Non-ETs; more organic than ET?

[Jason Kanter]

Don, your credentials do not extend to musical history. Please educate
yourself a bit before declaiming like this. You might look at my website
http://www.rollingball.com/TemperamentsFrames.htm  for a visual of how the
mathematics work in these temperaments. Mozart probably played on
instruments tuned to the Prinz temperament, which you can find in the group
of Well temperaments.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Don A. Gilmore" <eromlignod@kc.rr.com>
To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2004 1:12 PM
Subject: Re: Non-ETs; more organic than ET?


> I may be an engineer, but I'm also an advanced, conservatory-trained
pianist
> of some 32 years experience (I started at the conservatory when I was
eight
> in 1972) and  I come from a line of five generations of professional
> musicians (my grandfather was a famous jazz bandleader, singer and
> saxophonist in Kansas City).  That's more than can be said for most
tuners.
>
> What was heard in Mozart's day was inferior, just as automobiles of 1915
> were inferior to the ones today.  Mozart didn't play in a primitive
> temperament because he wanted to; he did because there wasn't a better way
> yet.  There is a concrete, musical reason why virtually all instruments
are
> tuned to ET and it has nothing to do with the "tidiness" of mathematics
(and
> ET isn't constucted with a rational number, by the way).  ET is the *only*
> temperament where everyone plays the same intervals within a key and in
all
> the keys all the time.  There is no other.  In *all* other systems *no*
two
> keys sound alike.  In *all* other systems you cannot have equal consonance
> for all intervals, even in the same key.  If you flatten the E in the
major
> third between C and E to be more consonant, the resulting third from E to
G#
> will not be the same...in fact it will be *worse* than ET.  And all other
> intervals that include that E will be changed by varying degrees.  I have
> played in other temperaments and it is a pain in the ass, especially when
> accompanying other instruments.
>
> ET wasn't foisted upon the musical community by dastardly engineers,
> politicians, or by divine decree; it was invented *by* musicians and has
> been universally adopted because WE LIKE IT and because it solves the many
> problems and limitations you experience if you don't use it.  I AM a
> musician.  ET vastly simplifies music for us and lets us all play and
> modulate with complete freedom.  Any other temperament is a gimmick, like
> titanium golf clubs or a six-string bass guitar.  A $500 cue isn't going
to
> make you shoot pool any better and a fancy tuning isn't going to make you
> sound any better.
>
> Don
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "David M. Porritt" <dm.porritt@verizon.net>
> To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2004 1:17 PM
> Subject: Re: Non-ETs; more organic than ET?
> > Engineers (who are not always the most artistic lot) tend to think that
if
> a temperament can be constructed with a rational number it must be right.
> However, if one wants to hear what Mozart was hearing you can't use ET.
Of
> course hearing what Mozart heard might not be important to you, but if it
> is................
> >
> > dave
>
> _______________________________________________
> pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives