e.t. comment for your response

[Horace Greeley]

Frank, et al,

Once again, Owen strikes home.

In writing the following two sentences, he 
deconstructs the current myth (myth in the
sense of something which has an essence of truth
which may have been forgotten/changed over time)
of the importance of mathematical accuracy:

> 19th century tuning by ear was a highly developed
>art based on aesthetic judgments for every tone, and test chords were
>used more than test intervals.  By contrast, 20th century tuning is a
>mathematical skill."

Let me hasten to add that a reasonable understanding
of the mathematical tools applied in tuning is important.
What I continue to question is valuation of mathematical
accuracy (appropriately pointed out as a futile pursuit) above
musical quality.  Like so much else in art, this latter presumes
a "best one can reasonably possibly do under the given
circumstances" level of technical performance, but makes
allowances for the infinite variety of (human) experience
and ability.

The purpose of technique in art is to develop one's 
technique to the level that technical limitations do not
dictate one's artistic performance.  This is just as true
for tuning in the 20th Cent. as it was for Michelangelo,
VerMeer, or any other artist/art form one cares to think
of.  

Germane to this discussion is the comparison of two
works on tuning: Owen's "Tuning the Historical
Temperaments by Ear"; and the much earlier
work by J. Murray Barbour "Historical Temperaments"
(with a subtitle that does not spring to mind.  As
ground breaking as Murray's work was, it was dry
as old shoe leather.  Owen's, on the other hand, never
loses sight of music as being as much a listener's art
as anything else.  The one area in which I disagree
with Owen is that he takes the position that, prior
to (roughly) the 20th Cent., people could not hear
beats.  I find this to be inconsistent with the aurally
based tuning systems which he then presents.  No
doubt, a minority view.

Other thoughts?

Best.

Horace




At 03:04 PM 12/4/1997 -0500, you wrote:
>Stephen Birkett wrote:
>> 
>> In an on-going discussion on hpschd-l the following comments appeared:
>> ....
>> >> A.Streicher specifically states that the fifths beat equally. Your
>> >> statement makes the "naive" think than modern tuning  was in use in
>> >> 1800.
>> >Please define "modern tuning."  What I'm trying to say with this
>> >thread is that equal temperament or something very close to it was
>> >used in late 18th- early 19th-century music.  I don't know of any
>> >piano tuners who tune *perfect* ET on modern pianos.  Does this mean
>> >that modern pianos are tuned to circulating temperaments?
>> 
>> (neither of these is from me)
>> 
>> Any comments from you piano tuner guys and gals? Don't you all tune
>> perfect ET?
>> 
>> Stephen
>> 
>
>If I ever saw flame bait, this is it!  But, I’m a sucker for tuning
>arguments so here goes:
>
>It’s highly unlikely anyone ever tuned "perfect" ET.  Close maybe, but
>not perfect.  Even machine calculated tunings can’t be perfect because
>of the physical limitations of the instrument and the person translating
>the perfectly calculated theoretical tuning to a real tuning. 
>Furthermore,  if by chance, someone did happen set a perfect ET, it
>would last only as long as the first keystrokes.  We try to set
>"perfect" ET, and we get close, but attaining mathematical perfection is
>almost impossible.
>
>The definitive expert on the question has to be Jorgensen.  Here is SOME
>of what he has to say on the subject.
>
>"…… we must conclude that equal temperament as we know is was not tuned
>on pianos during the 19th century.  A study of the instructions for
>tuning given in the present book (by A. J. Ellis who invented the cent
>measurement)  for the years through 1885 verifies that essential
>acoustical information for tuning equal temperament was lacking.  This
>was one reason for the 19th century tuners’ inability to tune equal
>temperament by ear.  Other deviation was due to the basic concepts of
>tuning then in vogue.  19th century tuning by ear was a highly developed
>art based on aesthetic judgments for every tone, and test chords were
>used more than test intervals.  By contrast, 20th century tuning is a
>mathematical skill."
>
>
>Frank Weston
>
>
Horace Greeley

Systems Analyst/Engineer
Controller's Office
Stanford University

email: hgreeley@leland.stanford.edu
voice mail: 650.725.9062
fax: 650.725.8014