Old behaviour (temperament)

[Jeff Tanner]

Hi Avery,
Thanks for the reply.

> ; padding-bottom: 0 }  -->) Jeff,
> I don't know enough about all this to really get involved in the
>discussion currently going on, but I would like to make a couple of
>comments.

Nor do I, which was the point of my response.  Ed sort of asked why techs
were not learning ATs, or HTs, or WTs, or whichever we're going to call
them, and I was giving a response from someone who stuck a toe in the water
and found it a bit cold to dive in just yet.

I'd like an answer to this question.  If we "start out" with "milder
modern" alternative temperament creations, then where's the authenticity of
the historical temperament?  Even using Victorian Temperaments, which as I
understand it, were the best attempts possible at the time of achieving ET,
wouldn't be representative for earlier compositions.  It seems to me that
the whole process then becomes something more of a novelty -- something
different to offer, but not necessarily authentic to the period, composer,
or composition.

> I really don't think "sound better" is what's usually meant. At least not
>the way most people think of something "sounding better". The "color"
>would be more accurate, I guess. The way I understand it is that composers
>"back then" used the various changes in key color to build calm, tension,
>excitement, whatever into their music by starting with a particular key
>suitable to what they wanted to hear and modulating to and from various
>keys to achieve that. Maybe this is too simplistic but that's where I am
>at this point. (Be gentle, Ed & Ron!) :-)

This is my point.  Did they use it to construct these characteristics?  Or
was it the best they had?  Do we know if they really would have liked to
have heard their creations with equal tempering but that just wasn't
available?  Certainly, the orchestras would not have exhibited the same
"color" as the tuned keyboard instruments, as they can change temperament
with each chord progression.  Was the composer creating in his head and
having to deal with the keyboard temperaments which were available?  Or was
the instrument at hand actually an inspiration?  was it even kept in tune
well enough to recognize these characteristics of tonality?

It seems to me that if the composer was truly inspired by the temperament,
then temperaments would have been created for the sole purpose of bringing
out these changes in tonality.  When, as I understand it, the process
seemed to evolve away from these harsh tonalities over a couple hundred
years or so.


>
> No, it probably isn't that simple. Even when using an ETD, one "should"
>be able to know what to check aurally to verify that one is actually
>getting the temperament and tuning correct. That is where some time and
>study come in. But as Ed said in a previous post, most tuners with an ETD
>just use the offsets and put it on top of the tuning in the machine.
>Hopefully, it's a "tweaked" tuning, though, to smooth out any
>inconsistencies in the ET, which really means it needs to be tuned in ET,
>improved aurally as much as possible and then stored in memory before the
>offsets are added in. At least that's what I try to do.


Without hundreds of hours of practice on each temperament, wouldn't it be
difficult to "be able to know what to check aurally to verify that one is
actually getting the temperament and tuning correct"?  What's the pass/fail
rate on the aural RPT Tuning Exam?  How many examinees score 100 on the
temperament section?  ET is difficult enough to master for some techs.  Now
throw in a couple hundred or so more options.

The SAT III program supposedly makes it easy.  You do an FAC measurement,
choose a Temperament page, and you're off.  At least that's the way it's
supposed to work and that's what I did in my situation with the fp.  But
like I said, without literally hundreds of hours of practice on each
different temperament, how are we supposed to know what really is right?
Now, change pianos and get a different inharmonicity ratio.  I s'pect aural
tuning of all these temperaments on various instruments could get quite
chaotic.  Heck, it's hard enough to get ET to sound right on some of these
scales.

>
>
> Probably many but I'm open to learning more about it and I think a
>university setting is particularly suitable to exposing the students to
>HT's. At least it'll give them some basis on which to decide whether they
>like any of them or not. Anyway, that's one of my arguments for getting
>people to try it. :-)
> Avery

And you make a very good point which I agree with.  The university setting
should be the place more suitable to exposing listeners to HTs.  And this
is why I'm not opposed to tuning HTs when requested.  But on the other
hand, CAUTs are generally so overloaded, at least I feel like I am, and
have so many other concerns (such as budget, salary, outside work, etc.)
that making time for adding all this to our repertoire seems a bit trivial,
no?

In the university setting, the piano is not only a performance instrument,
but also the basic tool of music education.  So I could also see the
inverse of the idea that college is a good place to introduce alternates:
Mass confusion on the part of students as to what sounds in tune during a
time when they're supposed to be developing something stable.

Again, not forcing my views, just offering discussion.

Jeff