Coleman 11..Mr. Ed.

[JIMRPT@AOL.COM]

In a message dated 4/14/2000 6:26:44 PM, Ed F. wrote:

<< I was comparing mono-temperament environments to multi-temperament ones,  
not one instrument compared to another.>>

So was I Ed. Baseball is played with one bat and one ball whereas golf is 
played with one ball also but.... a larger selection of 'bats" :-) thus the 
difference between a tuner with just ET in his repertoire as opposed to one 
who has a selection of temperaments he is comfortable with. Don't tell a 
baseball fantatic or a golf addict that they aren't having "fun" or that they 
could have "more" "fun"
if they only played the other sport--- :-) It would of course might be 
different "fun" perhaps but "more fun"? We all like a little variety at times 
and perhaps that is what you are seeing in your 
customers...................BESIDES I am agreeing with you in general but 
disagreeing with your phraseology in 'three' instances.  The use of those 
words places an arrogance to your message/post that needn't be there, isn't 
there in your class or personal conversation.

<<"Well,  for starters, you will not find the word "historical" in my post.  
I try to be clear, but sometimes people infer stuff I didn't intend, sorry if 
this is one of them.">>
 Excuse me? Isn't this thread about a "Temperament Revival?" And the use of 
temperaments other than ET, ergo 'historic' or other 'modern' interpretations 
of historical tunings?...if not I guess I 'have' missed the point.

<<"What I am discussing is adding to ones tuning ability.  I think going to a 
multi-temperament world is a move forward.  There is music being written 
today in temperaments other than ET, and we can either be part of it, or 
anchor ourselves in the intonation that we inherited.">>

  It definitely would be a move for the large majority of tuners today, 
however.....a "move forward"? We ain't talking about "Back to the Future" 
here :-)
 We are talking about a more general use of 'historic' temperaments and those 
newer temperaments based on 'historical' theories aren't we?  Music has 
always been written in more than ET.....what's the point here?  Besides 
"anchors" aren't a bad thing to have aboard :-)

  The point I was trying to make was simply that something being new or 
different or revived does not make it  better anymore than one can say Sitar 
music is better than Piano music.....though they are difinitely different! 
Even then 'some' temperaments  I have heard sounded more akin to Sitar tuning 
than anything else. :-)

  So if'n y'all don lisen to me I gwan send some excess rattlesnakes to Masah 
Avery fo yo visit, or brings em to DC fo you. :-)
Jim Bryant (FL)