Doug writes:
>Wouldn't the discussion of temperaments happening now on this list be part
> of the historical record? And they seem to be near constant. I dare say
> there is debate happening over ET's worth.
Greetings,
Yes, I agree. This is a very late-breaking thing, like the last 10
years or so. Owen
s book on how to tune by ear just didn't seem to start anything, and before
that, there seems to be virtually nothing to say after Braid-White.
> When did the ET era come into being?
This is a widely debated date, I have heard 1830 from some historians,but
they hadn't much to support how likely it was. Others think perhaps 1920. I
am regarding the 20th century as the the apex of ET's influence. By the turn
of the century, I think there was enough ET around to begin exerting an
influence on composition. Others will take serious issue with this.
I think we have to listen to the music in a variety of temperaments to
make an intelligent choice.
>Did all other temperaments languish by the way side until somebody
> decided to dust them off again?
Yes, Murry Barbour, Claudio Veroli, Owen Jorgensen and others.
>If ET is truely harder
>to tune then an HT why did the industry drift to something more complicated?
The industry find that standardization is cheaper than anything else. (that
ain't flame bait, just a plausible impetus toward ET)
>
>I realize that there are some deep seated emotions and attachments to this
> subject and I'm in no way trying to get anybody bent out of shape.
Ah yes, emotions. It is good to have'em, but far more meeting of the
minds can occur when they are held in some semblance of check.
Well, Ron and Jim are both valued correspondants, and it would be a
bland world indeed if we all thought the same, identical thing. That there
is ongoing debate on the topic means that there is change and learning
occurring. And that is what we are here for, no?
Regards,
Ed Foote
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC