[CAUT] ET vs UET

Fred Sturm fssturm at unm.edu
Fri Apr 23 14:40:25 MDT 2010


On Apr 23, 2010, at 6:25 AM, Dennis Johnson wrote:

>  We have already discussed previously that tuning with a personal  
> interpretation is probably the most "authentic" method.


	I'm not sure I agree with that statement. This assumes the tuner is  
actually and consciously making decisions in accordance with "taste"  
rather than with "method." I would suggest that this is a late 20th  
century phenomenon, and that for most of piano tuning history - shall  
we say from 1840 to 1980? - the majority of tuners tried to achieve  
the best equal temperament tuning they knew how, in accordance with  
the rules and procedures they had learned. That is certainly what the  
historical sources I have read lead me to believe.
	Before 1840 (and before piano) is only different in that other  
patterns were included besides ET. I find it impossible to imagine a  
1/4 comma mean tone with a "personal interpretation," for example. Nor  
a Vallotti. Some methods were less precise, as in French Ordinaire or  
Werckmeister's instructions of 1698, but hardly a matter of "personal  
interpretation." Instead, the decisions made would be to make the  
diatonic thirds more or less just, with the result that the chromatic  
ones would move in the opposite direction, more a practical decision  
than an artistic statement.
Regards,
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico
fssturm at unm.edu







More information about the CAUT mailing list

This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC