in passages in tonal music during which there is no tonal
center. I also maintain that we should tune our open strings
with equal temperament so that our strings sound as good as
possible in every key.
I want to pause a moment to elaborate on the preceding
sentence. Our fingerings can easily adjust where we play
stopped notes in order to make every note sound as in tune
as possible in the given key, but the same cannot be said of
our open strings. This means intentionally narrowing our
fifths (and consequently widening our fourths, on the bass)
as compared to the beat of the sound of fifths when they are
tuned according to just intonation. Violinists and violists can
do this without much difficulty, for many of the resulting beats
between overtones occur above the range of human hearing.
 FE ATURE

Getting cellists to raise their C strings and bassists to lower
their E strings can be more difficult, because many more of the
resulting beats are low enough in pitch to be within the range
of human hearing. If your low string players need convincing,
point out that the piano that has just been tuned (assuming it
was done well) does not sound out of tune, and their fifths and
fourths have been altered just as much as you are asking the
low string players to do.
Inflected melodic intonation can be used to alter pitches
in situations where neither of the above conditions exists.
For example, “non-chord tones”—pitches that are not chord
members of the prevailing harmony at the moment—can often
be adjusted slightly in such a way that helps bring out the
shape of the melody, such as by bending a pitch slightly in the
direction in which we expect it eventually to resolve. You can
readily see this system in action when you look at a frequency
analysis of a recording of any great string player.
So, why don’t we simply use just intonation all the time?
The answer has to do with the fact that the brain processes
harmonic pitch information differently from melodic pitch
information. The articles in the bibliography that include the
words “two channel” in their title all address this phenomenon.
A Look at Pythagorean Intonation
Perhaps you have heard of Pythagorean intonation and
are wondering why I do not include it in this article. Quite
simply, just intonation replaced Pythagorean intonation
early in the fourteenth century when our system of Western
harmony started to become based on triads and not just fifths
and octaves. The reason some people still think Pythagorean
intonation is relevant is because, when compared to just
intonation, some of the other intervals it contains are closer to
what is found in equal temperament or to what we get when
we inflect melodic pitches.
In figure 2 I have italicized the numbers I would like to draw
to your attention. Notice that with Pythagorean tuning all the
minor intervals (second, third, sixth, seventh) are smaller than
in just intonation, and all of the major intervals except for the
second are larger. In fact, in Pythagorean tuning, the minor
intervals are even lower—and the major intervals higher—than
in equal temperament. Lowering minor intervals and raising
major ones generally alters them in a direction consistent with
their voice leading tendencies.
Do you see how Pythagorean tuning can appear attractive
to string players? Its perfect intervals are the same as in just
intonation, while all of the other intervals are inflected in a
way that heightens their voice leading tendencies. However, I
have never seen a recording of real music by a real performer
in which the frequency analysis consistently corresponds to
Pythagorean tuning. Rather, the thirds and sixths tend to
closely approximate just intonation (especially when they
last long enough for beats to be detected), and melodically
inflected pitches tend to vary with the context, and do not
align with any fixed system of tuning or temperament.
Tuning Exercises
How do you get good at playing in equal temperament?
Practice with a chromatic tuner. The benefit of equal
temperament is precisely that the tuning of any pitch does
not change. This objective quality, of fixing the frequencies of
pitches in an absolute sense, has its benefits and its usefulness
in music.
How do you get good at inflected melodic intonation? There
are no rules for this beyond letting your ear be your guide. It is
like when a cooking recipe says “season to taste.”
How do you get good at just intonation? This can be
tricky, because the ideal frequency of any given pitch in just
intonation depends on the key you are in.

Interval Pythagorean Tuning Just Tuning Equal Temperament Figure 2. Comparison of

Ratio Decimal Ratio Decimal Decimal Pythagorean tuning, just tuning,
and equal temperament.
m2 1/1 1.054 16 / 15 1.067 1.059

M2 256 / 243 1.125 9/8 1.125 1.123

m3 9/8 1.185 6/5 1.2 1.189

M3 32 / 27 1.266 5/4 1.25 1.26

P4 81 / 64 1.333 4/3 1.333 1.335

Tt 4/3 1.405 45 / 32 1.406 1.414

P5 1024 / 729 1.5 3/2 1.5 1.498

m6 3/2 1.580 8/5 1.6 1.587

M6 128 / 81 1.688 5/3 1.667 1.682

m7 27 / 16 1.778 9/5 1.8 1.782

M7 16 / 9 1.898 15 / 8 1.875 1.888

P8 243 / 128 2 2/1 2 2

WWW.ASTASTRINGS.ORG | 21
 FEAT U R E
Figure 3. Exercise alternating between A major and C major scale fragments.
Let us return to the case of the out-of-tune chords shown at
the beginning of the article. Assume that you are playing on
a violin or viola with the A string tuned to 440 Hz. Then, the
G string in equal temperament would be 196 Hz. What is the
ideal frequency of first finger E on the D string?
• E (equal temperament) = 329.63
• E (justly tuned to A major) = 330
• E (justly tuned to C major) = 326.67
What does this mean in terms of cents? It means that, in
A major, the E needs to be two cents higher than in equal
temperament, whereas in C major, it needs to be tuned 16
cents lower than equal temperament.
For an interesting tuning exercise, consider having a student
alternate between A major and C major scale fragments (see
fig. 3).
Have the student consciously raise the pitch of the E after
the first fermata and then lower it again after the second one.
The main point I want my students to take away from such an
exercise is that neither E is categorically out of tune. Both Es
are “in tune,” but in different keys. In everything but atonal
music, intonation should always be heard in terms of the
prevailing key.
What about tuning in keys besides A major and C major?
Figure 4 shows when you should use the higher or the lower
version of a given pitch based on its scale degree function
within the key (i.e., E is scale degree two in D major, etc.).
This is admittedly a bit of an oversimplification, but if
students are forearmed with good ears and knowledge of the
direction in which they need to adjust the pitch, I have found
that their likelihood of landing on the justly tuned version of a
particular pitch goes way up.
Although there are many times in music when we will want
to tune pitches according to equal temperament or to our own
tastes in melodic inflection, it is critical that we string players
be able to play just intonation in any key. Just intonation is the
“bread and butter” of playing “in tune” on a string instrument.
It is what allows a string quartet to sound so consonant and
beautifully harmonious on all of their cadences, for example.
I love to read books and articles about aural perception in
general and music perception in particular. Every so often in
such literature, one encounters an author who wonders openly
about how much of a difference the ear really hears among
the various tuning systems. “Is just intonation actually better
than equal temperament?” the question often goes. When I
read such a sentiment, it always makes me chuckle. If only the
person asking were to play a bowed string instrument, then he
or she would know how much of a difference it makes.
22 | AMERICAN STRING TEACHER | MAY 2017
Figure 4. Scale
Scale degree Adjustment
degree function.
1 ×
2 ×
3 Ø
4 ×
5 ×
6 Ø
7 Ø
Bibliography
Ballard, Dana;Yarbrough, Cornelia. “The effect of accidentals, scale
degrees, direction, and performer opinions on intonation,” Update:
Applications of Research in Music Education 8 (1990): 19-22.
$CN\CPQ)GTCNF,p/WUKECNXU2U[EJQCEQWUVKECN8CTKCDNGUCPF6JGKT
+PƃWGPEGQPVJG2GTEGRVKQPQH/WUKECN+PVGTXCNUqBulletin of the
Council for Research in Music Education 70 (1982): 1-11.
$CTDKGTK2CVTK\KQp8KQNKPKPVQPCVKQP#JKUVQTKECNUWTXG[qEarly Music,
19 (1991): 69-88.
Barbour, J. Murray. Tuning and Temperament, 2nd ed. New York: Da
Capo Press, 1972.
Benade, Arthur H. Fundamentals of Musical Acoustics, 2nd ed., rev.
New York: Dover Publications, 1990.
$QGT'FGp2KVEJ6JGQTKGU7PKƂGFq+PPsychophysics and Physiology
of Hearing ed. E. F. Evans and J. P. Wilson, 323-334. London:
Academic Press, 1977.
Boomsliter, Paul, and Warren Creel. “Extended Reference: An
7PTGEQIPK\GF&[PCOKEKP/GNQF[qJournal of Music Theory 7 (1963),
2-22.
Boomsliter, Paul, and Warren Creel. “The Long Pattern Hypothesis in
Harmony and Hearing.” Journal of Music Theory 5 (1961): 2-31.
Bregman, Albert S. Auditory Scene Analysis: The Perceptual
Organization of Sound. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1990.
Brown, Rebekah Ann. “Dynamics of intonation in performances by
artist violinists.” Ph.D. diss., Indiana University, 1996.
Burns, Edward M. “Intervals, Scales, and Tuning.” In The Psychology
of Music, 2nd ed., ed. Diana Deutsch, 215-64. New York: Academic
Press, 1999.
Butler, David. The Musician’s Guide to Perception and Cognition.
New York: Schirmer Books, 1992.
Deutsch, Diana. “The Processing of Pitch Combinations.” In The
Psychology of Music, 2nd ed., ed. Diana Deutsch, 349-411. New York:
Academic Press, 1999.

Elliot, J., J. R. Platt, and R. J. Racine. “Adjustment of Successive and
Simultaneous Intervals by Musically Experienced and Inexperienced
Subjects.” Perception & Psychophysics 42 (1987): 594-598.
Fyk, Janina. “Static and dynamic model of musical intonation.”
In SMAC 93: Proceedings of the Stockholm Music Acoustics
Conference, July 28-August 1, 1993. Stockholm: Kungliga Musikaliska
Akademien, 1994, 89-95.
Fyk, Janina. Melodic Intonation, Psychoacoustics, and the Violin.
Trans. Joanna Ciecierska. Zielona Gora: Organon, 1995.
Garman, Barry Rex. “The effects of accompaniment texture and
contextual pitch distance on string instrumentalists' intonational
performance.” Ph.D. diss., University of Miami, 1992.
Gelfand, Stanley. Hearing: An Introduction to Psychological and
Physiological Acoustics. New York: Marcel Dekker, 1990.
Genevro, J. Bradley. “Ways to improve intonation,” Teaching Music 4
(1997): 30-32.
Geringer, John M. “Comparison of good versus bad tone quality/
intonation of vocal and string performances: Issues concerning
measurement and reliability of the continuous response digital
interface,” Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education
no.141 (Summer 1999): 86-92.
Geringer, John M.; Madsen, Clifford K. “Musicians' ratings of good
versus bad vocal and string performances,” Journal of Research in
Music Education 46 (1998): 522-534.
Goldstein, Julius L. “An Optimum Processor Theory for the Central
Formation of the Pitch of Complex Tones.” The Journal of the
Acoustical Society of America 54 (1973), 1496-1516.
Greene, Paul C. “Violin Performance with Reference to Tempered,
Natural, and Pythagorean Intonation.” In University of Iowa: Studies
in the Psychology of Music, vol. 4, 232-251. Iowa City: Iowa University
Press, 1937.
Hajdu, Georg. “Low Energy and Equal Spacing; the Multifactorial
Evolution of Tuning Systems.” Interface 22 (1993): 319-333.
Haynes, Bruce. “Beyond temperament: Non-keyboard intonation in
the 17th and 18th century,” Early Music, 19 (1991): 357-381.
Houtsma, A. J. M., and J. L. Goldstein. “The Central Origin of the
Pitch of Complex Tones: Evidence from Musical Interval Recognition.”
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 51 (1972): 520-529.
Jacobson, Christopher. “The importance of kinesthetic perception in
playing in tune,” American String Teacher, 48 (1998): 54-57.
Lloyd, Llewellyn S., and Hugh Boyle. Intervals, Scales &
Temperaments: An Introduction to the Study of Musical Intonation.
New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1978.
.QQUGP(TCP\p+PVQPCVKQPQHUQNQXKQNKPRGTHQTOCPEGYKVJTGHGTGPEG
to equally tempered, Pythagorean, and just intonations,” The Journal
of the Acoustical Society of America 93 (1993): 525-539.
Madsen, Clifford K.; Geringer, John M.; Heller, Jack. “Comparison
of good versus bad intonation of accompanied and unaccompanied
vocal and string performances using a Continuous Response Digital
Interface (CRDI).” In Papers Submitted to the ISME Research Seminar.
Stockholm: Musikhogskolan Centrum for Musikpedagogisk Forskning,
1990.
Makeig, Scott. “Affective Versus Analytic Perception of Musical
Intervals.” In Music, Mind, and Brain, ed. Manfred Clynes, 227-250.
New York: Plenum Press, 1982.
FE ATURE
Noorden, Leon van. “Two Channel Pitch Perception.” In Music, Mind,
and Brain, ed. Manfred Clynes, 251-67. New York: Plenum Press,
1982.
Pierce, John R. “The Nature of Musical Sound.” In The Psychology of
Music, 2nd ed., ed. Diana Deutsch, 1-23. New York: Academic Press,
1999.
Pikler, Andrew G. “History of Experiments on the Musical Interval
Sense.” Journal of Music Theory 10 (1966): 54-95.
Plomp, Reinier. “Beats of Mistuned Consonances.” Journal of the
Acoustical Society of America 42 (1967): 462-474.
Plomp, Reinier. Aspects of Tone Sensation. New York: Academic
Press, 1976.
Rasch, Rudolph A. “Perception of Melodic and Harmonic Intonation
of Two-Part Musical Fragments.” Music Perception 2 (1985): 441-458.
Siegel, Jane A., and William Siegel. “Categorical Perception of
Tonal Intervals: Musicians Can’t Tell Sharp from Flat.” Perception &
Psychophysics 21 (1977), 399-407.
Terhardt, Ernst. “Pitch, Consonance, and Harmony.” The Journal of
the Acoustical Society of America 55 (1974): 1061-1069.
Terhardt, Ernst. “The Two-Component Theory of Musical
Consonance.” In Psychophysics and Physiology of Hearing ed. E. F.
Evans and J. P. Wilson, 381-390. London: Academic Press, 1977.
Vos, Joos. “Subjective Acceptability of Various Regular Twelve-Tone
Tuning Systems in Two-Part Musical Fragments.” The Journal of the
Acoustical Society of America 83 (1988): 2383-2392.
Wapnick, Joel, Gary Bourassa, and Joanne Sampson. “The
Perception of Tonal Intervals in Isolation and in Melodic Context.”
Psychomusicology 2 (1982): 21-37.
White, Patricia. “More on Intonation,” Internet Cello Society
Newsletter, Jan. 2000. http://www.cello.org/Newsletter/janfeb00.htm.
Wightman, Frederic L. “The Pattern-Transformation Model of Pitch.”
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 54 (1973), 407-416.
<CVQTTG4QDGTV,CPF#PFTGC*CNRGTPp+FGPVKƂECVKQP
Discrimination, and Selective Adaptation of Simultaneous Musical
Intervals.” Perception & Psychophysics 26 (1979): 384-395.
Benjamin Whitcomb is professor of cello at the
University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, where he
has received awards for his teaching, research,
and service. An active recitalist, he performs
more than thirty concerts a year around the
country and overseas. Dr. Whitcomb is a
frequent clinician and performer at universities
and conferences throughout the country and
abroad. His books, The Advancing String Player’s Handbook series
and Cello Fingerings, have received rave reviews from journals on
string playing. He has published numerous articles and has presented
many papers at national and international conferences.
WWW.ASTASTRINGS.ORG | 23