historical vs. equal temperament

[David Porritt]

I promote the use of appropriate HTs here and offer to tune them.  I don't
really get any takers.  I'm glad I can do this.  Personally, I don't like
listening to HTs.  I have heard ET for 59 years, and the others just sound
"wrong" to me.  I admit it is just a personal preference not a value
judgement.  IMHO ET really is the final improved search for the ideal
temperament.

I also believe that there are key colors even in absolute ET.  I can't explain
how, but I hear it.  I've never been one to discount something simply because I
can't explain it.

dave

______________________________

David M. Porritt, RPT
Meadows School of the Arts
Southern Methodist University
Dallas, TX 75275
______________________________

Anne Beetem wrote:

> Ah, but Stephen, there is also the difference in absolute pitch.  I
> frequently transpose harpsichords to 392, 415, 440.  Even played with the
> same HT or ET, in the same "Key" (what does that mean now? if it is also
> related to absolute frequencies),   the same piece will sound different,
> throatier at 392, shriller at 440, changing the character.    A dear friend
> of mine tells me that when he hears his Sonatas for Harpsichord performed
> in the pitches other than the one he composed in, that he finds the changed
> character disturbing.  He does not have perfect pitch.
>
> Then, as you noted, there is the question of whether it was ET.   Is ET a
> theoretical absolute? Our instincts say yes,  the realities of
> inharmonicity on the piano mean something else again, and then,   how far
> off of ET are we before we are an HT?   Try some Granados in a late
> Victorian,  just slightly off ET.  In particular his C# Barcarolle in the
> Scenas Romanticas.   Play it in C#as written, then in C#  (a trivial
> transposition).
>
> Finally, yes, the position of the hand matters very much, the relative
> strengths of the fingers in the different configurations, though the truly
> skilled pianist does their best to circumvent this limitation, always
> aiming for the sound in the mind.
>
> Not only Chopin, but Beethoven and Czerny (as is evident in the fingerings
> from his exercises) were well aware of the different capabilities of
> different fingers on different notes in different hand positions.
>
> Anne (yes,  I thought I'd signed off, but apparently it hasn't gone through
> properly yet--glad it didn't, so I'm just using the speed delete method of
> maintenance, unless its properly good stuff)
>
> >There are only two possibilities here. Either the et was not really et or
> >what you are hearing is not a tuning/tonal observation but rather a
> >musical one. Now on this latter I will wax heretically...from my former
> >life as pianist I can recall a few discussions with various souls on that
> >point. In particular can the same composition played in two different keys
> >sound differently on a piano tuned in a perfect et? The boring
> >traditional answer is no. The heretical answer is maybe, for at least two
> >reasons: the position of the hand is quite different thereby resulting in
> >different tone production and (probably the most significant) the altered
> >position of the hand in various keys results in subtle differences in
> >phrasing...I have always thought and disagreed with former teachers etc.
> >to be an effect that is observable. Chopin commented on the significance
> >of this change in hand position for black key keys.
> >
> >Stephen
>
> Anne Beetem
> Harpsichords & Historic Pianos
> 2070 Bingham Ct.
> Reston, VA  20191
> abeetem@wizard.net