HT's (RE:Susan Kline's post)

[Gregory Torres]

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
Dear Susan,

Bravo! Amen!

You have pretty much nailed it on the head. You have said very eloquently what I
have been trying to say all along regarding HT's.

There is definitely a time and place for them but I have grown to appreciate ET
simply because it opens up so many musical possibilities with much freedom. While
ET is a compromise (as is any temperament) it is still a beautiful design,
allowing much chordal and tonal freedom. While I can appreciate that other
temperaments offer
a more pure tonal harmony in certain keys/chords the fact is that the other keys
or intervals suffer horribly, and for me, being able to play a wide variety of
music from different eras makes ET the best choice. JMHO

Regards,
Greg Torres


Susan Kline wrote: (Major Snips)

> Dear John,
>
> 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.
>
> 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?"

> >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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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



---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/3a/48/5d/e0/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--