Coleman 11

[Doug Mahard]

Ed Foote wrote:
>
>     I don't agree.  Temperament history shows an everpresent changing and
> melding of styles. The whole evolution took place among a wide variety of
> tuning systems, and the debate over them was near constant.  The writings
of
> the debaters is our historical record.  This is contrasted to the ET era,
in
> which there was only one style, and no debate over its worth.  I see a
> profound difference here.
>
Hi Ed,

Wouldn't the discussion of temperaments happening now on this list be part
of the historical record? And they seem to be near constant.  I dare say
there is debate happening over ET's worth.  When did the ET era come into
being?  Did all other temperaments languish by the way side until somebody
decided to dust them off again?

My knowledge of temperament history is very limited. Just how did ET strong
arm all other temperaments into the back seat.  If ET is truely harder to
tune then an HT why did the industry drift to something more complicated?

I realize that there are some deep seated emotions and attachments to this
subject and I'm in no way trying to get anybody bent out of shape.

Ed, please read these as sincere questions.  I'm hoping you and anyone else
that wants to jump in here can bring me up to speed.

Doug Mahard