I don't think the evidence is thin: I think the evidence is substantial; however I consider the weight of the evidence to show that the practice was uncommon--but important, worth debating.
In other words the "thinness" is in the number of people who practiced the technique, rather than in the solid evidence that it was used. Actually, I wish I could be thinner as well; it can be a good thing. As for the "staggered" frets only being made of ivory, that seems a bit of a stretch. I love the expression "en pied de mouche", though, if it really means "fly-steps"--It could mean almost anything, I think.... perhaps a bunch of tastini would look like flysteps, like viewing theorbos from the moon. Not to mention the Locke meantone piece for Trois Mouche-quetaires. Apologies in advance, dt At 02:57 PM 6/18/2008, you wrote: >Dear Jean-Marie, > >You are right that evidence for tastini is thin on the ground, so all >the more reason not to overlook the evidence provided by Christopher >Simpson. In his _Compendium_ he mentions the use of an extra first fret >by some players of the viol and theorbo. I have the modern edition of >the original 2nd edition of 1667, edited by Philip Lord (Oxford: Basil >Blackwell, 1970). The relevant passage begins on page 51: > >"I do not deny but that the slitting of the keys in harpsichords and >organs, as also the placing of a middle fret near the top or nut of a >viol or theorbo where the space is wide, may be useful in some cases for >the sweetening of such dissonances as may happen in those places; but I >do not conceive that the enharmonic scale is therein concerned, seeing >those dissonances are sometimes more, sometimes less, and seldom that >any of them do hit precisely the quarter of a note." > >He goes on to say that singers, violinists, and players of wind >instruments, can adjust the pitch of their notes, unlike players of >keyboards and fretted instruments. The fact that fretted instruments >sound out of tune when they modulate to less familiar keys, must surely >mean that he has in mind unequal fretting for them. This passage is so >important in relation to the present discussion, that I feel it is worth >reproducing Simpson's next two paragraphs, in spite of their length: > >"Now as to my opinion concerning our common scale of music, taking it >with its mixture of the chromatic, I think it lies not in the wit of man >to frame a better as to all intents and purposes for practical music. >And as for those little dissonances (for so I call them) for want of a >better word to express them) the fault is not in the scale, whose office >and design is no more than to denote the distances of the concords and >discords according to the lines and spaces of which it doth consist, and >to show by what degrees of tones and semitones a voice may rise and >fall. > >For in vocal music those dissonances are not perceived, neither do they >occur in instruments which have no frets as violins and wind instruments >where the sound is modulated by the touch of the finger; but in such >only as have fixed stops or frets, which being placed and fitted for the >most usual keys in the scale, seem out of order when we change to keys >less usual, and that (as I said) doth happen by reason of the inequality >of tones and semitones, especially of the latter." > >Best wishes, > >Stewart. > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Jean-Marie Poirier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: 18 June 2008 21:58 >To: lute >Subject: [LUTE] Re: Meantone > >Dear David, > >Thank you for your reply. Of course I agree about most of your >assertions, but I am still very reluctant to adhere to the general >enthusiasm regardin the so-called "tastini". As a matter of fact, I know >only one source mentioning this practise : Galilei's Fronimo. One late >sixteenth-century source is a rather slim piece of evidence to >acknowledge this idea as an almost universal solution to MT tuning >problems, including earlier and later repertoire, don't you think ? >Or maybe you know of other sources describing or explaining clearly this >practise. I don't. Bermudo, Gerle, Le Roy, Dowland, Praetorius, Mersenne >(more or less in chronological order) do not mention this technique for >tuning their lutes "properly". >The passage of Jean Denis (a harpsichord maker in fact, who like all >harpsichord specialists looked down on the lute or viol as an imperfect >instrument because of their supposed tuning limitations) that I sent >earlier in the day speaks of placing frets "en pied de mouche", i.e. in >a broken line, ("staggered" as Mark Lindley translates in his book >"Lutes, Viols and Temperaments, OCambridge UP, 1984), not slanted at >all, and that is the reason why he concludes by saying that this can be >done by using ivory frets, that can be cut and placed accordingly... >Hardly "tastini" or very drastic ones indeed. >It's true that this sort of fancy fretting was used for some citterns >and maybe bandoras (I am not sure ) but these were metal-strung, not >gut-strung, and doesn't this make a difference in terms of practical >intonation ? > >Anyway, the bulk of historical evidence is clearly in favour of a more >or less equal temperament when considering fretted instruments like >lutes or viols, and the ear of the musician (not the OT-12 or any other >tuner ;-) usually is recommended to be given the last "word", which, >after all, sounds very reasonnable to me. > >All the best, > >Jean-Marie > > > > >To get on or off this list see list information at >http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
