In a message dated 98-01-29 07:44:16 EST, pianoman writes: << my tunings are now much more equal than they used to be. >> In George Orwell's novel, "Animal Farm", the Pigs, who took control of the farm, ousting the owner, Mr. Jones, told all of the other animals that "All animals are created equal" but eventually declared that "The Pigs are MORE EQUAL than the other animals" and thus created an inequality that was worse than had been previously suffered. Th point is that so even say "more equal" or "less equal" is absurd. A temperament can only be "equal" if it truly is. If it is not, in any way at all, then it is not equal. I certainly do believe, from what you have said, that the way you tune would be considered "normal" by all of those who have used that term on this list and that your customers consider your tunings to be "normal" too. They wouldn't have you back if they didn't. You couldn't have conducted a business for 36 years if your tuning did not meet professional standards and customer expectations. What I have been trying to do in this discussion is to disspell some commonly held beliefs that are really myths. Only since the time of the RPT Standardized Tuning Exam, when Electronic Tuning Devices (ETD)'s have been used to compare one person's tuning against a carefully established standard, have a great number of people been able to acheive what might really be considered a true Equal Temperament. Before that time, which was about 20 years ago, the Strobe tuner only offered a poor approximation of an ET. People had good aural tuning skills, yes, and there were many very good tuners. Artists and customers were satisfied with the tunings. The tuners probably believed in ernest that what they were doing was ET and thus ET became an implied standard, so normally done, so often expected that it did not need to be requested or stipulated, it simply was what a piano tuning was. But the number of people who could actually tune a perfectly equalized scale was very small, indeed. Your own history reflects the most common pattern of today. When you tuned aurally, your temperaments were close to being equal but probably contained some error and inconsistency. This would be defined as a "Quasi-Equal Temperament" along the lines of late 19th Century historically documented tuning patterns such as those found in Owen Jorgensen's book, "Tuning". This does not mean that they were unacceptable, non-standard, unprofessional or not normal any any way. All it means is that they were within what was considered to be the norm. What was probably far more important than the inherent inequality in your temperament was the good quality of your unisons and octaves. Franz Mohr used to stress in his lectures, "No artist has ever complained to me about the exact amount of beating in a 3rd." If it were really so important that temperaments MUST be EQUAL in order to be "normal", "professional" and "ethical", then those artists would have demanded absolute equality of temperament from him. It is quite obvious that they never did. As time went on and you purchased and learned to incorporate an ETD, coupled with newer, more precise aural tuning checks you may have learned through PTG seminars and Exam sessions, your temperaments probably did gravitate toward a state of true equality. My argument is, and will remain, that this alone was not necessarily an improvement. I will concede that most technicians of today believe that if they can create a perfectly equalized scale, then they will have produced an ideal tuning. This is an idea which I believe to be ill-conceived and misguided. It is difficult to challenge and to try to change people's opinions about long-held views that are admittedly the concensus of opinion. I do believe that it will eventually be done though. There was a time when the concensus of opinion was that the earth was flat. It seemed to be the only plausible theory. People were persecuted and even put to death for daring to defy the establishment on this notion. It took people with tremendous courage and persistence, who often risked and gave their lives to prove what eventually became so obviously the truth. Today, there are those who will go to any legnth to protect what has been established really only quite recently from a historical perspective. It is touted as the ultimate refinement, the point to where music and the art of tuning have evolved. Anything else would be a regression, a step backwards. So inbedded are these beliefs that what should be plainly obvious is unknown and greatly misunderstood by the majority. By continuing to study the art of tuning and temperament, by having Historical Temperament classes and performances at PTG seminars and conventions, by continuing the discussion and sharing of information here, on this List, by eventually getting concert artists, univerities, regular customers and the recording industry interested in a way to offer something new and different, this cycle of ignorance and repression can be broken. I believe our music industry and particularly the piano industry will depend on it. If something individal and unique cannot be created with the piano, then it will give way to electronic music, all based on the dictations of Helmholz. Bill Bremmer RPT Madison, Wisconsin
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC