[LUTE] Roman and equal temperament
Dear Roman and all, is there really any experienced lute player, who does not correct his/her intonation towards pure while playing? It is easier to the viola da gamba players, of course, but very possible to us lutenists, too! Even if you do not want to set your frets to non ET, you can easily sharpen or flatten your notes - especially in higher positions. Roman, do you really just push the buttons, or have you already found the enjoyment of coloring the pitches? If not, try it. And then welcome to the gang! ;) Arto To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Non equal contra equal temperament
Even more. I think ET is a musical embodiment of same egalitarian/republican idea that was perpetrated on the civilization by the secret cabal of Rosicrucians and Illuminati, and MT embodies submission to despotism and status quo. All of this fits nicely into Platonic connection between political systems and musical styles. (I hope DAS would assay this someday) Do I detect a certain elitist erudition embodying an energetic effort to effect an effective exit? Rosicrucians and Illuminati as egalitarians - oh well, they might just as well have been as the former exists as a Society that advertises the truth in the tabloid pages (along with the phone sex ads), and the latter is an apocryphal elite. As a past master of the meaningless statement I am jealous. To combine such concepts is worthy of a novel, shall we call it The Da Vinci Code. (Not to knock that book, I enjoyed it thoroughly as a novel - but Eco's Foucault's Pendulum might be more to the point. There the fiction is the internal theme of the fiction). And I do believe that assess would be a better word than assay, although both have a similar dictionary meaning. Assay is more normally used for physical qualities of substances, assess for the evaluation of ideas or argument. Isn't this silly? Best, Jon To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Non equal contra equal temperament
Arto, I should stay out of this, but I'll stick my neck out having only seen your message and the quote from RT (those included below). To me there is only one reason for ET, and that is the chromatic instruments with fixed strings (piano, harp, etc.), and the need to play them in different keys. Even meantone is a corruption of the perfection of the intervals as defined by the overtone scale. We all know the Pythagorean comma, and that all of the temperaments are compromises to handle it. (Don't pick on me, I'm trying to write briefly). The only instruments that don't need a compromise are those with continual pitch ability - like the voice and the unfretted violin. I would have said that ET was painting by numbers, and meantone was painting with a lot more numbers (or shades of tone and interval). But despite that I'm an advocate of ET, it allows us ensemble play (and that is another reason for it) on instruments not set to the same base scale. What we lose in that pure, or near pure, third we gain in the flexibility of ensemble play. There is a place for each in the spectrum of musical performance. As string players we sometimes forget the need to work with instruments not easily retuned (or impossible, in the case some of the winds). ET is a lingua franca of tuning. Not the best for everything, but one that will work for all. Best, Jon - Original Message - From: Arto Wikla [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 5:40 PM Subject: Non equal contra equal temperament On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Roman Turovsky wrote: So, to drive the point as far as humanly possible: Meantone is painting-by-numbers, while ET permits one to say something meaningful and original, musically speaking. It is really confusing to find a militant or fundamantalistic fighter for equal temperament in the Lute List! To this guy the ET seems to be kind of religion? Or perhaps and likely it is just his wish to be the troll of the List. (The word troll is a modern web-equivalent for provocator.) But if you have ever heard a pure or near pure third in your final cadence of a lute piece of let us say 1500-1690 (or more), you will never accept an ET 3rd there! And if you do, either your hearing or your aesthetics has something very wrong in it... ;-) All the best, Arto To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Non equal contra equal temperament
So, to drive the point as far as humanly possible: Meantone is painting-by-numbers, while ET permits one to say something meaningful and original, musically speaking. It is really confusing to find a militant or fundamantalistic fighter for equal temperament in the Lute List! REally??? How so? To this guy the ET seems to be kind of religion? Even more. I think ET is a musical embodiment of same egalitarian/republican idea that was perpetrated on the civilization by the secret cabal of Rosicrucians and Illuminati, and MT embodies submission to despotism and status quo. All of this fits nicely into Platonic connection between political systems and musical styles. (I hope DAS would assay this someday) Or perhaps and likely it is just his wish to be the troll of the List. (The word troll is a modern web-equivalent for provocator.) A troll is mythical Scandinavian creature that has little to say, much like a certain Finn. But if you have ever heard a pure or near pure third in your final cadence of a lute piece of let us say 1500-1690 (or more), you will never accept an ET 3rd there! And if you do, either your hearing or your aesthetics has something very wrong in it... ;-) I've heard these 3ds aplenty, and found them cheesy. RT To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Non equal contra equal temperament
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Roman Turovsky wrote: So, to drive the point as far as humanly possible: Meantone is painting-by-numbers, while ET permits one to say something meaningful and original, musically speaking. It is really confusing to find a militant or fundamantalistic fighter for equal temperament in the Lute List! To this guy the ET seems to be kind of religion? Or perhaps and likely it is just his wish to be the troll of the List. (The word troll is a modern web-equivalent for provocator.) But if you have ever heard a pure or near pure third in your final cadence of a lute piece of let us say 1500-1690 (or more), you will never accept an ET 3rd there! And if you do, either your hearing or your aesthetics has something very wrong in it... ;-) All the best, Arto To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: equal temperament
Roman Turovsky writes: I didn't say that Artusi's criticism was directed at CM's instructions. Yes you did. You said: Monteverdi operas modulate sufficiently for Claudio M. to have him ask his musicians to tune in ET, for which he suffered criticism from a gentleman named Artusi. Roman again: I think we can permit ourselves some perspicacious conjecture that CM tuned in ET because long cyclical works go through such a sufficient number of different keys that ET would have been warranted. And it solves a lot more problems that it creates. I'm happy to permit your conjecture; I'll decline to do it myself in this case. Conjecture is useful in the absence of empirical information. But I've heard a lot of performances of Monteverdi's large works in the last couple of decades, all in unequal temperament. None of them made me aware of any tuning problems that needed to be solved. What specific problems do you have in mind? Roman again: Real modulation starts with Frecobaldi and Froberger, who were very much in the pro-ET camp. Regardless of what Frescobaldi and Froberger thought (I'd be interested to see something specific on that subject) the fact remains that modulation is a part of all art music in the middle to late baroque, and there's no evidence that most of them used equal temperament. Again, empirically we know that modulation works in unequal temperament, because musicians have been doing it for a generation.
Re: equal temperament
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004, Roman Turovsky wrote: Composers are practical creatures and I doubt they were given to the masochism and snobbery of the type of our friend in Helsinki. I just wonder Mr. S's comments like this. If his ears ans mind enjoy equal temperament, let it be so. Nobody can be perfect. :^) Arto
Re: equal temperament
Dear All: None of the Monteverdi I've played strayed into unusual keys. What works are we talking about? Yours, Jim
Re: equal temperament
Dear All: I forgot to mention in my previous posting that when I played the Monteverdi Vespers with the Folger Consort some years ago we used tempered (not equal) tuning and fretting, and it sounded wonderful. Yours, Jim
Re: Fw: Equal Temperament
On Friday 30 January 2004 06:50, Jon Murphy wrote: Dear Jon, I wonder if this Catherine is helped by your explanation because you do not explain anything of the background of differences between temperaments in your long e-mail. For example meantone has pure thirds etc. If you want the explain temperaments you need to refer to the differences of how the octave is divided, i.e. the differences in ratio often expressed in cents. It would be better if you give her some website links with explanations. Perhaps you can forward her the following links which I saved on my webbrowser a long time ago: http://www.microtonal.co.uk/xtra.htm http://home.planet.nl/~d.v.ooijen/lgs/meantone.html and the following more technical links: http://www.b0b.com/infoedu/science.html http://www.jimloy.com/physics/scale.htm http://home.swipnet.se/~w-37192/eng/handbook/Tuning/history.html About electronic tuners you are wrong. I have two of these things, one is a cheapo with ofcourse only equal temperament and only a=440 Hz. The other Korg OT-12) can be calibrated to any frequency you like and also many temperaments (valotti, meantone, etc. etc.). that's certainly not a cheap thing. This was also written on this list by the way if I remember well. Best taco Ladies and gentlemen,=20 0 I ask your indulgence in reviewing this message that I have forwarded to = the Lute List. The question comes from the Harp List, and my response = has been sent. I'd like to know if I've made any gross errors (the = object was to answer in principle, not in detail). Do remember that = accomplished musicians on intruments that have fixed temperament may not = have knowledge of temperament.=20 I solicit your comments,=20 I did see a letter a bit ago on the Lute List on electronic tuning, and = it made me wonder if the electronic tuner used equal temperament. Been = planning to repair my occilliscope and look at the freqencies, but I = think is a good assumption that the electronic tuner uses equal = temperament.=20 Best, Jon - Original Message -=20 From: Catherine Hicks=20 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 4:12 PM Subject: Equal Temperament Dear Jon,=20 Hello, my name is Catherine and I am a harp student (just beginning!) = of Eala Clarke's. She said that you would be willing to maybe answer = some of my questions? My music theory isn't the grandest and this may be rather confusing, I = hope you can get at what I'm asking. I play piano as well as harp, and I = was reading a book on pianos, their construction and philosophy and = history, and it described the methods of tuning that they used. Equal = temperament, they called it, saying that the intervals are not tuned to = the same pitches all the way up the piano because it would then end up = sharp. So they divide the octave up into twelve tones and tune with = that. Then a friend of mine asked me if my harp was tuned in equal = temperament, like a piano. I use an electronic tuner and just tune it to = that. So what exactly is equal temperament? Would it not be true for other = instruments as well? Are electronic tuners based on that system? Thank you very much! Catherine Hicks ~ In Corde Mariae [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fw: Equal Temperament
Taco, Your message is well taken, but the details of the specific differences is what I was trying to avoid. My impression from her message was that she needed a small impression of the idea of temperaments rather than a full description. As her message to me was off the harp list I expect that if she needs more information she'll ask for it. Some people can be scared off by too much theory, others thrive on it. I hope she comes back to me for a bit more. (And I do appreciate the web links, I'll have to check them, but I can lay out the frequencies versus the cents. About electronic tuners you are wrong. I have two of these things, one is a cheapo with ofcourse only equal temperament and only a=440 Hz. The other Korg OT-12) can be calibrated to any frequency you like and also many temperaments (valotti, meantone, etc. etc.). that's certainly not a cheap thing. This was also written on this list by the way if I remember well. I haven't seen one that handles the temperaments (and I'm not familiar with the valotti by name, although I'm sure is is one of the variations of meantone). It must be expensive, just in the amount of buttons it must have. If I didn't play the harp I wouldn't have an electronic tuner. I'd just stay with my old A 440 fork I've banged on my skull for fifty years. I trust my ear better than the tuner, which might say that I must have my own temperament drilled into my neural structure. But that comes as a former vocalist, that most flexible of instruments. My tuner only allows a change of A calibration. I got it as I have 52 strings to tune on the harp, and doing a relative tuning off an A would take forever, but I still correct it by ear. Now to the basic question! Is a temperament, other than equal, valid for an instrument like a harp or piano where one may be playing in any and all keys without retuning. Where are the perfect thirds when you start anywhere, even on the pentatonic notes? I believe that was what I was trying to tell her, without getting into the math. Equal temperament seems to me to be the only solution for an instrument that needs to be played in any key (chromatically) without adjusting the frets or pitch of the open key. Correct me if I'm wrong. Best, Jon
equal temperament
Dear All, Just a footnote - well-tempered is not the same as equal-tempered. No one knows exactly which temperament Bach had in mind when he wrote the WTC but there are some strong candidates amongst temperaments which were popular at the time. The late John Barnes wrote an article in Early Music on the subject some years ago, unfortunately I no longer have it to hand. These temperaments were irregular because (unlike meantone temperaments) they had several sizes of fifth, and circular because you could play in any key. The effect of these tunings is to give nearly pure thirds in some home key (usually C or F) and wider thirds as you modulate further away. The WTC then becomes an interesting exercise in *composing* in different keys (because each key has its own character), rather than an exercise in *playing* in any key (which is trivial). If you are interested in this issue, a good place to start is the articles Temperament and Well-tempered clavier in Grove. Best wishes, Martin
Re: equal temperament
The WTC then becomes an interesting exercise in *composing* in different keys (because each key has its own character), rather than an exercise in *playing* in any key (which is trivial). This is a matter of opinion, and I personally find nothing trivial about it. Unequal temperament may give some flavour to earlier music that blandly never strays to far from the home key, but in the era in which modulation became an important element of expression ET is anything but trivial. It is INDISPENSABLE, as a matter of fact. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: equal temperament
On Friday, January 30, 2004, at 04:01 PM, Roman Turovsky wrote: The WTC then becomes an interesting exercise in *composing* in different keys (because each key has its own character), rather than an exercise in *playing* in any key (which is trivial). I'm sorry - writing for writing. Try to play ''in any key''! This is a matter of opinion, and I personally find nothing trivial about it. Unequal temperament may give some flavour to earlier music that blandly never strays to far from the home key, but in the era in which modulation became an important element of expression ET is anything but trivial. It is INDISPENSABLE, as a matter of fact. RT Crazily loving modulations (which are so rare in Baroque literature) I undersigne with both hands. jurek
Re: equal temperament
The WTC then becomes an interesting exercise in *composing* in different keys (because each key has its own character), rather than an exercise in *playing* in any key (which is trivial). I'm sorry - writing for writing. Try to play ''in any key''! This is a matter of opinion, and I personally find nothing trivial about it. Unequal temperament may give some flavour to earlier music that blandly never strays to far from the home key, but in the era in which modulation became an important element of expression ET is anything but trivial. It is INDISPENSABLE, as a matter of fact. RT Crazily loving modulations (which are so rare in Baroque literature) I undersigne with both hands. jurek S made a point of catering to the individuals afflicted with the modulation vice, you know. Monteverdi operas modulate sufficiently for Claudio M. to have him ask his musicians to tune in ET, for which he suffered criticism from a gentleman named Artusi. Who remembers Artusi now? RT
Re: equal temperament
Roman Turovsky at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Monteverdi operas modulate sufficiently for Claudio M. to have him ask his musicians to tune in ET, for which he suffered criticism from a gentleman named Artusi. Who remembers Artusi now? Alas, I can't seem to find my list of the persons who remember Artusi now. I also can't find any reference to equal temperament from either Monteverdi or Artusi. Perhaps you could specify? Howard
Re: equal temperament
Monteverdi operas modulate sufficiently for Claudio M. to have him ask his musicians to tune in ET, for which he suffered criticism from a gentleman named Artusi. Who remembers Artusi now? Alas, I can't seem to find my list of the persons who remember Artusi now. I also can't find any reference to equal temperament from either Monteverdi or Artusi. Perhaps you could specify? Howard You might still have Margo Schulter's message with the info. I have deleted all of them... RT
Re: equal temperament
Roman wrote: Monteverdi operas modulate sufficiently for Claudio M. to have him ask his musicians to tune in ET, for which he suffered criticism from a gentleman named Artusi. I wrote: I ... can't find any reference to equal temperament from either Monteverdi or Artusi. Perhaps you could specify? Roman wrote: You might still have Margo Schulter's message with the info. I have deleted all of them... I can't seem to delete newsgroup postings. Last December 7, Margo said that Artusi took Monteverdi to task for writing intervals that sounded harsh in the less-tempered tuning of singers, though they would sound OK on lutes, which were more tempered (Margo accepts uncritically Lindley's interpretation that lutes were normally tuned in equal temperament. I voice disagreement whenever I happen to read one of her posts, which isn't all that often). Nothing about instructing musicians to play in equal temperament (Artusi could not have known what Monteverdi told his musicians, and Artusi's signed essays did not even mention Monteverdi's name). Modulation didn't enter into it. Nor did Monteverdi's operas, which didn't yet exist. HP
Re: equal temperament
Martin Shepherd: And ET is not indispensable for modulation - as I hoped I had made clear, it is just one of many temperaments which allow modulation to any key. It also has the unfortunate effect of making all keys sound the same, and therefore largely removes the point of modulating in the first place... Roman Turovsky: Why is it then that composers start modulating only when the temperament becomes sufficiently equalized? To Martin: The point of modulating has little to do with the character of keys, but with the progression from one key and pitch level to another. If the keys all sound alike, it makes perfect sense to go from C minor to d minor to G major to C major in a movement, but it doesn't alter the sound much to start in b minor instead of c minor. To Roman: You assumed your conclusion. Composers modulated without ET. Not much. Real modulation starts with Frecobaldi and Froberger, who were very much in the pro-ET camp. __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: equal temperament
Roman wrote: Monteverdi operas modulate sufficiently for Claudio M. to have him ask his musicians to tune in ET, for which he suffered criticism from a gentleman named Artusi. I wrote: I ... can't find any reference to equal temperament from either Monteverdi or Artusi. Perhaps you could specify? Roman wrote: You might still have Margo Schulter's message with the info. I have deleted all of them... I can't seem to delete newsgroup postings. Last December 7, Margo said that Artusi took Monteverdi to task for writing intervals that sounded harsh in the less-tempered tuning of singers, though they would sound OK on lutes, which were more tempered (Margo accepts uncritically Lindley's interpretation that lutes were normally tuned in equal temperament. I voice disagreement whenever I happen to read one of her posts, which isn't all that often). Nothing about instructing musicians to play in equal temperament (Artusi could not have known what Monteverdi told his musicians, and Artusi's signed essays did not even mention Monteverdi's name). Modulation didn't enter into it. Nor did Monteverdi's operas, which didn't yet exist. I didn't say that Artusi's criticism was directed at CM's instructions. It was directed at his practice. Composers are practical creatures and I doubt they were given to the masochism and snobbery of the type of our friend in Helsinki. I think we can permit ourselves some perspicacious conjecture that CM tuned in ET because long cyclical works go through such a sufficient number of different keys that ET would have been warranted.And it solves a lot more problems that it creates. RT
