ET just as easy as HT? (was aural - sounds nice?)

[Paul S. Larudee]

I almost hate to get involved, but I just want to point out the the question of
"difficulty" is a matter of opinion.  Arguments in support of a given point of
view are possible and have been well articulated by the participants to the
discussion.  However, as in all matters of opinion, there can be no "proof."

Paul S. Larudee, RPT
Richmond, CA

Conrad Hoffsommer wrote:

> Bill, Jim,
> At 09:36 10/06/2000 -0400, you wrote:
>
> >Well, Jim I can back up what I say.  As usual when talking about
> >temperaments, I refer to the teachings of Professor Owen Jorgensen RPT.  The
>
> >   To tune ET, you must make 3 *estimates* before you
> >can make a single check.  Even then, it is possible to make errors along
> >the way because of the *unavailability* of adequate checks and proofs that
> >the temperament is progressing properly.
>
> If I recall correctly Owen taught temperaments using the "C" fork, which
> certainly makes sense for the "normal" tonal center of HTs, but I certainly
> agree that "flying blind" for those three steps in 12ET makes hitting A440
> _exactly_ a somewhat iffy proposition.
>
> >In many HT's by contrast, absolute *proof* that each and every interval is
> >correct is available at each and every step thus allowing the tuner to
> >know with ease and for sure that the temperament is as intended.  Add that
> >to the fact that small errors *do not* affect the outcome of a typical HT
> >as much
>
> >and you have a strong argument to support the statement that "ET is the
> >most difficult of all temperaments to tune."
>
> >What evidence to you have to support your argument that ET is no more
> >difficult in terms of + or - cent errors than any other temperament?
> >Bill Bremmer RPT
>
> My take on this is that you are both right.
> -If you are a little "off" from ET, it isn't ET.
> -If you are a little "off" from Kirnberger, it isn't Kirnberger.
>
> -If you are a little "off" from ET, it won't
> actually/technically/computer-certifiably be ET, but might be an
> approximation which has another name and which will work quite admirably in
> ET's stead.
> -If you are "off" an equal amount in Kirnberger (or any other HT), it won't
> be Kirnberger, but very possibly will exhibit all the qualities desired of
> an unequal temperament, and might also have morphed into another temperament.
>
> So....
> I think that the real question here is: How far "off" can any of these
> temperaments be before thay lose their desired characteristics? Is that
> increment the same, as I think Jim is trying to say, or different as I
> believe Bill is saying?
>
> Conrad Hoffsommer - Music Technician -mailto:hoffsoco@luther.edu
> Luther College, 700 College Drive, Decorah, Iowa 52101-1045
> Voice-(319)-387-1204  //  Fax (319)-387-1076(Dept.office)
>
> Si fractum non sit noli id referice.