This looks like the tester is not fully aware about tuning an instrument
Also graphic representation of tuning tendencies is pretty pointless,
A reliable study would work Bb1 to F3 and would have F1-F2 as a in tune.
Also would know that the common nomenclature for a chromatic scale is Bb1 B1 C1 C#1...
Hi Aldevis. I'm the developer of Intonation Station and also the author of the case study. I developed the app after tearing my hair out trying to work out a vintage saxophone's intonation tendencies by hand using a conventional tuner. I'd like to address some of your points.
This looks like the tester is not fully aware about tuning an instrument
You're not specific on why, so it's hard to address this point. The case study clearly stated that the sax was warmed up then tuned to middle C on a standard tuner. Why middle C and not concert A or some other note? Because it's roughly in the middle of the instrument and we don't know it's intonation yet. We find out later whether middle C was a good note on which to tune that sax/mouthpiece combination, once we've completed the study (spoiler: it wasn't).
Also graphic representation of tuning tendencies is pretty pointless,
I'm not sure what you're saying here. Would you prefer a written list of tuning tendencies? The app supplies this as well in its Details Tab, as well as a load of other information pertinent to intonation/tuning. I think you may be saying that we shouldn't rely on such a fine-grained representation of intonation and use our ears more. All I can say is that the instruments I use - a selection of modern and vintage, both brass and woodwind - have various specific pitches that are real clangers at a gig if you don't know the instrument thoroughly. The graphical approach combined with the detailed stats works well for me in preparing in advance for pitches I need to watch out for. Indeed, using this approach has produced a massive transformation in my ability to play in tune in public ensemble. Of course, others prefer different approaches, as the multitude of related comments in this forum testifies.
A reliable study would work Bb1 to F3 and would have F1-F2 as a in tune.
We don't know whether the range F1-F2 is in tune until the study is completed. On my 12M, that range contains pitches that are both flat and sharp. The range for which you want the sax to be mostly in tune is somewhat dependent on the type of music you play, but since the app doesn't know that, it calculates the average tuning over the whole range played. For the first mouthpiece, the study points out that Intonation Station did indeed confirm that the average tuning was sharp by 6 cents.
Also would know that the common nomenclature for a chromatic scale is Bb1 B1 C1 C#1...
Remember that the app doesn't know that you're playing a chromatic scale, or even what instrument you're playing. I took a decision use the octave suffixes (C1 versus C2) most closely related to international standards of frequency/pitch. If this is a deal-breaker, then I can look into ways of labelling the various notes within the range of generic groups of instruments, but so far I haven't had any feedback to that effect from users of the app.
But mostly because if most notes (including C3, as it's called there) are shown sharp there is an initial error, either in method or in the experiment
This is addressed several times in the study. For example, where the neck was simply too short to pull the mouthpiece out further. In any case, the case study was designed to show how users how to get the best out of the app for an arbitrary instrument/mouthpiece combination and to highlight individual bad pitches on that instrument, not as an exhaustive study on which mouthpiece is the best for a particular model of sax. I'm happy to alter the website to make that more explicit.
All the best, and apologies if I've misunderstood your comments. Paul