<html> At 11:51 AM 4/26/2002 -0700, you wrote: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>S= usan: When called for bad intonation, a certain type of string student would start= furiously tuning the open strings. My teacher would say, "That's only= four notes ..." I think you are missing the point= . . .  it is a valid anecdote though.</blockquote> Bradley, we are suffering from malocclusion of argument. You had just talked= about a study which apparently said that string players determined interval= size (and therefore intonation) not by melodic contours or other musical= qualities, but instead solely in order to acquire resonance from open= strings. This seems so strange to me that I feel your explanation of the= studies you cite must be lacking. I asked what happened when these string= players played in B major (where, on the cello, not a single open string is= part of the key) and I added this anecdote showing that string players= should, and can, be able to play more in tune than the open strings if they= are slightly off. That is, they are not chained to the open strings, but= rather can adjust pitch to match other players, other instruments, piano= accompaniments, etc. So, what do you do when you put on a new string, and it pulls flat? Aside= from stopping at every opportunity to tune it up, of course. Do you just= play flatter on the other strings, because the new string has better= resonance that way? (I know, this is silly ... but then, this whole= discussion is silly.) Well, it= sounds like to me you should have continued to listen to your open strings.= How do you know you are in-tune if you never listen to your other strings= (I do not mean physically play them)? I ask again -- how do you "listen to your other= strings" when you are playing in a key which doesn't include them? Do= you then feel that you play better in tune in keys which include open= strings, and worse in more distant keys? Maybe we should stop playing the= Brahms B major trio, because we can't check with our open strings? You are= confusing interval size and strings' natural variation in key color. Sorry, I think you are doing this. I was talking interval size,= and you brought up the color of the open strings. For me, interval size= should be the same in all keys. You were saying that interval size should= be determined by the resonance of open strings. Here: I'll quote you: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Susan, string players do not= melodically temper intervallic movement. You may feel that way for a completely different reason than you think. Sufficient psychoacoustical research has been conducted to show that musicians do not have sufficient ability to melodically place a= succession of notes. String players generally place notes based on open-string sympathetic vibration: intervals are tempered in such a way to make the other three strings sympathetically vibrate. This makes the instrument "ring" and have an "open" sound. I'm sure that at some= point in your cello career someone told you to "check it with the open= string?"</blockquote> This seems to be saying that string players are incapable of placing notes= or making accurate intervals in distant keys. Did you really mean to say= this? Maybe we should just eliminate everything with more than three sharps or= flats? Okay, let's tackle this head-on, before putting it to rest. I feel that when several people play together, they try to adjust to each= other, which is easier if their personal sense of interval size is fairly= close, and harder if some have "barber shop ears" or just can't= control intonation very well, or have a fondness for sharping just= slightly, because it enhances their sound. It is easiest, of course, when= one of the instruments is a piano, which gives a much less capricious basis= than instruments which are infinitely adjustable for pitch, like strings,= voice, trombone, etc. When one person plays solo, it is more like a cantor or an unaccompanied= choir. It is harder to keep an even keel, but one's tonal memory (the poor= relative of absolute pitch) will help to keep one in pitch. Physical memory= of position helps put some limits on how far one can stray, but nowhere= nearly good enough ones to play really in tune. I still don't think that= one could do something like play a G and say to oneself, "is the D= string resonating well with that?" (no? well, maybe I should try going= sharp -- now is it good? no? I guess I should have gone flat ... AH, that's= just right) As you can see, I'm not understanding your position clearly at all.= Bolstering it with your degrees and the famous groups you have studied with= is not helping. We should probably call it a day. But first, I must mention= one thing which has happened a number of times from several people in this= thread: they talk about "just intervals" and seem to make no= distinction between just octaves, fourths, fifths, -- versus thirds and= sixths. (Just what they would call a just second or seventh, I can't guess= ...) For me, octaves, fourths, and fifths (and their relatives in other= octaves) should be as just as we can get them. But not thirds or sixths.= They just don't work harmonically or melodically that way. A= "good" string major second is slightly larger than a tempered= one, and a "good" string minor second is slightly smaller, or= maybe a lot smaller if it is an important leading tone. If you add these= "good" intervals, you just don't get beatless thirds or sixths.= The major thirds are far too close to the size of minor thirds if both are= beatless, and I hear these as terribly unmusical. They add a rootless and= ambiguous feeling to the playing, and they take away the strength of= harmonic progressions. If you love them and think that the whole string-playing world backs your= position -- carry on. We are not going to agree, so why bother trying to?= If we sat down together with instruments, we could probably clarify a lot,= but we are unlikely to. Sincerely, Susan Kline </html>