more on this temperament tangent

[David Love]

Beethoven did have perfect pitch, so the report goes.  Rather than the
modulation to the remote key of B being temperament driven, it seems more
likely that it holds musical meaning in the journey far away from the tonic
and is characteristic of his late compositions (for example the late string
quartets) that introduced some harmonic innovations.  Having perfect pitch,
that modulation would have meant a great deal to him as he would have had an
intuitive sense of the distance of that key from the tonic and its return.
It might be the musical manifestation of the story told more literally in
the piano sonata opus 81a.  The rest of us mortals must rely on following
these modulations by our developed skill of relative pitch, if we don't lose
our concentration for even a moment.  For him the contrast in keys was
apparent with or without differences accentuated by temperament.
Interestingly, reports by those who visited him, as mentioned in his several
biographies, tell of a piano never in tune, with so many broken strings that
when he played it, it seemed more noise than music.  Clearly his ability to
conceptualize his music extended far beyond the limitations of his own
keyboard and I think that would also include the constraints of temperament.

David Love

----- Original Message -----
From: <Tvak@AOL.COM>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: November 02, 2001 8:43 PM
Subject: Re: more on this temperament tangent


>
> In a message dated 11/2/01 8:48:20 AM, Billbrpt@AOL.COM writes:
>
> << Did composers simply say
> to themselves, "Gee, I think I'll write a symphony in D just because I
like D
> even though D sounds the same as all the other keys."? >>
>
> No, because it doesn't sound the same as other keys.  Each single note
sounds
> unique.  Even if there is no context, no chord, no temperament.  Just the
> single note.  And each one sounds different from the others.  Ask anyone
with
> perfect pitch, they'll tell you the same thing.  Now, did Beethoven have
> perfect pitch?  I don't know.  But I do believe that he chose the keys for
> his works for reasons other than temperament.  I think his choices were
> purely "temperamental".
>
> <<I find your statement at least as arrogant as you've accused Ed of
being.>>
>
> You're right...I didn't mean to escalate the discussion beyond an
appropriate
> level of civility.  (I should "temper" my comments so that no one loses
their
> "temper"!) I want to thank you all for a fascinating discussion which has
> made me think.  For instance, I wonder what was the intonation like in
> Beethoven's orchestra?  Today, professional symphony players play VERY in
> tune almost ALL the time.  I wonder if Beethoven's orchestra sounded more
> like one of our high school orchestras today? (intonation wise)  Did he
> choose the tonality of D for the NINTH SYMPHONY because it was one of the
> best keys for string instruments?  Not only can they can fly through the
> scalar passages, but their intonation will be much better in that key
than,
> say, Eb major.  Not because of any temperament, but because the open
strings
> provide a foundation of pitch.  Was he trying to insure that the piece
would
> be played more in tune?
>
> As you can probably tell, I'm not sure anyone made me change my opinions
in
> this chicken-or-the-egg topic, but the bottom line is...
>
> <<Unless you can prove that Temperament has *no* influence upon
composition,>>
>
> No one can prove that, nor can anyone prove the opposite.  I don't think I
> can say that temperament had *no* influence on composition.  That's such a
> blanket statement. All I really wanted to take objection to was the
comment
> that Beethoven wrote his Ninth Symphony in D because of the temperament of
> his era.  It's more likely he said, "Acch, I think I'll write a symphony
in
> the key of D because D sounds unique und that's the key I'm hearing it in
> mein kopf---it's a good key for strings, flute, oboe, UND...I can have the
> tympani play motivic material---ACCHtaves F to F!!!"  But then, who knows?
>
> I enjoyed the comments of everyone, on both sides of this issue.  Didn't
mean
> to ruffle any feathers, really...
>
> Tom Sivak