[VIHUELA] Re: Meantone temperament
At 06:01 AM 3/31/2006, Ed Durbrow wrote: >Okay. Good example. Got it. >I thought the point that was being made was that it was impossible to >have them the same in both instruments. If the keyboard player set >his meantone to all flats, for example, and the lute did likewise, I >don't see where there would be any differences. I see where Eugene >was going with that now. The key phrase was "unmodified frets" which >I glossed over. >Like David said, in practice there are ways to work around it. > >Ed, sticking with the "easy" keys Well, I'm glad this all managed to play itself out before I managed to get out of bed this morning. Of course, the original launch of this talk was regarding 5-course guitars and, on occasion, specifically addressed some guitar music to dabble in remote keys (I keep trying to send this talk back to that list, but it keeps getting redirected to the lute list only). In some cases (Bartolotti, e.g.) the implication is through performance from one piece/key to the next without re-tuning or repositioning frets. On the surface, the implication in that specific, guitar-centric case would seem to be in favor of equal temperament. Best, Eugene Summation of that before (for the vihuela listers): At 04:13 AM 3/31/2006, Ed Durbrow wrote: >I don't know about all unequal temperaments, but let's take meantone >as an example. If we set our frets to a meantone temperament (putting >aside tastini for the moment - as a single keyboard would have to >have just one note per key), it happens to work out that all the >notes at every fret are in that temperament. What is the difference >with a keyboard? If you tune a keyboard to meantone, are not all the >notes within the temperament? > >By "parallel series of unequal temperaments", do you mean each string >has the same fret relationship and is therefor parallel? It is quite >amazing that it works out that the notes at those frets are in the >temperament just as they would be on a keyboard or a tuner, but as >far as I know, that is the case. > >I know I must be missing something so if you could explain it a bit >further I would be grateful. > >cheers, > >Ed Durbrow >Saitama, Japan >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/ At 05:25 AM 3/31/2006, Stefan Ecke wrote: >If the keyboard player sets his instruments to meantone >with the accidentials f sharp, c sharp, g sharp, e flat and b flat >and you set the first fret of your lute to have a g sharp on the >first course the notes on courses 2-6 will be d sharp, a sharp, >f sharp, c sharp, g sharp. >Thus, courses 2 and 3 don't match the keyboard on the first fret. >If you move the fret up so that courses 2 and 3 are in tune with >the keyboard, all other frets are no longer in tune on the first fret. >Similiar problem are there for all the frets that have accidentials. > >Stefan To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Meantone temperament
At 02:19 AM 3/29/2006, LGS-Europe wrote: >Again, you seem to be mixing theory (it is impossible to tune a guitar or >lute in an unequal temperament) with practice (we have to play together with >Werckmeister harpsichords)... >In near as well as remote keys in unequal temperaments, if there are notes I >cannot play on my lute or guitar because they are out of tune with the >keyboard, I don't play these notes. I kn ow, some chords become really thin. >Common sense combined with critical listening will find solutions... >...Avoid wrong notes and find practical solutions. Thanks, David. I enjoyed this practical and logical take. All my recent commentary on this topic originates in the simple fact that setting single, unmodified frets in any unequal temperament intervals (some oft-cited meantone scheme, e.g.)--as some lutenists justifiably do (and I do enjoy hearing it when I perceive it as well played)--is NOT equivalent to setting the whole of the chromatic capability of a guitar or lute in that temperament as it is on a keyboard, but in reality is setting a parallel series of unequal temperaments under the intervals of the fretted strings. Moving to remote keys on a lute or guitar with frets spaced in any unequal intervals thus is a different and less "logically" dissonant effect than on a keyboard. That's my only real point here. Best, Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Meantone temperament
- Original Message - From: Howard Posner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 8:07 pm Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Meantone temperament > > This may be correct as a matter of mathematics, but it doesn't > work > like this in the real world. Most of us on this list set our > frets > unequally, and we do it with tied-on frets without tastini. I > think > your statement exalts theory over practice; or perhaps you're > using > "temperament scheme" in a sense so restrictive as to be of no > practical > use. I'm only stating fact. I don't want to belittle efforts to approximate any temperament scheme on lutes. I just think there is too much willingness assume setting frets in any non-equal temperament scheme is the same as tuning each individual note to that scheme as with keyboards. It's not. You say "most of us", but I would wager most of us who play 5-course guitars like those to launch this thread set our frets to approximate equal temperament. The fact remains that spacing frets to reflect the intervals of some non-equal scheme is not the same as tuning every note of a keyboard instrument; it sets each fretted string to that scheme in parallel, but doesn't necessarily preserve the meantone relationship in crossing between strings. In part, this may be why guitar music is more willing to explore remote keys than lute music. I still like to hear well-played lute music, no matter how frets are spaced. I'm not fond of belittling other musicians for NOT using some temperament scheme or another. > These days unequally tempered lutes, theorbos and guitars play > with > unequally tempered harpsichords and organs all the time. Of course. I enjoy hearing and wouldn't want to imply otherwise. They still aren't quite in tune with each other, especially in remote keys. Best, Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Meantone temperament
Eugene C. Braig IV wrote: > you still can't truly fret any instrument to any > temperament scheme other than roughly equal temperament without > tastini or > some other device for sectioning frets. This may be correct as a matter of mathematics, but it doesn't work like this in the real world. Most of us on this list set our frets unequally, and we do it with tied-on frets without tastini. I think your statement exalts theory over practice; or perhaps you're using "temperament scheme" in a sense so restrictive as to be of no practical use. > A fretted instrument can never quite be in tune with a keyboard without > using a fair number of tastini or some other device for segmenting > frets, > especially in remote keys. The exception, of course, is equal tempered > keyboards playing along with frets set to approximate equal > temperament. Since equal temperament obviously was not universal until > more recently, I suspect the period ear might have been a little more > tolerant of a little tonal ambiguity between tone colors. These days unequally tempered lutes, theorbos and guitars play with unequally tempered harpsichords and organs all the time. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Meantone temperament
At 05:12 AM 3/28/2006, LGS-Europe wrote: >Of course, but we have to play together with keyboards, and think of >something not to be _too_ out of tune with them. |-( >So it's worth trying such temperaments on our continuo lutes. A fretted instrument can never quite be in tune with a keyboard without using a fair number of tastini or some other device for segmenting frets, especially in remote keys. The exception, of course, is equal tempered keyboards playing along with frets set to approximate equal temperament. Since equal temperament obviously was not universal until more recently, I suspect the period ear might have been a little more tolerant of a little tonal ambiguity between tone colors. Best, Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Meantone temperament
Am 27 Mar 2006 um 13:52 hat Eugene C. Braig IV geschrieben:
> At 01:20 PM 3/27/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >Of course. The thing is that not all equal temperaments are equal,
>
> Of course indeed.
>
>
> >...so citing from historic sources proofes nothing as long as the
> >mathematical stuff is included.
>
> I'm not certain what you mean here.
I think the game is not equal versus meantone temperament. Circulating unequal
temperaments ("well tempered") could have been called equal because of their
usefullness in all keys and even meantone temperaments do have a flavor of
equality
with regard to the hexachords. We tend to be sloppy when we give examples of
historic composers favoring this or that temperament. It's important to know
what
terms they used, what the terms could have meant to them and even better: which
temperings exactly they wanted to have aplied and where.
Nothing personal here, I just wanted to broaden the view. When it comes to
temperaments there are a lot of misconceptions around, as well as sloppy usage
of
terms. Only recently I met a professional viol player who claimed to tune
Vallotti...
Best regards,
Stephan
>
> Best,
> Eugene
>
>
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at
> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>
[VIHUELA] Re: Meantone temperament
At 01:20 PM 3/27/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Of course. The thing is that not all equal temperaments are equal, Of course indeed. >...so citing from historic sources proofes nothing as long as the >mathematical stuff is included. I'm not certain what you mean here. Best, Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Meantone temperament
Of course. The thing is that not all equal temperaments are equal, so citing from historic sources proofes nothing as long as the mathematical stuff is included. Regards, Stephan Am 27 Mar 2006 um 10:13 hat Eugene C. Braig IV geschrieben: > At 06:31 AM 3/26/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >(Sorry for the crossposting, but this seems to be a two-list-thread.) > > > >I'd like to take the oppurtunity to once again point out Bradley > >Lehman's Bach-tuning, which can be studied at http://www.larips.com > >... > > > I like Mr. Lehman's work, however it (or any talk of keyboard > temperaments) has little direct relevance to fretted strings. Bradley > can tune every single note; a 5-course guitar can only set intervals > that will be spaced in parallel from a (or A), d, g, b, and e'. > > Best, > Eugene > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >
[VIHUELA] Re: Meantone temperament
At 06:31 AM 3/26/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >(Sorry for the crossposting, but this seems to be a two-list-thread.) > >I'd like to take the oppurtunity to once again point out Bradley Lehman's >Bach-tuning, >which can be studied at http://www.larips.com ... I like Mr. Lehman's work, however it (or any talk of keyboard temperaments) has little direct relevance to fretted strings. Bradley can tune every single note; a 5-course guitar can only set intervals that will be spaced in parallel from a (or A), d, g, b, and e'. Best, Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Meantone temperament
(Sorry for the crossposting, but this seems to be a two-list-thread.) I'd like to take the oppurtunity to once again point out Bradley Lehman's Bach-tuning, which can be studied at http://www.larips.com According to his argumentation, equal could well have meant to be _equal-sounding_ in several instances. I quote from his FAQ: "My thesis is that JS Bach knew very well about equal temperament (in the 1720s and earlier), and rejected its rise in practice by other experts, because he had something better-sounding already in hand. This was a major point in compiling the WTC as demonstration. His "equal-ish" temperament has the same complete flexibility through all keys, all equally usable, but with a healthy and interesting variety of characters also. It makes the jobs of the other players and singers easier and more natural, in the tensions and relaxations it reveals in the music. Interpretation becomes an instinctive reaction to the sound that is already happening: not a fight against equal temperament's sameness to put the phrasing across the footlights." I read somewhere that ET or E-sounding-T became an important issue when professional wind players started to visit european courts around 1700 with differently pitched instruments depending on where they came from. Not surprisingly Neidhard advocates ET only for courts, this enables chromatic transposition to suite the guest artist. String players could adjust easily to the local pitch and meantone variety, and AFAIK choir and chamber pitch were mostly a whole tone apart which also minimizes transposing problems in a meantone temperament. So to me the rise of ET seems to be a practical issue rather than an aesthetical one. It's a pity that unequal but circular temperaments like Lehman's aren't possible on fretted instruments. Regards, Stephan Am 25 Mar 2006 um 12:37 hat Daniel F Heiman geschrieben: > > On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 11:52:58 -0500 "Roman Turovsky" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Howard wrote: > > >> Equal > > >> temperament pretty much destroys this expressive effect. Most > > >> baroque music is in one of the simpler keys (i.e. few sharps or > flats > > You forgot the modifier EARLY. In the later baroque where the > > expression is > > based on modulation the ET is essential. > > RT > > > > Equal temperament is NOT essential for music from any part of the > baroque era. Some theorists, composers and performers were advocates > of it, and others were not. For example, Johann Sebastian Bach was > not a fan of equal temperament. He did write a set of pieces entitled > "Das wohltemperierte Klavier," which most commentators now believe > requires a circulating meantone temperament rather than equal tempered > tuning. > > F. W. Marpurg provides twelve different unequally tempered tuning > schemes for keyboard instruments in his Versuch (Breslau, 1776). J. > P. Kirnberger gives a meantone keyboard temperament in 1779 (die Kunst > des reinen Satzes in der Musik, Berlin) which is repeated in the > treatise of C. L. G. von Wiese (Dresden, 1793). All of these are > beyond the normally accepted terminus of the baroque period. Murray > Barbour states, "We are told that organs in England were still > generally in meantone temperament until the middle of the nineteenth > century." (p. 10) > > Daniel Heiman > -- > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >
[VIHUELA] Re: Meantone temperament
(Sorry for the crossposting, but this seems to be a two-list-thread.) I'd like to take the oppurtunity to once again point out Bradley Lehman's Bach-tuning, which can be studied at http://www.larips.com According to his argumentation, equal could well have meant to be _equal-sounding_ in several instances. I quote from his FAQ: "My thesis is that JS Bach knew very well about equal temperament (in the 1720s and earlier), and rejected its rise in practice by other experts, because he had something better-sounding already in hand. This was a major point in compiling the WTC as demonstration. His "equal-ish" temperament has the same complete flexibility through all keys, all equally usable, but with a healthy and interesting variety of characters also. It makes the jobs of the other players and singers easier and more natural, in the tensions and relaxations it reveals in the music. Interpretation becomes an instinctive reaction to the sound that is already happening: not a fight against equal temperament's sameness to put the phrasing across the footlights." I read somewhere that ET or E-sounding-T became an important issue when professional wind players started to visit european courts around 1700 with differently pitched instruments depending on where they came from. Not surprisingly Neidhard advocates ET only for courts, this enables chromatic transposition to suite the guest artist. String players could adjust easily to the local pitch and meantone variety, and AFAIK choir and chamber pitch were mostly a whole tone apart which also minimizes transposing problems in a meantone temperament. So to me the rise of ET seems to be a practical issue rather than an aesthetical one. It's a pity that unequal but circular temperaments like Lehman's aren't possible on fretted instruments. Regards, Stephan Am 25 Mar 2006 um 12:37 hat Daniel F Heiman geschrieben: > > On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 11:52:58 -0500 "Roman Turovsky" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Howard wrote: > > >> Equal > > >> temperament pretty much destroys this expressive effect. Most > > >> baroque music is in one of the simpler keys (i.e. few sharps or > flats > > You forgot the modifier EARLY. In the later baroque where the > > expression is > > based on modulation the ET is essential. > > RT > > > > Equal temperament is NOT essential for music from any part of the > baroque era. Some theorists, composers and performers were advocates > of it, and others were not. For example, Johann Sebastian Bach was > not a fan of equal temperament. He did write a set of pieces entitled > "Das wohltemperierte Klavier," which most commentators now believe > requires a circulating meantone temperament rather than equal tempered > tuning. > > F. W. Marpurg provides twelve different unequally tempered tuning > schemes for keyboard instruments in his Versuch (Breslau, 1776). J. > P. Kirnberger gives a meantone keyboard temperament in 1779 (die Kunst > des reinen Satzes in der Musik, Berlin) which is repeated in the > treatise of C. L. G. von Wiese (Dresden, 1793). All of these are > beyond the normally accepted terminus of the baroque period. Murray > Barbour states, "We are told that organs in England were still > generally in meantone temperament until the middle of the nineteenth > century." (p. 10) > > Daniel Heiman > -- > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >
[VIHUELA] Re: Meantone temperament
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 11:52:58 -0500 "Roman Turovsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Howard wrote: > >> Equal > >> temperament pretty much destroys this expressive effect. Most > >> baroque music is in one of the simpler keys (i.e. few sharps or flats > You forgot the modifier EARLY. In the later baroque where the > expression is > based on modulation the ET is essential. > RT > Equal temperament is NOT essential for music from any part of the baroque era. Some theorists, composers and performers were advocates of it, and others were not. For example, Johann Sebastian Bach was not a fan of equal temperament. He did write a set of pieces entitled "Das wohltemperierte Klavier," which most commentators now believe requires a circulating meantone temperament rather than equal tempered tuning. F. W. Marpurg provides twelve different unequally tempered tuning schemes for keyboard instruments in his Versuch (Breslau, 1776). J. P. Kirnberger gives a meantone keyboard temperament in 1779 (die Kunst des reinen Satzes in der Musik, Berlin) which is repeated in the treatise of C. L. G. von Wiese (Dresden, 1793). All of these are beyond the normally accepted terminus of the baroque period. Murray Barbour states, "We are told that organs in England were still generally in meantone temperament until the middle of the nineteenth century." (p. 10) Daniel Heiman -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
