HT's

[Susan Kline]

Dear John,

>Anyhow, got some loose thoughts on the subject of HT's that I thought the
>list may like to critique for me.  I have no strong feeling  to these ideas
>so openly welcome any opinion.  I have no scientific facts for any of these
>ideas, just impressions.

I think many of your points are well taken.

I have not been part of any "mainstream" historical temperament school of
thought. My main exposure to both the ideas and the sounds has been a 
reading of Jorgensen, listening to his tapes, Ed Foote's CD, a few
harpsichord performances, an introduction to the field during my training,
including an introduction to mean tone tuning, and two of Jim Coleman,
Sr.'s classes.

However, I have made a few purely personal observations. What I hear is
overshadowed by my background as a musician playing the cello, which I 
think is the crux of the matter.

We talk about temperament, and its effects on musical interpretation. For
me, temperament comes under the broad heading of intonation. Temperament
is an attempt to produce the best possible intonation while hampered by
a fixed scale which must be used in many keys on an instrument which plays
a lot of chords. Playing chords will bring out the worst of any intonation
problem, especially since the lack of any vibrato in the piano will make
the beats between intervals prominent.

_Even in a single key_ different chords require small changes in individual
notes to produce the best musical effects! How, then, can one have an ideal 
temperament even in a single key? .... One can't. In return for being able
to play many notes at the same time, and many notes quickly, and throughout 
a tremendous compass, one gives up control of the envelope (tried a crescendo
on a single piano note or chord lately?) and the intonation. 

As a consolation prize, assuming the piano has been recently tuned fairly
well, the intonation can't drop below a certain less-than-ideal but often
far-better-than-average level. I had the privilege of meeting William 
Primrose shortly before he died. I had just finished my tuning course. I
asked him how his students dealt with the problems of playing the viola
accompanied by the tempered scale of the piano. He sighed. "If only they
played as well in tune as the piano!" he said.

There's another fly in the ointment. Intonation and intervals are learned, 
not innate. Different cultures use very different scale patterns and
interval sizes. Experiences aside, people vary tremendously, not just in
the accuracy of their pitch discernment, but even in their modes of listening.
Listening for melodic versus harmonic intonation is just the most important
of these differences, most of which have not to my knowledge been explored.
I just see the signs that people can listen to the same thing but hear it in
vastly different ways. Here we also stray into musical tastes and emotional
makeup. Firm and fixed values of "good sounding" vs. "bad sounding" just 
aren't realistic. One has to ask, "Good for what?" and "Good for whom?"

This is the background I bring to your points.

>PIANOS
>The upright or vertical piano must make up 80% or more of the pianos in
>use.  Most of these uprights appear to fall into 2 groups, full size
>uprights built sometime prior to WWII, and studio size Asian pianos built
>in the last 20 years.  Most of the pre WWII group a now getting a bit run
>down, and most of the newer Asian group are at best of medium quality.
>
>Simple Conclusion: The vast majority of pianos in use and being tuned can
>use all the help they can to sound good.

Amen, amen. I'd say that if you counted all the pianos, tuned and untuned,
in America, grands are much less than 20%. You are also leaving out the
raft of spinets and consoles we are plagued with in this country. I am
_happy_ when I come across a studio sized Asian piano, because it will 
be better than average for my usual daily work.

>PIANO PLAYERS
>Simpler and unscientific conclusion: The vast majority of people NEVER play
>in the 'advanced keys'.

Yes. However, I'm not at all convinced that many HT's sound "worse" in the 
"advanced keys." To me, some of them sound the worst in C major. Contrary
to accepted opinion, but true for me. The thirds and sixths are the crucial 
intervals. 

>OTHER FACTORS
>Of the number of pianos being played, only a tiny percentage would ever be
>played in conjunction with another instrument.  Most musicians have only
>the faintest idea if the piano is 'in tune'.  As long as unisons and
>octaves are OK, they don't care all that much about the rest (OK calm down,
>this is only meant to be half serious).

Half serious or not, it is right on the money as far as my own experience
is concerned. However, I would put the emphasis in slightly different places. 
I would say that the unisons and octaves are about 95% of _being_ IN TUNE,
and therefore, that musicians DO hear whether the piano is in tune or not. 
This assumes that the temeperament isn't _overwhelmingly_ different from 
what they're used to. They simply have a much larger tolerance for minor
changes in temperament than we assume they should. 

>HYPOTHESIS
>Putting all the above together, the vast majority of the piano market
>comprises 'ordinary' piano's being played alone in a home situation,
>playing relatively simple material in the keys of F,C,G,Bb,Eb etc.
>
>So after reading Jorgensesn's work I am left asking myself "what is the
>best tuning for the average customer" (average defined above).  Will the
>improved harmony in the simpler keys in a Victorian or other HT, bring out
>the best in what is being played on the average home piano?  Could this
>really be the right solution for maximizing the musical experience of the
>'average' player?
>
>Look forward to any comments.
>
>
>Regards,
>John Woodrow
>Sydney, Australia

Glad to hear it, because I have a few. 

I think that if you try different temperaments with different people, you
should make them extreme enough that they cause major differences in tonal
color. If you try "very _mild_ Wells" and suchlike, I think that most
people, especially most non-musicians, won't hear the difference and may be
quite frustrated as they try to. 

The musicians might not be so frustrated, but they also might see no 
particular benefit. The ones who will really like historical temperaments
will like certain stronger ones (and probably hate others.) 

The only way I see to find this out is to try a few. As Gina points out,
the question of who is to pay for it arises. I think that in the early 
stages of your explorations it might be reasonable to view this as a 
learning effort, to be done at your own expense for your own interest 
and enlightenment, and your customers' enlightenment as well. If they 
like the results, they can pay you your usual fee ... if they don't 
like them, back goes the ET, and they can pay you for the usual tuning, 
but not the HT. (Assuming, of course, that they didn't ask for the HT 
themselves up front.)

A friend (who is also a piano tuner) put her own experience like this:
"They either say AHHHHhhhhhhhhh! or they say YUCKkkkkkk!" 

We were talking about the reactions of people when they heard a triad
with just thirds. (I'm of the Yuck persuasion.)

Perhaps Jim Coleman, Sr. could share his Coleman 11 with us pretty soon.
He put it on a Kawai grand at the California State Convention, and I got
to play it a bit. It is quite a strong Well, but most of the things we 
played on it in the Tuneoff sounded very musical to me. It beat the pure 5ths
over 80% of the time for me. 

When Jim played the Chopin Prelude #15 (in Db major) in the Coleman 11,
it sounded great to me. It was warm, sweet, and lilting. Then he moved 
it down to C major, and it sounded bland and gutless to me, quite lacking
in grace, and generally annoying. He put it back up -- sounded wonderful.

After that, I have a very different reaction than before to people who
talk about the distant keys of Well temperaments being harsh or depressing,
to be used for the expression of strong dark emotions.
 
My understanding is that Jim planned the Coleman 11 to be a very strong 
Well centered in C major, with the keys getting a progressively greater
color as they moved around the circle of fifths.

The proof is in the tasting, and we should all keep open minds as to 
what will be considered "good" or "bad." 

If the rest of the tuning is to my liking, equal temperament can sound
very good to me. De gustibus non disputandum est.

Susan


Susan Kline
P.O. Box 1651
Philomath, OR 97370
skline@proaxis.com		

"Time will end all my troubles, but I don't always
approve of Time's methods."
		-- Ashleigh Brilliant