Temperament, A pianist responds

David Love davidlovepianos@earthlink.net
Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:22:57 -0800


After reading this more carefully I just wanted to comment because I think
you really missed my point.  When I cited opus 90 as an example of the
arbitrariness of WT, this is what I meant.  The first part of this sonata,
in E minor, is full of energy, drive and would benefit from an "active key"
more characteristic of the far end of the circle in WT's.  But this is not
really at issue because of the unsettled nature of the minor key itself.  So
let's go to the second movement in E major.  This key in WT is not a
terribly tranquil sounding key.  Rather, it is fairly active even in the
mild WT's such as Broadwood's.  In the Young temperament, it is a very
active, read dissonant, sounding key.  But this movement is characterized by
rich sonorities and a tranquillity which stands in contrast to the frenetic
first movement.  Beethoven's instructions at the opening tell the player to
pay attention to this.  He wants you to enjoy the harmonies.  The character
of that movement stands in stark contrast to the character of E major in WT,
at least to my ear.  And though I am not a concert pianist, I am no hack.  I
have studied for years with some of the best teachers in the Bay Area and
feel quite comfortable discussing interpretive issues with these pieces.  A
WT E major may be perfectly suitable for some pieces, but not for that one.
Thus the suggestion that the piece was conceived based on the nature of WT's
is not congruous, at least to me.

There are other examples.  Chopin's etude op. 10 # 3 in E major does not
sound good to me in WT, even though the piece that follows, Op. 10 # 4 in C#
minor sounds fine.  And while we are on Chopin, his etude op 10 #6 in Eb
minor may sound fine in a WT because of its restless nature, but Schubert's
Impromptu in Gb, op 90 # 3 sounds bad, or more to the point, it just sounds
out of tune.  When I tuned A WT for a customer who requested it the other
day, she sat down an started to play the Chopin etude op 25 # 1 in Ab.  As I
listened I couldn't help but think the piano sounded out of tune.  That
rapidly beating Ab - C third just stood out like a sore thumb.  There are
countless such examples.

And that is my point.  WT keys may suit some pieces but not others.  To me,
this puts serious doubt in my mind about whether composition was driven by
temperament, which was the original discussion.  I am more inclined to think
that the great composers tolerated the limitations of the keyboard.  Though
many used the key board to work out problems, ideas appear to be have been
more often self generated.  Reports of Beethoven's piano by those who heard
him demonstrate pieces are that it was usually so out of tune that the
nuances of temperament would have been lost anyway.

As far as my view that choosing a WT over ET imposes one's personal taste,
here I observe a philosophical difference in what I consider to be my role
as a piano technician.  Choosing a style of tuning which gives each key a
distinct character, like it or not, places greater interpretive importance
on the technician than should be there.  I've always operated under the
philosophy that I have done my work best when it is noticed least.  When the
piano is well tuned, voiced (and regulated), the pianist and the audience
will have a more direct connection.  The artist controls the emotion of the
piece by control of tempo, dynamics, and their own interpretive vision and
style.  When one or the other begins to notice the tuning as something
"other" or when the ripe character of a WT F# is inappropriate, then it
breaks that tenuous connection and I have allowed my lack of skill or my ego
to interfere with the relationship between the artist and his/her audience.
Then, I have not done my job.

David Love

From: <A440A@AOL.COM>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: December 09, 2001 1:52 PM
Subject: Temperament, A pianist responds


> Greetings,
>      Certainly no one thought that the temperament discussion was over,
did
> they?  Well, buckle the belts, hide the kids, question beliefs, and for
the
> uninterested, please delete, now.
>
>    I must disagree with David's posting of last month: to wit
>  (snips to focus on Beethoven)
> >>The arbitrary choice is that C is more tranquil than F#. In Beethoven's
> Op.90,  in >the second movement when the piece moves to a very tranquil E
> major, in normal >WT a fairly "active" key, it would benefit from a
quieter
> key.  In all honesty, I don't >think Beethoven was thinking of different
> temperaments when he wrote that, >though I can't, of course, know for
sure.
> >   Thus the choice of using a WT that creates more activity in E major
seems
> to be >imposing a personal taste in tuning that is not appropriate to the
> piece.  I am sure >there are also pieces where the revcerse could be
argued.
> To try and argue the >superiority of WT over ET and that WT has more color
> and therefore is more >interesting, musical, dynamic, multi-dimensional,
etc.
> is a meaningless waste of >time.<<
>
>       Since David cited specific passages, I sought the response of a
pianist
> by forwarding this post to Enid Katahn, (the pianist that has played on
the
> temperament CD's).  I shall post her comments below in "quotation marks",
but
> first, to address one thing, when David writes:
>
> >>"The arbitrary choice is that C is more tranquil than F#". <<
>
>    Not arbitrary at all, but a logical and widely accepted way to temper
> prior to 1900. This  basic arrangement stayed constant from Weckmeister to
> Braid-White.  In this tuning that evolved out of refined meantone
philosophy
> and the Holder bearing plan, C would always have been more "tranquil" than
> F#.
>     Since virtually everyone who published temperaments and how to create
> them in the years between 1700 and 1850 obeyed this same order to the
keys,
> I think it plausible to assume that all pre-1880 composers were familiar
with
> how the "colors" progressed in keyboard tuning and illogical to think that
the
>  greatest composer of the era would be oblivious to these characteristic
> differences between keys.
>      So, back to the original post by Dave:
>
> >>There are some pieces where you could argue that a reverse of that
system
> would be better;  for example, Beethoven's op. 90.  The opening in
> Em(relative of G major) which is filled with tension might benefit from a
> reverse WT.
>
> To which Enid repsonds;
>     "Not true.  Just because a key is more dissonant than Cmaj.  doesn't
> neccessarily mean it isn't peaceful. There is a difference between
dissonance
> as harshness and dissonance as emotionality, or expressiveness".  In this
> piece, Beethoven was looking for keys with more expression.  As he goes
> through, there are places where he creates a lot more contrast than he
would
> have in a more consonant key, such as C major."
>
>  Several examples:
>
> bar 9:   Beginning in a Gmaj, this passage moves downward, finally passing
> through Cmaj before ending on a B triad.  So, LVB places the most
consonant
> chord on the keyboard immediately before one of the most highly tempered.
On
> a WT , this juxtaposition creates a great harmonic contrast.  The
> pianist/historian's perspective on this is " This extreme contrast may be
> read as LvB's way of letting us know that there is something going on
under
> the surface and it is not all as peaceful as you might think".  (If LVB
did
> write this piece for his sponsor Baron Lichnowsky and his wife , it could
be
> making a musical referrence to the stormy marriage that they hid below the
> verneer of civility in public. Beethoven is known for this sort of
> stuff..Call the musicologists!!.)
>
>    However, what if Beethoven had written Op. 90 in C?
>    "If op. 90 had been composed in the "more consonant" key of C, Bar 9
would
> have moved from from G to C, causing a  change in how the passage works,
> especially the last two chords.  In the original key, the final modulation
> from C to B creates a particularly strong musical resolution of this
passage,
> a resolution suggesting something mysterious.  Had the sonata been in C,
the
> move from F to E would not be as dramatic.  Instead, the passage would end
> with two chords more similar to one another instead of its original very
> "expressive" chord played against a background of maximum consonance."
>    In view of the above, when David  writes "to argue that WT has more
color
> and therefore is more interesting, musical, dynamic,
> multi-dimensional,<snip>is a waste of time". ,  I must disagree for the
> following reason, among others:
>      In WT this modulation changes not only the pitch of the interval, but
> also the beating, or "color', whereas in ET, only the pitch changes.
Since
> more happens when you drop 100 cents while changing from a 7 cent to a  19
> cent third than when you simply drop everything 100 cents and the ratios
stay
> the same, I consider the WT to be more  "multi-dimensional"  and dynamic
than
> ET.  The WT modulation is certainly more complex, even in the simplest
> physical terms.
>      I would suggest that harmonic contrast, used in the above example,
works
> to enhance the expressive intentions of this music. (this is in the
opening
> bars, where we normally expect to find the musical expectations and hints
of
> things to come to be laid out).  The choice of key determines the degrees
of
> contrast in the passages and I don't think Beethoven left those to
anything
> arbitrary.
>
>
> Example 2: second mvt. going into bar 32,
>      The original choice for this passage in C#minor, a very colorful,
> expressive key in WT.  Enid writes:
> " had Beethoven written op 90 in C, this would place this passage in Am,
> which defeats the whole purpose.  Am is a pleasant, peaceful sound, all
the
> way through, but this passage is supposed to be full of emotion".   Played
in
> the key of Am on a Young temperament, the passage sounded lifeless to the
> several listeners present.
>
> Example 3:   The passage beginning at 115.
>   Here, Beethoven goes from one extreme of consonance to the other, and
does
> it in a very refined fashion.  Starting in C, he moves through  Cm,
C#min,
> C#, Emaj, E7, then crashing B's resolving to E.  In a WT, these
modulations
> create a steady rise in the amount of tension leading up to the climatic
B,
> from which, in the final move to E, creates a strong resolution.  A
> masterful example of using progressively increasing tempering as the
passage
> develops, arriving at a point of maximum "expression" (B) just before the
> final resolution (to E).  The emotionality or expression of the piece is
> heightened by this coherent, organized increase.
> However,
>     If the sonata were in C, this progression would have  begun in Ab!
> Hardly a consonant pleasant beginning, and a place from which it will be
> difficult to increase tension. That is a very intense key to begin a
passage
> such as this!  Where is there to go??
>    Had Op.90 been composed in the "more consonant" Key of C, the movement
> would travel through:
>   Ab, Abm ,  Am,    A,     C      C7  G  then ending on C.  So, the
passage
> would have had the softening of the tempering going against the rise of
> musical tension plus that odd return to consonance in the middle A to C
move.
>    Also, the  climatic, expressive chord would not be the original's
heavily
> tempered B, but rather, a usually dulcet G.  This would be an odd use of
> temperament and wouldn't be supportive of the musical direction the
passage
> exhibits.
>     All in all, Enid Katahn feels like Beethoven knew exactly what he was
> doing.  The "color" effects created in a WT consistantly work with the
> musical direction of his music.   This is to be expected, since,as she
points
> out, composers didn't just start with the first note and go through to the
> end, but rather, they had distinct musical moments that they would go
about
> linking together, figuring out how to get from here to there,etc.  In
> anything but ET, the choice of key is a fundamental component of how the
> harmony functionswith the musical direction.
>    One mistake that is often made is to equate dissonance with bad,
> consonance with good.  This totally sidesteps the musical qualities of
> contrast.  We know that there are physical reactions to the various levels
of
> temperament, and the music certainly seems to support their use in
consistant
> ways. It would be a shame if Beethoven used these musical qualities and we
> missed them, entirely, because of our allegiance to a status quo.
>      I, and others that have delved into it, are finding that these
qualities
> are very attractive to pianists.    Yes, they can be cast in a crude and
> counterproductive light as "out of tune",  but I suggest that comes from a
> musically limiting viewpoint. Drawing the curtains before seeing the play
is
> no way to find out what the story really is.     There is nothing magical
> about a 13.7 cent third.   Restricting oneself to a single temperament,
for
> life, a person should have an extremely good reason to do so, and such a
> decision should be as informed as possible.
>          Physically, there is more complexity in a well-temperament than
an
> equal one, and music performed on a WT is de facto more harmonically
complex.
>  If the variety appeared random, one could question why a composer was
> writing seemingly irrespective of the keys' characters, however, key usage
> isn't random or arbitrary.
>       In a passage by passage examination, this complexity often appears
to
> be an intention of composers such as Beethoven.   The effects are not
easily
> measured, except by direct comparison, as in side by side listening to a
WT
> and a ET.  This has been done in the past and I believe the results
usually
> favor the non-ET tuning.
>   What's are these differences worth?  That depends on how we use them.
What
> is a "meaningless waste of time" to one person is a path to a deeper
> understanding of music for others.  I don't think a musical genius like
> Beethoven was composing piano music in ignorance of the way the keys
sounded,
> and the preponderance of evidence points to WT being the standard of his
day.
>
>      So when David decries "imposing a personal taste in tuning that is
not
> appropriate to the piece",  I must respond that I see the use of 20th
century
> tuning for 18th and 19th century music as a far more dramatic example of
> imposing personal tastes, and  that any almost any form of WT would
provide
> less of an imposition.
>
> Regards,
> Ed Foote RPT
>    (Stay tuned for more. I've some modern reasons too! )
>



This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC