<HTML>In a message dated 2/25/02 1:23:47 PM Central Standard Time, JD@Pianomaker.co.uk (John Delacour) writes: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">From what I've read here recently of what Jorgensen says, I think I'll stick with authors that base their writings on historical fact rather than opinion and conjecture. </BLOCKQUOTE> Jorgensen's book is full, page after page of documentation that supports his finding. I only wish I had the time to quote even a little of it.  Basically, what I see in the 18th and 19th Centuries is the same back and forth struggle which is occurring presently.  People seem to want from a 12 tone system something they cannot really have. At some point, the ultimate compromise is discovered or proposed, it sounds like a good idea and a lot of people "jump on the bandwagon" only to have some people revert to older practices after everyone thought all of the issues had been decided and settled. The specifications provided in your recent post would not insure a good piano tuning by today's standards.  It might be possible but the likelihood that some kind of cumulative error would produce unintended and unrecognized effects is very high.  This goes for Braide White's instructions and for many others too.  WIthout the understanding of the 4:5 ratio of contiguous 3rds, ET is next to impossible to get exactly right every time. The idea that errors in tuning other temperaments would be just as commonplace as when attempting ET and have the same unintended effects is not really true.  Ron Koval made some very interesting graphs which showed this.  It is rather easy to turn ET into some kind of Meantone, Well-Temperament or as I have often lamented, Reverse Well but to make mistakes and have the temperament come out perfectly equal is among the remotest of possibilities.  Errors made in the HT's merely produce variants of these while not changing the intended effects while errors in ET produce unintended effects which ruin the desired equality. <<and, referring to equal temperament: "...the pianoforte is doubtless a very useful instrument for making the acquaintance of musical literature, or for domestic amusement or for accompanying singers.  But for artistic purposes its importance is not such as to require its mechanism to be made the basis of the whole system of music.">> Yet we do use the piano and other keyboards for just that:  the foundation of nearly all music composition.  When I tune a piano in the EBVT, I can really "hear" or imagine what the orchestra will sound like much easier than with ET. <<...and a lot more besides in various places.  Helmholtz was a fervent advocate of JUST intonation and would probably commend your work highly as an attempt to relieve the unpleasantness of equal temperament which he felt most keenly.>> Now, this is interesting because my impression of Helmholtz was that he was the King of the ET only mad scientists.  However, my EBVT has all tempered tonalities.  There is a sprinkling of just intonation, yes but any triad has a tempered 3rd or minor 3rd.  The Equal Beating effect does hide some of the tempering and in context, makes much early music sound as if it is being played on a far more restrictive temperament.  This leaves the remote keys within a range that even the most HT resistant ears usually find palatable. If Helmholtz would have liked that, maybe he wasn't so bad after all.  But I must say that these "Just Intonation" tunings I've heard on the piano really turn my stomach.  I can't ever imagine that becoming popular.  Listen for yourself.  Try this link but don't be surprised if it makes you lose your dinner! http://www.newmusicbox.com/32/audio/harrison1.ram Bill Bremmer RPT Madison, Wisconsin <A HREF="http://www.billbremmer.com/">Click here: -=w w w . b i l l b r e m m e r . c o m =-</A> </HTML>