more on this temperament thing

[Tom Servinsky]

Ed,
Footnotes below
----- Original Message -----
From: <A440A@AOL.COM>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 10:30 PM
Subject: Re: more on this temperament thing


> Sorry for the double post, the first one went out on accident.
>
> When I wrote: '
> <<Both Steinway artists here in Nashville have told me they are never
going
> back to ET >>
>
> Tom wrote:
> >>I'm guessing that these artists are not playing Chopin in Nashville.
Could
> it be that the country tunes they play in Nashville are mostly in the keys
of
> C, D, G, and A?
>
>     These two are classical artists, Marilyn Shields-Wiltsie and Enid
Katahn.
>  They have nothing to do with the country tunes.
>
> Tom again:
> >>I would actually like to learn a non-equal temperament that favors the
keys
> of C and G.  So many of the pianos I tune have young students who play the
> piano.  They would never play an Ab major triad.
> Would it be possible to use a temperament which would maximize the
> in-tuneness of all the white notes?  Is there an un-equal temperament that
> would serve this purpose?
>
>    Virtually ALL the well-temperaments "favor" the keys of C and G.  It is
a
> characteristic of the genre that the keys with the fewest accidentals have
> the most consonant thirds, although these keys have more highly tempered
> fifths,(remember, thirds and fifths work in opposition).  There will be a
few
> keys with near-14 cent tonic thirds, and a few with the full wazoo of a
> syntonic comma.  The Young has one, F#-A#,  the Broadwood's have none,
etc.
>   Steve Fairchild promoted what was actually a Valotti temperament for
just
> this clientele.  His rationale is, "Why compromise the keys that are used
all
> the time just to make the ones that are NEVER used the same?"   If we are
to
> attempt to provide the greatest amount of resonance and harmony from the
> instrument, we must reduce the dissonance.  That can be done in a variety
of
> ways, however, one fact augers for the conventional well-temperament. That
is
> that in any of the WT's,  the sum total of dissonance is reduced from ET,
> unless the piano is played in all keys equally.  This is not the normal
> distribution of key signature, however.  The keys with more than 4
> accidentals are played nowhere near as much as those with less.  This
holds
> true especially for the consoles and spinets used by the millions of
complete
> amatuers out there for whom music is a special and enjoyed activity.  Most
of
> these players will never learn a piece if F#, so why compromise all those
> thirds that they do use, just to make sure F# is identical to everyone
else?
> That is one reason to re-evaluate the exclusive use of ET.
>    I found it very interesting that Oleg tells us the Paris tuners are not
> using strict ET,  just the young ones!  I am sorta surprised, probably
> because of the heavy, and I do mean heavy, idealization of ET above all
else
> that is very predominant in the American piano trade.   This  is slowly
> changing,  I can see that,  but the preponderance is there and it may make
us
> erroneously think the rest of the world is doing the same thing.
>      I wonder what they are doing in Germany or Russia?  If I understand
> correctly, Steinway factory tuners are stretching their tunings into pure
> fifths by the 5th octave.  Is that a departure from perfect ET?
> Regards,
> Ed Foote

Ed,
As far as the 5ths are concerned, strectching them to be pure, is that a
departure from ET. Ok, I'll buy that.
But I would rather call it "tempering" the ET, because still the basic
premise is it working on as evenly as a progression of 10th,17th,23rds, and
so for. The big difference,for the sake of having the upper registers  not
sounding too flat to many trained musicians, is making a conscience point in
the scale to increase the beat speed to accomodate the transgression  into a
purer 5th. An interesting point that you raise because I have found myself
tempering those octaves (5-7th) to make them more musical than straight ET
offers.  And that would tuning would currently fail the RPT exam.
So I'll come clean....
I personally have a problem with some of the features of ET...like
contracted 5ths. I hate it, it's not musical, it doesn't follow any
rationalle other than help the algebraic equation end of the issue find
resolve. I also don't care for a busy rapid progression of 3rds in
temperament section as it destroys the warmth of the piano. So the delimna
is do I sacrifice the octave stretch to  open the 5th or do I go wide, get
the pure 5th, and sacrifice with extremely busy 3rd's. And then there's
somewhere in the middle where a musical decision  can accomodate both. Which
is where I tend to be. Not an obvious contracted 5th, not much but just
enough to satisfy the equation.
It's when I get to the 5th octave that I consciencly move  and the 5th will
begin openning up and the tuning begins to take on another flavor. A much
more musical flavor, yet still with the basic of ET. Is that still ET?
....your call.
I guess my dicotomy is I'm trained and current performing symphony musician.
I have my degrees in music. I've studied it all my life. I perform as a
pianist as well. Plus, obviously, I work on these critters. In symphony work
we always aim for absolutely clean 3rds. If your part is playing E4, and a
C4 and G4 is being played, you better make sure you are centered dead on.
There's no grey area in symphony work.
Digress  to tuning of a piano...entirely different set of principles. Yet
somewhere in the end, and amazing as it is, the 2 can exist on stage
blending as though little or no problems exist.
Tom Servinsky,RPT
>
>