The temperament crusade continues

[A440A@AOL.COM]

Richard writes:
>I would welcome any evidence from the composers themselves. If temperament
> was so important they surely must have said something on the subject. 
> There is no direct evidence (to my knowledge) of how Mozart's or
> Beethoven's piano was actually tuned or which tuning if any they did
> prefer.  

  Now that you mention it,  I don't think George Gershwin ever said a thing 
about temperament,  so is it reasonable to think he may have actually had a 
well tempered  tuning on his composing piano?  I don't think so, his music 
seems to be best served by a temperament that we know was in use when he 
worked.  What about Rachmaninoff?  Is there any record of him describing a 
temperament?  Not that I know of, so do we consider a meantone tuning for his 
piano work? No, I couldn't accept that at all, since it sounds terrible, ( I 
heard this once in the shop!). 
    If we apply the same logic farther back, it becomes evident that we 
should listen to the era specific tunings for any composition.  Gregorian chan
t will make a case for pure fifths etc. Byrd and Bull,( maybe even Mozart)  
for meantone, Beethoven, Schubert, Brahms etc for well-tempered, etc.  
 
>   As Charles Beard (I think) the historian said, "No evidence, no history"

     Yes,  and according to Kirnberger's account of Bach's son statement, 
Bach himself didn't want an equal temperament.  That is concrete evidence 
right there, no?   And what evidence is there for anything but an unequal 
tuning for the Baroque and Classical eras?  If circumstantial evidence is not 
allowed in the temperament decision process, then there is no evidence of 
anything, in which case we would have to listen to the music played in a 
variety of tunings and decide which sounded best.  (this is actually 
happening, and I haven't found anyone that like Mozart better in ET after 
they try the alternatives.)

    We know what temperaments were proposed and when. That is from the
> theorists. It is the evidence of who, where and when they were actually
> used that is lacking. The best we can say is :"So and so  MAY have used
> this temp at that time".

    I must respectfully disagree. Saying "So and so  MAY have used
 this temp at that time"  doesn't quite mean the same as saying that there 
was a genre of tuning style that was extant at their time.   There is a 
preponderance of evidence that indicates something other than ET was in use 
for the period between 1400 and 1900.  Trying to find evidence that our 
modern ET was in use during this period is a much more difficult proposition, 
and lacking this evidence, is it not unreasonable to assume a greater 
probability of meantone or well-temperament?
    There is also the human side of the equation when it comes to who was 
actually doing the tuning.  The production of ET requires more work than any 
of the others, so that is another reason to assume that the average 1700's 
shop worker sent out to tune wouldn't even consider it.  Why would an poorly 
paid instrument worker want to push the avante-garde notion of ET when it is 
the most difficult tuning there is and very little evidence that it was 
desired?  Especially in an era in which ET was the province of just a few 
theorists? That doesn't seem reasonable. 
    My strongest supporting evidence for temperament selection is the 
positive reactions I get from musicians that have heard the difference.  This 
reaction spans the gamut from the classical side of town to the hotel bar 
that features B.G Adair playing the hits and standards from Eubie Blake to 
Cole Porter, (she uses a copy of the Broadwood tuning from 1885 and it sounds 
great. She said that the piano has never sounded so good,(it is a Yamaha G2 
with a wrap-around bar attached to it.) 
    In short, there is more reason to believe that Mozart and Beethoven used 
irregular, circulating tunings than there is reason to believe that they used 
ET.  So,  with concrete evidence lacking,  other factors must guide a 
temperament choice.  I have listed my reasons for the use of earlier tunings, 
and would like to hear the evidence that would rebut them.  Imho, the absence 
of definitive statements from the composers themselves is of little guidance 
in this matter.  
Regards, 
Ed Foote