<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD><TITLE></TITLE> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY> For those who like the visual display: here it is. A dromedary temperament with two humps. <IMG src="cid:109120805@12042006-1011"> Another aspect that may or may not turn out relevant to the nuanced sound/feel of a temperament is the beat ratio within a triad. E.g., in the C major triad the minor third EG and the major third CE beat in a ratio of ~2.5 to 1 (or 5 to 2). The supposition is that nice clean single number ratios make for a nice "tremolo" effect -- ET has a m/M beat ratio of about 1.7. Here is the graph of the Bach-Lehman beat ratios, suggesting that keys of C and F are pretty close to 5/2, G and D pretty close to 2/1, and E, B and Gb just about 3/2 ... maybe this makes it sound nice?? Unclear until other temperaments are compared in this way .. but interesting for the nonce: <IMG src="cid:109120805@12042006-1018"> (For more along these lines visit <A href="http://rollingball.com/TemperamentsFrames.htm">http://rollingball.com/TemperamentsFrames.htm</A>) <DIV class=Section1> || ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || ||| || Jason Kanter . jkanter@rollingball.com Piano tuning, regulation, repair Serving Seattle and the San Juans <BIG>425.830.1561</BIG>  </DIV> -----Original Message----- From: pianotech-bounces@ptg.org [<A href="mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org">mailto:pianotech-bounces@ptg.org</A>] On Behalf Of A440A@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 8:37 PM To: pianotech@ptg.org Subject: Re: Feedback or Controversy on Bach/Lehman's temperament ?  << Did any of you try the Bach/Lehman temperament >(<<A href="http://larips.com">http://larips.com</A>><A href="http://larips.com">http://larips.com</A>) ?  Is it good, Great or just common ? Do you believe >it IS the original J.S.Bach's temperament ? etc... >> Greetings,        First, there are three questions, and two of them unanswerable.  I have tried this tuning on a piano, and it had some nice qualities, however, I don't know that we can classify these temperaments as great, good, or common without having some agreed upon ideal.  An ideal from which their departure can be measured.   I would suggest the Young, with perfect symmetry from one beat a second in C to a full comma in F#, it follows Werckmeister's rules).             Unlike ET, well-temperaments create a tonal palette and some were better for particular composers than others. The Bach-Lehman is milder at both extremes than a number of widely published temps in that the C-E and  F-A thirds are tempered about 6 cents and the most expressive third is the E-G# at almost 20 cents.  In terms of Jorgensen's definition of harmonic balance, it is poorly balanced.  It might be head and shoulders above any other temperment for the music of a composer that used it to write the music, but in general terms, it is somewhat out of step with a lot of the other temperments.       I doubt that Bach had the same tuning under his hands all the time, so the idea someone finding  "his" temperament seems rather specious to me.  It is plausible that he was using a well temperment, since much of his stuff is rather greviously interrupted by wolves when played on meantone.  Which WT is a matter of conjecture.  I have listened to the WTC on a Kirnberger III and reveled in how expressive some highly tempered 17ths were.  Their speed is only slightly varied in the milder forms, and it would take a more educated ear than mine to actually hear the difference between a Kirnberger and a Werckmeister.   Some of the latest research into Bach's tuning involves a code of sorts that graces the front cover of the WTC.   It contains the reversed image of a series of notes, and has been "decoded" to give a tuning that is making some rather strenuous claims to authenticity.           Even though we may not be able to discern the exact differences between temperaments upon listening, (and we gotta admit, this is nuance level stuff),  there IS a difference in what the sensitive performer feels, and any given temperament's reception will be a product of the technician's choice and the performer's expectations.   I favor an ultra-conservative approach.  I keep the concert pianos in a Moore and Company "Victorian" era well-temperament as their default tuning.  I can call it a "quasi-equal" tuning around most of the faculty without causing alarm.  It can move into a Broadwood tuning or ET without anything having to move over three cents.  All our pianos are used for a wide variety of stuff, accompanying all sorts of instruments, and nobody has said a word about the lack of equality.  There are numerous pianists that really like the pianos, though.          I have moved one of them into a Coleman 11 for an all Mozart and Schubert program and it went over well.  Mixed programs might force a compromise so that the later pieces don't get "bent" by something best suited for a century before.         The Bradley Lehman tuning seemed harsh in places I didn't expect it.  I remember E and A both  verging on uncomfortable for me. Since the piano's vastly different overtone spectrum may make a caricature out of a temperament that was nicely colorful on a harpsichord or fortepiano,  I don't know what this tuning would sound like on a more authentic instrument, but regardless, the balance is still sorta weird.  Regards, Ed Foote RPT <A href="http://www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/index.html">http://www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/index.html</A> www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/well_tempered_piano.html </BODY></HTML>