Greetings, Interesting and insightful letter from Ted Sambell, and since I got mentioned, I feel the call to respond to certain parts. I shall forward this to him at his own address, since he is off-list. Inre Well Temperaments: >What I object to is the imposition by some of our fraternity of these >tunings on their customers, who usually cannot be very aware or >knowledgeable of the complexities involved. I find that the great majority of customers have no idea of what is involved in ANY temperament. As to the use of another temperament being an "imposition", my experience has been the opposite, with 99.9% of those that I decide are likely candidates being quite impressed with the sound and thankful for being introduced to them. Presently my clientele is about 75% non-ET. >It is not enough for one to >put forward the argument that one did a historic tuning for such and such >a client and they declared it the best tuning they ever heard; it is >merely anecdotal, subjective, and open to all kinds of interpretation. I agree, any one customer that has an epiphany can be looked at as merely an anecdotal occurance, but after a significant(actually,an overwhelming) number of them all react the same way, the interpretation of what is happening begins to focus on something more than subjective. By the same measure, one customer reacting negatively to a WT is only an anecdote, but if all of them did, then I would have to either starve or rethink the value of using that tuning. (However, that is NOT what is happening). >When one normally tunes In Equal Temperamant this is not being in any way imposed >on the client. One is working to an official and accepted standard, in >every way comparable to other standards, like the length of a foot, the >weight of a kilogram, the size of an acre. If feet, kilos and acreage were as varialbe as "ET" I have seen in practise, civilization would grind to a halt! The percentage of working tuners that have joined the Guild and passed the RPT test is small, so I don't believe the standards we are seeing among 'ourselves' are what customers at large generally get, though the machines have made distinctions between master and beginner less obvious to many. I am also not sure how we may regard ET as "official". It may have become whatever it is by default, but the only "official" aspect of it is that it is the test temperament for the PTG. This doesn't mean it is what the world really wants. At one time, a "Regular Man's Haircut" was part of the official test to get licensed as a barber, but after many years, that style was pushed out of the way for a wide variety of others. So it may be with temperament, (to make a hairy analogy). >I am only too happy to tune whatever temperament the customer requires, and have indeed done so quite >frequently. But I do not try to pretend I am providing something unique or superior they cannot get from >my fellow tuners. This would just be dishonest salesmanship. Perhaps up there, but I know of more than one locality in which there is only ONE tech that has taken the trouble to learn a variety of temperaments, and in these areas that tech's tuning is unique. They are also in the enviable postion of acquiring new clientele because of it. This isn't dishonest, but, rather, the benefit of initiative and education and has been at the forefront of my efforts with the classes I have given. There is money in the temperaments, and more and more techs are seeing that. The greatest resistance to non-ET usage seems to be coming from the techs that don't want to change and resent having to make the choice between putting out more effort or losing customers. (there is also resistance from purely aesthetic reasons, which I consider far more honorable). >Additionally, some of the proponents of historic >temperaments are paranoid in their hatred of equal temperament to the >extent of refusing to tune it at all, and 'blame' it on the piano tuning >fraternity. This is not only absurd, but places them in the position of >doing exactly what they accuse others of. I submit that that description fits no more than one or two persons, and they are such an insignificant part of the trade that they will have little effect on anything. Please, don't paint the practise of temperament variety with the reactionary tint of these few. Most of us that use variety of temperaments include ET right in there, too. >There are two aspects of the whole discussion on >historical tuning which I feel could use more attention. The first, which >I have mentioned several times, yet seems to be ignored is that 1/4 comma >meantone has one extraordinary characteristic in common with equal >temperament, namely, that all its usable keys are alike each other. Agreed, and this is one of two shortcomings of Meantone, it contains virtually no key character(oh, I know, the 1/6 and the PBMT have gradations, but minimal ones). The other being the restriction that 41 cent dim4ths create. The music composed during its reign does rely on the effects of Just intervals, but MT is often an impoverished choice for later compositions. >This being so, one would think that the condemnation of Equal Temperament >on the grounds that 'all keys sound alike' would apply with equal force >to Meantone. I don't know. There may be a difference between all keys sounding alike with Just thirds and all keys sounding alike with 14 cent thirds. And therein lies the compromise's nature. How much "Justness" is it worth giving up to be able to modulate at will? All of it? some of it? most of it? These are the questions upon which the temperament debate has rested for over 20 centuries, and we are just now able to compare them all at once. It is a great time to be a tuner! > It so happens that I really like Meantone, but the music for it must >be chosen with great care. And this is the crux of the matter. There is >no such thing as a perfect temperament for all music, and to tune a Well >Temeperamant in the belief that anything is 'better' just because it is >not Equal makes no sense at all. In my experience, very few tuners believe that "anything is better" just because it is not equal. ET has its place, but I submit that it has enjoyed hedgemony the past 100 years primarily because of commercial reasons and convenience. That is changing, today. >(Incidentally, I put forth the notion that key colour does exist in Equal Temperament, on the grounds that >beats are a component of the tones we hear, and that transposing from one key to another speeds or >slows them) I can't yet agree with that. In many cases, composition determines the speed of the beating (a tenth played in the WT key of Ab might beat slower than a third played in the key of D , but we still hear that Ab as more tempered). However, a given "x" cent third is sensed as the same amount of dissonance no matter where it is found. This has some qualifications: The linkage of apparent dissonance to beat speeds has to take into account the frequency range in which both are heard. Also, Plomp and Levelt demonstrated, via their critical band studies, that even a Just M3 sounds dissonant if played low enough in the scale, ( due to partials other than the 5/4 occuring closely enough to each other to be heard as beating). > I have Ed Foote's CD of three Beethoven >sonatas, The first and last movements of the Pathetique, which are in >minor, seem to work very well, with excellent performances from the >artist, but I find the beautiful serene melody of the middle >movement very jarring, particularly any time it moves into the dominant >harmonies. Enid, when asked, explained that this sonata was called the "Pathetique" for a reason, and she felt that the middle mvt. was composed expressly to create an emotional response of pathos. It also sets the stage for the last section, which is heard as more beautiful than it otherwise would have been,(the "tight-shoe theory" of harmony). The middle section, in Ab, has a full syntonic comma in the harmony, and as a tuner, it raises the hair on the back of my neck. However, this passage caused more response from non-technician listeners than any other part of the CD and it was all positive! (this surprised me, I'll admit). Non-technical listeners regarded it as very "expressive" and beautiful. >Retuning to accomodate the music would have solved the problem, The "problem" seems to be mainly with us tuners. The aversion we have to a syntonic third is perhaps due to our being accustomed to the ET third. We are trained by our exposure to ET to judge an equal temperament by its not having anything that harsh. As you said later in your post when explaining why your JI tuning was regarded as out of tune , "to a great degree we are conditioned by our traditions". However, I think we can grow and change to the point where the contrast between harmonic extremes will carry emotional impact that outweighs the intellectual recognition of an alien sound. At least, I hope so and am working towards that end. Maybe we are starting a "new" tradition? >The second matter which deserves mention, is that the >proponents of Historic temperamants never seem to begin at the beginning >but launch straight away into the complexities of various Well >temperaments. Well, what is the beginning? Just Intonation is where any >discussion of tuning should start. It may be that we are focussing on pianos, and since they were invented in 1700, Just Intonation's heyday had been long past. Granted, the harpsichords are the pianos' intonational ancestors and they were certainly around in the Mannerist period, so JI could have been part of their 'DNA', but the modulatory restriction of JI certainly didn't find much fertile ground in the increasingly complex music that the keyboards allowed. As far as a starting point, our second CD, "6 Degrees Of Tonality" begins with Scarlatti in 1/4 comma meantone, so that is representative of Just intervals, no? It seemed a likely intonational starting point for a piano recording, and we did end the CD with an equal temperament! >Who has heard Just Intonation tuned on a piano? Not many, >I think. Since piano tuning cost money, it's reasonable that such a restrictive tuning would be a hard sell. However, several electronic keyboards have a temperament switch that allows a "Just" setting so more people are hearing it all the time. You have to pick your key to use it, and it is really restrictive, but it is being heard. There is also a growing JI movement centered around the synthesizer crowd, but those aren't pianos. >Realistically, we cannot expect to abandon Equal Temperament, any more >than the Scottish bagpiper can be expected to abandon his pentatonic >tuning. Indonisia, Japan, India, Korea, China, the Middle East are >unlikely to destroy their musical heritage by changing their tunings, >despite the way Western music has swept the world. And this is as it >should be. "Musical heritage" is the key word here, (ok, I had to fit one pun in somewhere). Our piano heritage arose out of a different intonational environment than the equally tempered one of today. The evidence of that is sufficient to require we consider that at the very least, the "canon" of western piano music was certainly being created before ET became dominant. If so, then our heritage is compromised by the exclusive use of modern tuning and the progressive tuner of the 21st century will make use of all alternatives, rejecting the constraints of having only one temperament. The vast majority of us tuners using well-temperaments also use ET, I certainly do. (I have one studio account that is worth more than $12k a year and it would not be mine without my ability to produce a broadcast quality ET. I am not going to start a battle in my pantry!) I hope we are not characterized by the very few radicals, as I believe that they have actually been counterproductive and are NOT representative of anything. I don't think we do a disservice to our customers by educating them, and when we do, a WT has not shown itself to be an imposition, but rather, an opening door to a new world of harmony and beauty. Yes, there are risks, and there are pitfalls, but risks and gains are proportional, so the adoption of a wider view of temperaments offers an opportunity for those willing to put forth the effort to learn how to use them. It has never been easier. Ted, I hope you can come to my class at the upcoming CAPT convention, I would certainly appreciate and respect your critique of it! Best regards, Ed Foote RPT
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC