In a message dated 4/19/00 5:18:18 PM Central Daylight Time, JIMRPT@AOL.COM writes: << Aiming at an "ET target" and missing it no more invalidates the ET theory than does aiming at an "alternative" target and missing it invalidates that theory....does it? Is it a mistaken action to call something 'ET' which misses the mark by .3 cents on a note? If so, would it not also be a mistaken action to miss a 1/7 meantone by .3 cents on one note and still say it was an 1/7 meantone? And couldn't we also reasonably say that 'no one' has ever tuned a 'true' Valotti-Young? >> Again Ron has done some great work showing that he understands that Temperament is after all, an important topic. I have seen technicians get up in arms about other subjects too such as quality of replacement hammers available. I have seen heated arguments about non-Steinway Teflon bushings, hammer juicing, pinblock doping, CA glue and using replacement parts. The battle raged for years over Aural vs. Electronic Tuning with the kind of temperament used never even entering into the debate. In the scheme of things, the use of a Victorian type temperament as a substitute for ET admittedly makes a small difference, one that most people, ordinary listeners, musicians and technicians alike probably would not recognize unless informed. But does this make the use of such a temperament insignificant or immaterial? Couldn't you say the same thing about the choice of one brand of replacement hammer over another? Couldn't you say the same thin about the Wapin bridge? Most people would never know the difference so therefore, what's the big deal? All of the factors that contribute to the betterment of piano sound and performance are important whether they are so obvious or not. It would be foolish of me to dismiss the Wapin bridge idea for example, just because I don't rebuild pianos. It follows that rebuilders who ignore advancement in temperament and other advanced tuning techniques understanding are missing an opportunity to enhance their best work. To take the last of Jim's statements first, it is indeed far easier to tune a Vallotti-Young Temperament perfectly than it is to tune ET perfectly. This subject has been covered before rather thoroughly. Even though a 1/7 Comma Meantone is *defined* as a series of 3.0 tempered 5ths, it does not change the basic character of the temperament to either make a small error or make a deliberate alteration (as Tim Farley RPT of Madison often does). It still will be a 1/7 Comma Meantone. Unfortunately however, as soon as there is a perceptible error or alteration of ET, it is no longer ET. Take the example of the Quasi ET that has only one note different by 1 cent. That makes a deliberate and significant difference. If one allows lots of errors, even if they are small to be introduced to the temperament, that which was intended to be ET easily becomes something else. Unfortunately, these errors often have an adverse, not beneficial effect. Understanding of Temperament is important. Thanks for sticking your neck out, Ron. Your example proves your point. A straight line can only be straight if it really is but a curve is still a curve even if that curve is not exactly as intended. Small errors in most HT's truly do not matter because they do not change the basic character of the temperament but small errors in ET do change the purpose and intent of the work radically. Bill Bremmer RPT Madison, Wisconsin
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC