I haven't read Isacoff so cannot comment directly. From knowing Isacoff only via your brief citation, Leonard, there is a point to be made in the "straight-frets" argument that seems to have been missed. Setting unsegmented frets on any lute-like instrument into any non-equal temperament scheme is not like tuning the individual keys of a keyboard. By setting straight frets under fretted strings, one sets up a series of parallel temperament schemes based from the intervals of the open strings. As one moves to remote keys on a keyboard in any non-equal temperament scheme, there is a logical descent into "colorful" dissonance. Not so much so on a fretted instrument; the progression becomes in illogical jumble calling more notes on the fretboard that do not fit the intended temperament. This can be mitigated by "segmenting" frets via tastini, paired frets of differing thickness, the "enharmonic" guitars of the early-mid 19th c., etc., but I don't think there is evidence that the practice of segmenting frets was ever status quo.
I also want to point out, once again, Bartolotti's first guitar book (Florence 1640, Minkoff 1984) in "mixed tablature", making a fair use of alfabeto chords engaging every string along with punteado passages. It opens with a series of passcaglias, one in each key and each ending on a cadential chord that seems to introduce the next. The implication is at least the possibility for through performance with (assumed) unsegmented frets. Without allowing time to reposition frets, that just wouldn't be practical without an effort to approximate equal temperament. All temperament is compromise. Again, different musics seem to allow for different temperament schemes in almost any era. There's nothing wrong with one temperament or the other (or, more correctly, something is wrong someplace with each). I would argue more should be willing to indulge, at least occasionally, in both non-equal and equal temperaments as the musical occasion seems to call for it as determined by the performer (unless explicitly prescribed by a composer...which certainly isn't often, thus these recurring debates). Enjoy, Eugene ----- Original Message ----- From: Leonard Williams <[email protected]> Date: Friday, September 25, 2009 8:44 pm Subject: [LUTE] Re: [LUTE]New lute music and ET To: Lute List <[email protected]> > I just read a book > called "Temperament" by Stuart Isacoff. (Liked > the Duffin book much better). The author insists that > tuning for fretted > instruments (using the lute as a prime example) was always and > had to have > been in ET because the frets go straight across the fingerboard > (!!!). How > does he think they tuned frets to ET without moving the frets > until things > sounded in tune: I think usually just or some meantone > intonation would > result. The author as much as states that ET was an ideal > that they kept > striving for, but never really says it was achieved on a level > other than > mathematical. In the end he shares wondrous appreciation > or the piano music > of Michael Harrison: he plays and composes for his > Harmonic Piano tuned in > just intonation by having 12 keys to the octave. > Duffin, on the other > hand, says that even after ET had been > "established", many piano tuners into the 20th c. used their own > littleprivate tweaks to make some intervals a little > sweeter: ET still not > recognized as a perfect solution. > > Regards, > Leonard Williams > > On 9/25/09 7:18 PM, "wikla" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 18:52:10 -0400, "Roman Turovsky" > <[email protected]>> wrote: > > > >>> Even after JSB there never was any ET for many, many years! > For example > >>> Chopin never met ET. ET is an invention of 20th century. > > > >> ET was invented long before, and was advocated by Galilei, > Frescobaldi,>> Werckmeister, and many others. > > > > In the time of of Galilei, Frescobaldi, Werckmeister, and > "many others", > > there was the want and eager to find a way to equalise the > intervals. But > > there was no way, no tool. Even Chopin did not have that tool. > They wanted > > it, but had they known, what becomes, they wouldn't have... ;-) > > > > > >>>> In my opinion ET lends ANY music noble and unaffected delivery. > >>> > >>> Just listen to, let us say, Antonio Cabezon, or any other > keyboard guy > > of > >>> 16th c. in ET and "good temperament", and tell your > feelings.. (You said > >>> "ANY music") > > > >> Take some old recording of August Wenzinger for example, and > compare it > > to a > >> contemporary one. > > > > Take _any_ Cabezon piece and try it by "piano"... > > > >>>> And there is no necessity of liking dodecaphony if you like ET. > > > >>> I do agree. But is there really any other reason of liking > ET than the > >>> want > >>> to feel equally every possible interval, chord. key or any > sequence of > >>> notes, starting where ever? Do you really want to hear - let > us say - > >>> F-major sound like E-major? > > > >> Why not? Fingerboard topography gives enough color, so why mistune? > > > > ??? > > > >>> The F-major - to me - is very soft, happy and royal, and > btw. also green > > > >>> to > >>> me; the E-major is much more sharp and angry, and btw. to me > its colour > >>> is > >>> blue. And what is most intersting to me, is that in the so called > >>> "baroque" > >>> tuning (a'=415Hz) and in the modern tuning (a'=440Hz) those > >>> characteristics > >>> follow the name of the key? Or better said, players tune their > >>> instruments > >>> so... > > > >> Arto, we now know that picth is a chymera, the Venetian one > being 465, so > >> there is no such thing as definitive "baroque pitch". > > > > Yep! There really is no definitive "baroque pitch" - as I > thought everyone > > knew. I wanted to say that in all the pitches of a' (where I > am taken > > into...) the colours are to me the same: F-major green etc. > > > > And of course - as always- it is possible to fool me... ;) > > > > Arto > > > > > > > >> > >>> > >>> Is it so? > >>> > >>> And an entertaining poll: What is the colour of your F-major and > > E-major? > >>> Those two are clearest to me: to me there are no other > alternatives to > >>> these two. D-major perhaps could be yellow? A-minor grey possible? > >>> C-major > >>> white? Well, that's enough... > >> There are many organic compounds that give chords their > colors, but I am > >> too > >> old for those.... > >> RT > >> > >> > >>> > >>>> I am > >>>> certainly no fan of the former, and it can be done in any > temperament>>>> anyway. Current forms of neomodernism are not > pitch-dependent, and > > often > >>>> avoid all definite pitch (as well as meter). > >>>> As to actual temperaments- none are absolute, and even > fewer are > >>>> sufficiently stable to discuss. > >>>> > >>>> Another point - > >>>> There is a belief that intonational espression is largely a > product of > >>> ET, > >>>> because the latter permit minute deviations therefrom which > actually>>>> produce > >>>> expression. > >>>> Minute deviations from MT are plain old ugly, and the natural > >>>> consequence > >>>> of > >>>> this is the so-called Rooley Principle, according to which any > >>>> expression > >>>> is > >>>> entirely inappropriate in Early Music in general. > >>>> RT > >>>> > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>> From: "wikla" <[email protected]> > >>>> To: "Lute list" <[email protected]> > >>>> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 5:29 PM > >>>> Subject: [LUTE] Re: New lute music > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Dear Roman and other dears, > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:23:21 -0400, "Roman Turovsky" wrote: > >>>>> [...] > >>>>>> I am for one is absolutely happy to use ET, and I use it exclusively To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
