more on this temperament thing

[David Love]

My observation is that HT's (and I mean generally well temperaments and not
mean tone temperaments) work fine in music with a tonal center.  Drifting
out of the tonic briefly offers a different character which sometimes
enhances the modulation.  Once you get into music without a tonal center,
i.e. some impressionist music, jazz, etc., then ET is better as you don't
want key differences to be enhanced.

David Love


----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Servinsky" <tompiano@gate.net>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: October 18, 2001 4:27 AM
Subject: Re: more on this temperament thing


> Ed,
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't be safe to say that one of the
> underlining reasons Well-Tempered and Mean Tone Tempered tunings were
> mandatory in their days, irate beat structures in some of the keys were
one
> of the only features which demonstrated excitable sound change. By that I
> mean, seeing that there was no means of changing volume in early
keyboards,
> coupled with the mode of composition during those days( lack of
modulation)
> HTs was one  mean, which in some obscure way, a tuner could illustrate
> volume and excitement change.  Otherwise the early keyboards were almost
> completely monolithic. The usefulness of HT in those instruments are not
> arguable.
>  For my tastes,  G minor in a Broadwood's Best Tuning, captures the
essence
> of darkness as well as anything I have ever heard.   Playing a Chopin
> Nocturne in G minor sends goose bumps down my spine.  I'm less inclined to
> give credit to the temperament lending itself to beauty,  but applaud more
> to the genius of Chopin who had to figure and find a architecture that
would
> demonstrate his ideas.
> But on the whole, I find a lot of the "colors" in the high # keys (E Maj,
B
> Maj, etc) to negate the overall beauty HTs have to offer. For that reason
I
> know longer make a practice of tuning HT. I've studied it, I practiced it,
I
> tried selling it to my clientele, and I tried selling to my PTG chapter. I
> did the campaign thing trying to convert clients to HT, but except for a
> few, all have requested that their instruments be put back in the
> temperament they knew and understood, equal temperament.
>  The big problem that I had, as well as my clientele, is trying to
convince
> myself why F# Major should sound pleasing and not completely distasteful,
or
> any of the extreme color keys for that matter.
> On that note, no pun intended, I find it difficult to make the point that
> HTs are inherently better and somehow bring a purer sense of musicality to
> the music than ET. With today's instruments with incredible  volume and
> tonal capabilities combined with an EXTREMELY WELL TUNED ET,equal
> temperament is still  as an extremely refined, flexible, and finely
> constructed temperament capable of demonstrating and capturing the FULL
> range of music in all keys.
> Now for teaching purposes, which is what  your thread is about, there's no
> question that exposing earlier temperaments to studying musicians is
> applaudable. This brings them one step closer to experience and understand
> the  temperaments earlier composers had at  their fingertips.
> I still wonder  how Chopin, Mozart, or Beethoven, would be composing if
they
> were in today's world playing on today's instruments. I personally feel,
> they too would favor the flexibility of ET. Of course, that's pure
> speculation!
> Tom Servinsky,RPT
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Thomas Cole" <tcole@cruzio.com>
> To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 12:47 AM
> Subject: Re: more on this temperament thing
>
>
> >
> >
> > A440A@AOL.COM wrote:
> > >
> > >     For the last three years I have been giving temperament
> presentations to
> > > technicians and musical groups,(teachers, students, etc.).  These two
> groups
> > > react in very different ways, and I have altered my procedures
> accordingly.
> > > The techs represent a hard sell, the musicians just roll over in
> epiphanies.
> >
> > Ed, I am both a musician and a technician and, as afar as pianos are
> > concerned, the historical temperaments always strike me as out of tune -
> > because the number of beats are "incorrect" to my beat-counting ears.
> > The non-smooth progression of beats has always triggered that response
> > in me.
> >
> > On another note, I used to listen to my dad play chamber music with
> > friends at home when I was a child, and I loved to hear how good string
> > players would alter certain pitches to express the music. But this was
> > not the same as a piano tuned to HT because the flattened or sharpened
> > notes would change according to the key they were playing in, the mood
> > of the piece, whether they were ascending or descending the scale, etc.
> > They had the ability to change their "temperament" on the fly and could
> > vary the amount of sharpness or flatness to suit the moment.
> >
> > Getting back to the piano, an unequally tempered tuning cannot adjust as
> > one modulates through a series of key changes, although it would be
> > interesting to hear a keyboard that was programmed in such a manner
> >
> >
> > > From a technical and professional standpoint, the change of
temperament
> is
> > > viewed with extreme suspicion.  From the musician's, I have found that
> > > well-temperaments excite them, stimulates a closer look at the
> repertoire,
> > > and gives me some input into musical expression.  This is at the root
of
> my
> > > commitment to offering a wide variety of temperament.
> > > >>I know it's not politically correct to say it, but I like ET, and
the
> more
> > > E the better!!<<
> > >    I don't think there is anything politically incorrect other than
> > > condemnation of others that choose paths unlike our own.  I like ET
> also,
> > > just not for EVERYTHING.
> > > Thanks for the note.
> > > Regards,
> > > Ed Foote RPT
>