In a message dated 8/14/00 9:20:32 AM Central Daylight Time, ginacarter@carolina.rr.com (Eugenia Carter) writes: << Currently I service quite a few customers whose pianos were tuned in HTs by other technicians. These customers called me because they did not like the HT tuning and were embarrassed or just didn't want to debate with the technician who previously tuned their piano in the HT. >> Thanks a lot for a very fair minded post, Gina. I actually often have the same experience as you do, only that the customers do not like what is represented as ET. In my experience, however, I have consistently noted that the temperament never was ET to begin with, but Reverse Well. All of the intransigence, hypocrisy and bigotry that HT tuners are accused of having is usually more of a motivation for the customer to change tuners than the actual sound that the Reverse Well Temperament creates on the piano. Naturally, after my recent post, I got an anonymous and cowardly letter from someone accusing me of "imposing my own taste" on others and "self destructive" behavior. I have been tuning exclusively in non-ET's for some 11 years now and regularly tune in excess of 25 pianos per week. 99% of the time I encounter a piano tuned by another technician, whether it is by a local tech or a piano recently moved to town, it has evidently been tuned in Reverse Well, not ET. The concert which was the subject of DI's post featured a harpsichord and fortepiano, NOT a modern piano. At least by now, it should be common knowledge that these instruments and the composers who were named NEVER were associated with ET. Yet, ET was chosen. Why? Probably because the people who tuned the instruments and played them had no knowledge of what may have been most appropriate. They have been the victims of the very same intransigence, hypocrisy and bigotry that the ET only crowd accuse HT tuners of. In my view, the attendees of that concert were offered a misrepresentation of the music at best, a fake or fraudulent representation being a more apt description. Yes, it was "enjoyed by all" and as I suggested, it probably would have been no matter what was done, a modern piano tuned in Reverse Well or a Clavinova with the appropriate button pushed. It isn't at all uncommon. And, were those tunings *really* ET or were they just a single minded, blind and ignorant to all other possiblities attempt at ET which resulted in something quite unintentional but which went unnoticed but nevertheless accepted? This was intended to be a concert where people were supposed to hear an "authentic" rendering of the music on historical instruments (most appropriately tuned in historic ways). Unfortunately, the ET only intransigence managed to force *their* taste upon the public. The whole idea is and has always been that if any and all ideas except ET can be eradicated, then no one will ever want nor even be aware of any other possibility. Then everything would be easier, simpler and cheaper, wouldn't it? Just like pushing the button on the Clavinova or even using recorded music at a public performance. It already happens in many venues where there used to be real keyboards and other live music. I would confidently offer a piano tuned the way I do to compare with one tuned by an ET only proponent any day of the year. As a musician, I have to work with pianos tuned in ET and I accept them and find them workable as everyone else does. I don't think, however that it means I have to tune that way just because someone else says it is the one and only way and I certainly don't have to accept Reverse Well as a substitute and remain quiet about it. I have consistently stated my position on this subject and I practice what I preach. I wonder what kind of "hypocrisy" this represents to Richard Breckne? In the case of this historic music concert, who was forcing whose personal taste upon whom? Whose behavior was really self destructive or destructive in a more general sense? Bill Bremmer RPT Madison, Wisconsin
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC