Greetings,
I wrote:
> With some minor idiosyncrasies (such as LVB's favoring Eb), the choice of
> home keys mimics the rising tempering of the thirds, with C being far and
away
> the most used key and F# being far and away the least used.
Fred replies:
>>But there are several other factors as well. There is, for example
the question of composers trying to make a living, writing music that
people will buy. Throw in more than a couple flats or sharps, and the
masses won't touch it. I think that is an equally persuasive argument
for why C, G and F predominate in the keyboard works you cite.<<
Several things argue against this, I think.
1. Beethoven was notoriously uncaring about how hard his music was, telling
a violinist that he didn't give a fig for his fiddle, he was "writing music
for eternity".
2. Regardless of the home key, in sonata form, one is going to be modulating
into extreme territory. I can't accept that the keys of the piano music of
Beethoven-Brahms were dumbed-down commercial reasons. They go to far afield in
the scores, and choices they made are too supportive of the mood of the pieces
to ignore,
3. Chopin...
>And, in fact, in looking through pieces in the key of C (and
>extending the range of study far beyond Beethoven, Mozart and
>Schubert), one generally finds (with a few exceptions) that the
>easier, blander pieces of any given composer are in that key. On this
>basis, one might suggest that C major stands for banality, as its "key
>color" attribute. Personally, I think they were being pragmatic,
>writing easy music in an easy key for a public that wasn't very
>accomplished.
Hmm, easy and bland do not address the "Waldstein", which only makes it
through about 25 measures before finding itself in Bmaj and then a theme in E.
The sonatas travel all over the keys, so I don't see how the home key would
ever determine the "ease" of play. In the "Pathetique", the easy part is the
middle section, in Ab! Nothing bland there in a WT, and the incredible
tempering in the harmony of that section fits right in for the movement's purpose.
In fact, that particular section, on "Beethoven in the Temperaments", (which
was performed on a temperament with 21 cents in that Ab third), created more
positive comments than any other track on the CD. Non-tuners who wrote were
floored by how "expressive" that passage was. Tuners, on the other hand, often
were totally jarred by the departure.
We run the danger of others creating our experience. Our life experience
is determined by our perception and our perception is determined by our
perspective. Our perspective is the ONLY thing we can directly change. Perspectives
change in response to education. I firmly believe that ET is predominent at
this moment due to a lack of perspective, and that is changing.
>>In any case, to make a solid case about key color and temperament by
numerical analysis based on predominance of pieces in various keys,
you really need to go beyond the keyboard. Is the prevalence of keys
for keyboard compositions completely different from that of wind or
string ensembles? (I don't believe so). Or are they essentially the
same? Do not the same arguments apply? <<
We would have to do a compilation of keys chosen for strings before this
would carry any weight. I did it for the piano literature, maybe somebody
could total up 300 representative string and wind pieces and see where the
breakdown places the predominance??? ( I would, but am totally swamped with tuning
these temperaments all over the state, at the moment, at top dollar, I might
add).
>>And yet the strings and winds
are not constrained by temperament, and since they always play (or try
to play) "just" intervals, the keys are equal in key color as defined
by a Valotti/Young style scheme: they are all "C major." <<
Ooh, I don't know about that. I think sharpening the thirds for
expression when needed has always been part and parcel of playing. Casals had a
lot to say about that, I believe.
>>In sum, although your numerical analysis of key prevalence looks, on
surface, as if it amounts to something, when you examine it closely,
it doesn't stand up terribly well.<<
Hang on a second, so far, it is the only thing standing. We will need
to see a numerical analysis of key prevalence in non-keyboard music. I will
eventually get to that, and I don't think we will see the same allotment.
>>But if we want to try to get at actual historical performance
practice, to the extent that is possible, direct evidence is far more
persuasive. And that evidence points precisely where di Veroli says it
does. <<
I think actual performance practice was intended to maximize the
emotional impact of the music. To this end, the variety of tempering has
undeniable effect. Highly tempered and consonant intervals cause involuntary reactions
in the autonomic nervous system. These effects appear to go hand in glove
with the composition's use of them. (that Pathetique thing, again).
Seems that most of the writing about intonation comes from sources other
than the composers. So, inferring composer's intentions from those sources
has less influence on me than what I hear from musicians that are awakening to
the sound of WT.
>> The closest we get to fact is on the order of "the bulk of the evidence
says that this
temperament style was used" in a particular time and place. If the
evidence is ambiguous, that should be noted. If it is unanimous, that
should also be noted.<<
I don't think there are any "facts" available as to what the composer's
intentions were. Bach certainly seems to be defining a tuning system by his
WTC. And that squiggle on the cover is exactly the type of "Ars Reservata"
(sp?) gesture that he was known for.
And we certainly know that there is nothing unanimous to be had in this
discussion. So, I am going by the effect on the music, itself, coupled with a
large dose of plausibility, and the response of pianists that I know have had
a chance to compare ET with WT side by side.
>the original question of this
thread (about Schubert) - I think the answer is that ET has the weight
of historical evidence behind it. That doesn't make it "wrong" to
advocate for a WT as plausible alternative, but one should do so with
caveats, noting that most people with a right to an opinion (having
actually looked at and analyzed the existing evidence) hold a
different opinion.<<
Yet, I cannot find more than a miniscule number of people who have
heard the comparison to favor ET! Inre Dale Probst's explanatin of the 1998 Rhode
Island tune-off, Ok, we will, if we must, discount that Bill Bremmer's
tuning was the cause of the preference, HOWEVER, I have presented the comparison
numerous times on virturally identical pianos,(Rochester, Austin, Dallas,
Calgary), and the overwhelming preference is for the WT piano. I still offer to do
this again. I don't need all day to tune one, either. Give me 90 minutes
with a piano and a SAT and I will be glad to compete with any tuner in the world
that cares to place their ET on the other piano. I have never seen it fail,
so a large part of this investigation is looking for reasons why this is so.
>> And, of course, if one simply believes that Schubert sounds better in
a WT, one can express that opinion as well. But it shouldn't be given
as based on historical evidence and on the consensus of scholarly
opinion, nor should it be expressed as having equal weight in terms of
being historically appropriate.<<
I disagree. When ET doens't make any aesthetic sense, we have to
question how applicable the writing of theorists is to the composer's actions.
There are other things that have no "weight" for the scientist, but this isn't a
scientific question, it is an artistic one. Analyzing the evidence rarely
includes making the comparison, and we are trying to define a sensual difference
by intellectual means. The written word is not going to answer the question
of what is the most effective way to tune.
There are other questions that ET doesn't answer, also. Can we talk
about the pedal?
The more pedal that can be used, the more resonance the instrument will
produce. Common wisdom is that the original pedal markings cannot be used
because the modern piano has too much sustain and the sound becomes muddy. I
submit that is not true. When played on an appropriate WT, Beethoven's music can
be played with original markings and the sound is sublime, not mud. The last
mvt. of the 'Waldstein' calls for , I think, 16 measures with the pedal down.
We did this in Rochester and the general agreement of the audience in my
classes was that it sounded great. When we tried it on the ET piano, people were
shaking their heads after 6 measures. Meridith Flaut, the pianist, didn't
even care to go on with it, saying to me that it was just noise after that.
Has anybody tried this on a fortepiano and compared the effect of
tempering on the ability to use the original pedal instructions?
There is also another question that WT has answered for me. My customers
are willing to spend a considerable amount more for the tunings I am doing in
non-ET. There are other tuners here with clean unisons, that ain't it.
Professionals are not usually taken in by smoke and mirrors, or glib sales pitches,
so that ain't it, either. These people are finding new depths in music when
performed on the far more complex WT. Was it so different long ago?
We tune for money, and the most attractive tuning will usually command
the highest price. The console tuned in a WT will sell, off the floor, before
the other 10 units just like it tuned in ET, ( I have had a store owner tell me
this, and ask me not to tell anyone else about it!). Why should we tune a
spinet in such a fashion that the keys used all the time are compromised for the
sake of equality with the keys that are never used? I submit that very few
home spinet pianos are played in the key of F#, so why not follow Steve
Fairchild's idea from 30 years ago and tune for the use expected?
I am willing to demonstrate that a machine generated Coleman 11 will
be preferred to the finest ET available. Kansas City, anyone?
Regards,
<BR><BR><BR>**************<BR>A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours
in just 2 easy steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26h
mpgID=62%26bcd=DecemailfooterNO62)</HTML>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC