Broadwood Best

[Jason Kanter]

Jason said: 
| > Jorgensen goes to great lengths to correct Ellis's figures....

Ric replied:
...
|     I must commend you for publishing  figures of  temperaments in
| comparison to each other in a graphical format.  It is a novel
| approach utilizing recent technology.    It might be interesting
| to see such a comparison between Jorgensen's interpretation of
| Ellis's data and Ellis's original data.

Interesting idea. I will do that in the next edition of my charts ... the Ellis experiments in 1885 have had such a great impact on our current thinking, it makes sense to examine them freshly. After all, the Moore and the Broadwood Best, both courtesy of Ellis' research, are arguably the most frequently tuned historical temperaments these days.

|    When you publish the cents offsets of "Broadwood's Best"
| it is helpful (and necessary imho) to indicate that your figures
| are "corrections"  derived by somebody else 120 years later from
| the original.  

My website does state very clearly that almost all the historical data is taken from Jorgensen. At the time, I did not have the Helmholtz book, nor did I anticipate that Jorgensen's reasoning might be disputed. (I think the figures from Helmholtz, when charted, will show why Jorgensen reasoned as he did, that some notes must have slipped significantly. But we'll see, won't we? I will devote a section to Ellis.)

Meanwhile, I have precious little time for this endeavor. I need to work out a way to display beat synchrony. It might be summer before I get time to re-generate all the charts, and add the new temperaments developed by Wendell, Bailey, Koval, a bunch of theoretical ones by some mathematicians on the Tuning List, and even a decent modified meantone by Mr. Bill Himself.