Historic tuning modes

[A440A@AOL.COM]

Greetings all, 
Been listening to a Werckmeister III on a freshly restored Steinway AIII.  
what a combo.....

Newton writes: 
> I think that the reference to ET should be 1928 not 1828.  I
>likely misunderstood what Mr. Jorgensen said or took libatious
>liberties.

    I dunno,  it seems possible, if one took a lot of trouble, to tune ET in 
1828.  But I suggest that there are more pertinent questions, so I'll just 
pitch them out and as always, be interested in whatever various answers are 
posited.  (yea,  dang, this thread has probably turned into a temperament 
discussion, but this stuff just will not go away@!(:?}}
 So,  some questions: 
Was there a market for this?    
     Was there enough demand that tuners would have abandoned centuries-old 
harmonic values for a (much) more difficult temperament?   And if so,  who 
would teach them?  Read Montal's instructions and give it a try.  Use the 
contiguous thirds without checks and see how hard it is to get it close to 
ET.  
    Did anybody here learn to tune ET to within say, 1.5 cents of perfect on 
their own without anything to read on the process or guiding advice from an 
already ET capable tuner?  Think any of us could have done it in isolation?  
Is it plausible that ET was anywhere near the standard before several 
generations of instrument repairmen/choirmaster/voice-teacher/ whoever else 
had a tuning hammer in their hand between 1800 and 1900 struggled to achieve 
it?  There were no schools, very scant literature, certainly less 
intermingling than today, and instrument builders all had their own 
temperaments, it seems.   
    Does anybody question that somewhere in there ET took over? (If not 
perfectly measurable ET, then at least the 12 notes were close enough, ie, 
spaced  evenly enough to be below the general audience's or users awareness.) 
 Was it was close enough to deny any discernable "character" to the keys?  
Judging from the fin-de-sickle compositions, plausibly so.  
  These and other questions lead me to believe that while the move from 
Meantone to Well-tempered, (which means "wholly tempered, not "finely" or 
"nicely" tempered), was caused by musical adventurers needing those other 
keys to be more musically useful, the move to ET was caused by its commercial 
appeal.  It was a move that was in sync with a number of prevailing 
attitudes. Science was coming to the fore, ET is science, perfectly 
describable by math.  The manufacturers were greatly increasing their size of 
business, they would have many tuners, and a single standard was easier to 
administer.  With large numbers of valved horns beginning to appear in the 
1840's, ET made a lot of manufacturing sense.   Composers couldn't be 
avante-guarde if they followed their predecessors, so music DID leave its 
reliance on tonality for a spell.  The move to ET was part of a bigger 
consolidation of culture across the western world. It was to harmony what the 
BauHaus was to architecture.     
    The move from WT to ET represented trading the shaping of a palette of 
consonances for an unchanging standard, (which happened to be a brilliant 14 
cent third). Musically, there is a distinctly different  quality to the two 
systems.  They are not interchangable if the maximum expression is to be had 
from the music.   
   There's room for value judgement there, but the listening will be the 
final answer, and that is not a definite thing, either.  Poor choices of 
temperament can be made when tuning non-ET.  I suppose that is one perceived 
advantage of using ET, that a "wrong" choice cannot be made, but that 
security comes at a cost. 
      The cost is depth of emotional involvement created by the harmony, and 
I will wind this screed up with the thought that this loss can be measured by 
the slowly fading interest in piano.  We will never see the piano's 
importance return to its glory days of 1880-1920, we can't hope that it will 
replace things like gameboys, synthesizers, drum machines, radios, computers, 
etc. that absorb entertainment time today.  We can't hope that everybody will 
blow up their TV and return to listening to piano music as a central 
activity.  
      As technicians, we CAN hope to create a stronger attachment between 
pianists and their instruments, though, and it seems that the introduction of 
WT does that.  It certainly has in my own practise.    It is a powerful tool, 
it changes the music, it changes the musicians, and it can change 
technician's outlook on life.  
    I have seen recently several instances where the WT tech is suddenly more 
in demand.  It may behoove some to look at multi-temperament capability as 
more a financial asset than an aesthetic expression, but there is no need for 
the two to be exclusive. 
Regards, 
Ed Foote RPT