>If a room full of technicians can mistakenly identify a > Victorian tuning for ET, ( documented by Jim Coleman), then the differences > between a machine HT and an aural HT mean absolutely nothing at all to a > practical musician. > As far as practical goes, Murry Barbour put out all the info needed to > aurally tune the temperaments, and nothing happened. No growing interest, no > recordings, no dialogue in the Guild, no factory interest, etc. That was the > state of temperament awareness for 50 years prior to Al Sanderson and his > magic blue box. > Since the publication of Jorgensen's offsets, and the development of the > programmable machines, there has been a large resurgence of interest in the > temperaments. This is the wave of the future, and it is very gratifying to > see so many more people now taking an interest in the subject. > I submit that the temperament revival would not have happened without > the machines, and I see no evidence in the past or present to contradict > that. > Regards, > Ed Foote RPT I am glad to see an intererst in tuning methods, especially historic. But here I sit without a tuning machine. However I don't think aural tuners should dispair because after all there were no machines in historic times. And never mind that professional tuners did not start showing up until near the end Chopin's time. It is OK for the tuner to advocate historic tunings, but in the end the choice must come from the player. If he/she needs to make a temperament choice it should come through education and experience. The reality of getting this experience is very limited. Where do they get to hear Meantone from which all temperaments seem to have been developed? Or do they need to hear meantone at all? How do they decide that they want to hear Bach in a Werckmeister, or a Marpug, or a Prince? If they have the luxery of various pianos tuned to various temperaments they might reach an informed opinion. And what is an informend opinion? It is one thing for the tuner to set his machine and give a tuning. It is quite another to understand what the intervals are doing and how they relate in that temperament. This would be the task of the player, and this can only be accomplished aurally. So the need is to know which intervals are pure, which are sharp or flat, and which ones are the "wolves". and what is the starting point. Certain key signatures have certain sounds in certain temperaments, or this notion of "key color" wouldn't float. And what if the player after learning about three or four temps and plays in them comes to the point where he doesn't care what he is playing in? Is it possible he might say, "I don't care?" "I really don't hear that much of a difference execpt here and there and here" And given that "a room full of technicians can mistakenly identify a Victorian tuning for ET," what is to be done when the player asks, "If piano tuners can't tell the difference, why should it make a difference to me?" And indeed what difference does it really make? And who can make that decision? Go ahead, play Bach in ET, then what ever "well" you want, then try it in Meantone. Now what do you think? Or some how listen to Bach in those different temps. Do you get the same experience I get? I forget I am playing (or listening) in "different" temperament. There is perhaps a group of musical minded people that might be temperament sensitive, like those with pitch recognition, or claim "perfect pitch". Unfortunatly I am not one. The point of this post is not to disparage research or experimentation, or playing in the historical temperaments. It is my point of view formed from experiences as a tuner and rank (as in stinks) amature player. These experience do not bear out the intellectual expectations of historical temperaments. The intellectual understanding of temperaments is far and away "better" than actually playing or listening to them. IMHO. Temperament simply doesn't matter until you come to certain keys or intervals, execpt for ET. Yes there is a "charm" of playing Christmas carols in Meantone. Yes there is the odd experience of playing anything in a strict Pythagorean tuning. Yes there is the satisfaction of knowing you have played and heard pieces in Meantone, Marpurg III, Werckmeister, Valotti, Pythagorean, etc etc. Yes there is the satisfaction of knowing the theory of the intervals in the Marpurg, Valotti, Meantone, Young. Yes there is the satisfaction of reading how the great scientists studied and reported on temperaments, like Rosseau, Gallileo, (the father) Newton, Huygens, Pythagorus, Aristoxenes, and Didymus. Don't forget Guido and Ptolomy. All of it is facinating study. Much more facinating than playing or listening to them. ---to me anyhow. Ok I do enjoy tuning the HT's aurally, or trying to. ---ric
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC