Temperaments

[Richard Moody]

----------
> From: Billbrpt <Billbrpt@aol.com>
> To: pianotech@ptg.org; SwamiJuan@aol.com
> Subject: Re: Temperaments
> Date: Saturday, January 24, 1998 2:39 PM
> 
>    Jeffrey Siegel has been performing in Madison, WI for many years
doing a
> series of concerts.  He is known for remarks that show that he
believes
> historical temperaments to be archaic.  What he doesn't know is
that the
> temperament tuned on his piano never has been ET.  In fact, it
always has been
> pretty far from it.  It would score in the 50% range if compared to
the RPT
> Exam standard.

So what are you saying, that Seigel would be better off if you tuned
it?  Or the tuner there is incompetent? ?

>     The following is not an opinion but a provable fact:  Virtually
no one
> tunes a perfectly "equal" temperament.  Those who use the most
sophisticated
> electronic programs and a very few, very exceptional aural tuners
come close
> enough that their results yield a temperament which is absolutely
devoid of
> any distinction from one tonality to another.

Well this is what a technical forum is all about, , proof, the more
scientific the better.  In my experience of tuning for performances
and recordings, I have rarely had to change alter or "adjust"
temperaments.  In fact my opinion of temperaments is that a lot of
tuners tune a 
remarkably similar temperament considering it is a task which is so
difficult to be good at.   Perhaps your quest for the temperament
which
is "absolutely devoid of any distinction from one tonality to
another"
might be out of the relm of practicality.  Or more practicaly, few if
any tuners are
attempting to acheive that.  
	The purposes I use ET for are not for the sake of perfectly equal,
but nearly equal, and according to the instrument, (which is the most
important consideration).  This I think that is what the drove the
effort to produce the system of tuning that allows a nearly equal
temperament
to be established on the modern piano.  The mathmatical paradigms and
predictions of the 12th root of two are one thing, actually tuning
according to it is quite another. But the results are as intended, a
uniform temperament, (or uniform sounding) from tuner to tuner and
piano to piano.  This is really what the grail, excuse me the goal is
all about. . . Satisfaction first on the part of the player, the rest
of the musicians,and the audience.  

>       The rest, the great majority, may be attempting an ET but the
inherent
> "error" in their methods and perceptions result in a temperament
which often
> has considerable distinctions in the different keys .  Often, these
"errors"
> are at random so the temperament is so disorganized and unfocused
that the
> listener has difficulty distingushing one tonality from another. 
All to
> often, the bearing plan used by aural tuners actually results in
what has
> become known as "reverse well" temperament.  That is, the smooth,
harmonious
> tonalities are harsh and strident, those that should exhibit
dissonance are
> quietly harmonious.

This I have never heard in profesional situations,  What I hear is
quite the opposite. "Errors" are to be worked out during the training
period, and later on occasionally sitting with another tuner to check
yourself.  The result of tuning should allow hearing  the tonality
differences
between this D and that D, this room and that room, this original A
and this rebuilt A etc. etc. To hear tonalities resulting from one
tuning to another means someone is not tuning up to standard. Now if
I could just sit down with the person who tunes for Duetche
Grammaphone.  (I tune better than i spell) 
	
	But I can offer an experiment that will proove  tuners actually
tune very close, close enough to be called almost perfect, tune two
pianos, then play them together.  This does take time patience and
practice, but it is expected of the professional.  Better yet have
one tuner tune a piano, have another tuner tune a different piano,
play them together. This is not to say they will be perfect, but they
should be surprisingly close.   In fact they should be able to be
paralleled tuned with the same ease as if the same tuner had  tuned
both.  I think there are more good tuners than you think, is what I
am trying to say. 

>      This runs against the grain of virtually all music of past and
present
> and yet this is what is so typically presented as a piano tuning to
both
> artists and ordinary customers alike.  Therefore, the performer
learns to
> "back off" while playing in the keys which should exhibit quiet
harmony and
> "bang" hard where more brilliance is desired.  When some people who
are used
> to a piano which does not respond properly for tuning and other
reasons such
> as voicing and regulation, are presented with a well-prepared
instrument tuned
> properly in an authentic historical temperament, it is overwhelming
in the
> power of expression it has.  Once again, the mediocrity of the
lowest common
> denominator, ET is demanded to "correct" and narrow down this
wonderfully wide
> range and becomes touted and accepted as a standard even though it
is rarely
> acheived.

This is another myth perpetuated by the detractors of ET.  That  the 
intervals are all the same therefore the lowest common demonator. The
real problem is the resulting tonality of a twelve tone scale when
confined to a keyboard.  The intervals just cannot be pure.  The must
be tuned off from "just" if one wants to play music with two or more
notes sounding at the same time.  The choir or orchestra has little
problem with playing any harmonic interval, in any key, but the key
board sure does.  Hense the developement of tuning schemes.  Actually
I could argue that ET presents the higest common demoninator, and
offers the  most musical potential for the modern keyboard.  
   
>     Just because relatively modern music may have what may be
considered
> dissonance, this is not a reason to require ET.  There is actually
very little
> music which is truely atonal which is ever performed.  Most music
which people
> enjoy listening to, in all of the many styles that there are, is
all tonal  by
> its very nature and therefore requires distinctions between the
keys, not the
> absence of distinction.
>     To endlessly pursue the perfection of a completely equalized
scale is a
> tragically misguided goal.  One succeeds only in erasing all of the
key
> "color" which the music has in it by design and which people expect
to hear.
> I often hear people, both the general population and sophisticated
musical
> experts, speak of "key color".  If ET were the reality it is
supposed to be,
> these notions would have vanished long before most of us were even
born. The
> Key Signature of a piece is a designation of character, not just of
pitch.

	Are you saying ET does away with this? And then there are the
detractors of the keys (signatures) having color what ever that is. 
And no one ever addresses the fact that the voice and instruments
play in just intonation but the keyboard has to be tuned to ET or
something else.  And what do musicians say who play in  an all string
quartet and then play strings with a piano in a quartet. for example?




>     There will be another Historical Temperament Recital at the
annual PTG
> Convention in Providence.  This will be an important and positive
event.
> Hopefully, many of the myths, misconceptions and misunderstandings
that
> technicians and performers alike have will give way to new
enlightenment.
>      There is no "Holy Grail".  That is only a concept.  There is
only a
> virtually infinite range of possibilities of how to temper a scale
and how to
> stretch the octaves.  The future of tuning is in exploring,
understanding and
> implimenting these diverse approaches.
>      Bill Bremmer RPT

And I don't suppose that some will come along and say that few if any
 tuners can do a perfect Kellner, or a Young, or what ever.  But one
does want to be assured that what ever scheme,  it was tuned
"correctly"  And who but piano tuners are prepared to discuss that?  
	The Providence convention sounds like an excellent opportunity to
sit at a piano that has been tuned to a  historical temp listen to
the intervals, then sit back and hear how they sound in playing, or
perhaps have the piece played on both a historical tuned piano and
then on a ET tuned instrument.   I would be interested if recordings
of something like this were  made.  

Richard Moody

ps,  you said:
	"There is
only a
> virtually infinite range of possibilities of how to temper a scale
and how to
> stretch the octaves.  The future of tuning is in exploring,
understanding and
> implimenting these diverse approaches."

And it all starts from ET, if not where?   rm