The T word, (was Thumper Board)

[A440A@aol.com]

Greetings, 
 Bill writes: 
<< I think the point is that the majority of Great Composers did not 
arrive until the piano tuning industry was well in place. Which was 
why Bach was such a rarity, almost as rare as his piano. The real 
flourishing of Great Composers was made possible once composers were 
freed from the onerous task of tuning their own keyboards. >>

   I must respectfully disagree.  Mozart and Haydn composed well before the 
piano tuning industry was well in place,(dang, there just has to be a double 
meaning in there somewhere, but let's not get temperamental, yet). 
       The earliest pianos were so lightly strung that tuning them would have 
only been marginally more difficult than tuning a harpsichord. I say that 
from a point of view that is more logical  empirical.  I have limited experience 
with fortepianos, but after doing the "5-ply  wrestle with the wrest-planks" 
for so many years, those early models that I have encountered just laid there 
and allowed me to have my way with impunity. 
   Jorgensen posits that the trade of tuner began to form in the early 1800s, 
and yes, there was much great composition that took place afterward. However, 
it is illogical to think that a radical, new style of tuning appeared all at 
once.  Tuners of the time learned from their elders, and trade secrets were 
closely guarded.  There would have to have been one or several generations pass 
before the trade as a whole discarded the past.   I don't see how the task of 
tuning could have been an impediment to the flourishment of the great 
composers.  All accounts of Beethoven seem to indicate that his own pianos were in 
disastrous shape. 

    Which brings up the question of temperament, (hah, didn't think we could 
talk about history, composers,and tuning without it, did ya?).  The early 
keyboards were tuned by their users or musicians.  Choir masters, keyboard 
teachers,etc.  There is much info on tuning practises that Jorgensen gleaned from 
publications that were aimed at the users, ie, tuning instructions included in 
printed music tracts.   Even that early rebel, Claude Montal, published his 
bearing plan for equal temperament in 1832 in a booklet titled, "How to tune your 
own piano". So, we may accept that even in 1832 it was expected that piano 
owners assume the task of tuning.  This was five years after the death of 
Beethoven and four years after the death of F. Schubert!  
   If we give some credence to the idea that keyboards were still tuned by 
owners, piano teachers, musicians, or other "part-timers" in the early 1800's, 
then we have some reason to believe that ET was still not being achieved.  I 
say this because ET is the most difficult way to tune a piano, and it is 
implausible that it could be done by those that doesn't do it all the time.  Even 
today, with all the instruction in the world, plus 100 years of familiarity with 
the sound of ET, I have never seen a part-timer come very close.   Combine the 
weight of historical precedence with the ease of tuning any of the 
well-temperaments and it is no stretch to consider that most pianos in the early 1800's 
were tuned in something other than ET. It "could" have happened, but I don't 
think it was anywhere near common.    Now, to other items on the Chopin 
Liszt......
   Chopin was recorded as being saddened by the death,(by suicide) of his 
favorite piano tuner.  It seems that his tuner was able to achieve a tuning that 
was particularly valued by Chopin. What does this tell us?  I think there are 
several possibilites we may consider.   One is that his tuner was capable of 
actually producing a very even ET and for this reason he was so highly 
regarded.  If this ability was so special at that time, does it not perhaps indicate 
that in 1850 the ability to tune ET was still a very special thing?  And, by 
extrapolation, the majority of tuning was still shaped along WT lines?  If ET 
was common at the time, why would a tuner that could produce it be so special to 
Chopin, afterall  ET is ET is ET.  
   The second consideration is that his tuner was able to shape a WT to a 
very specific palette that appealed to Chopin.  Since WT is a genre instead of a 
specific tuning, and individual tuners of 1840, lacking an RCT or SAT would 
have had varying results in their work, Chopin could have found the guy with the 
taste that suited him.  
   I suppose a third consideration is that Chopin was such a neurotic artist 
that his attachment to this tuner was based on totally unrelated things.  I 
dunno.  Hearing the music of Chopin on WT, Reverse WT,(the DeMorgan), and ET, I 
am unconvinced that there is an optimum tuning for it.  It seems to work well 
in various tunings. Not so Beethoven or Rachmaninoff.  To my ear, they both 
composed music that definitely makes use of the characteristics of the tuning in 
their eras.  
Thoughts, anyone?  


Ed Foote RPT 
www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/
www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/well_tempered_piano.html
 <A HREF="http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/399/six_degrees_of_tonality.html">
MP3.com: Six Degrees of Tonality</A>