[CAUT] temperament for Schubert

[Keith Roberts]

#3 is outrageous. It is a statement by the someone who thinks they are part
of the upper crust and therefore somehow superior. It doesn't take education
to appreciate beauty and it's a stretch to think most music majors can tell
the difference. Read Nickle and Dimed in America if you want the opinion of
a PhD on the intelligence difference and the perception of the rich about
the poorer segments of society.
Keith Roberts



On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Israel Stein <custos3 at comcast.net> wrote:

>
> Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 19:36:56 -0800 "David Love" <
>> davidlovepianos at comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> Along these lines my experience suggests that non equal temperaments sound
>> best on lower tension scales where the upper partials are not so
>> prominent.
>> Historical instruments, not surprisingly, have very low tension scales
>> when
>> compared to the modern piano.  In spite of the fact that the plucked
>> harpsichord with the use of a plectrum instead of a hammer tends to excite
>> the higher partials proportionately more than a hammer would on the same
>> instrument, the fundamental tone is still quite dominant.  I wonder
>> whether
>> the move away from non equal temperaments in the modern era doesn't have
>> something to do with the ever increasing scale tensions that have taken
>> place during the same time.  In this respect, I find the imposition of non
>> equal temperaments on modern instruments to be less pleasing than on their
>> historical counterparts.
>>
> David,
>
> I have actually heard this cited as one of the factors in the move from WT
> to ET. There are others:
> 1. Greater dependence by composers dynamics for expression rather than key
> choice, made possible by the greater dynamic range of higher tension
> instruments
> 2. Larger performance venues with the rise of subscription concerts,
> supplanting homes of the nobility, drawing rooms and salons. Subtleties of
> temperament are therefore less audible.
> 3. Shift in audiences from nobility to the rising bourgeoisie. While men
> and women of the nobility often received extensive musical training and were
> capable of appreciating the subtleties of temperament - children of the
> bourgeoise merely aped habits of the nobility (hence "subscription concerts
> - they couldn't afford music in their homes). These "arrivistes" rarely had
> the sort of musical education previously given to nobles - and therefore
> were less sophisticated audiences, not capable of appreciating the
> subtleties of temperament.
> 4. Greater inharmonicity that results from greater string tension tends to
> fuzz the subtleties of unequal temperament.
>
> That's all I can remember right now. I believe there is more.
>
> Israel Stein
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut_ptg.org/attachments/20090114/cc9425b0/attachment.html>