TUNING digest 1604

Please take us off your mailing list--this is our third request

tuning@eartha.mills.edu wrote:

> TUNING Digest 1604
>
> Topics covered in this issue include:
>
> 1) Clavichords
> by Carl Lumma
> 2) Misc
> by Carl Lumma
> 3) Diagrams
> by Carl Lumma
> 4) Re: Tuning List CD comments
> by Gary Morrison
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 1
>
> Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 20:31:18 -0800
> From: Carl Lumma
> To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
> Subject: Clavichords
> Message-ID: <19981206013023359.AAA386@nietzsche>
>
> >I agree regarding harpsichords, but not with the general slight towards
> >historical keyboards. I would be very curious to learn exactly what kind
> >of a clavichord you have worked with to have arrived at such an opinion.
>
> I have played a variety of clavichords, both fretted and unfretted,
> including efforts by Thomas Ciul, several Zuckermann kits, and a Peter
> Fisk, which I own.
>
> >While many poorly-made instruments are so badly balanced in action that
> >bebung is almost inevitable, the timbre of the instruments with which I have
> >worked has been extremely rich, albeit intimately quiet overall. (A
> >comparison of the clavichord with the ch'in is appropriate here). I have
> >had no trouble tuning clavichords to ratios of seven and eleven.
>
> Both Norman Henry and I have had little success with ratios above 5 on the
> clavichord. However, I once had the opportunity to play a Challis
> clavichord (such a work of art you cannot imagine), and I could see getting
> 7's on it. I would be very interested in hearing your 11-limit clavichord,
> and I'd be happy to pay the cost of sending a tape with some samples on it
> to hear the results. Say... what's a ch'in?
>
> >And on a modern instrument, like the Wilson-Hackleman clavichord, it is a
> >breeze.
>
> I am dying to hear this thing! Everybody I asked in LA said it didn't
> sound very good, tho...
>
> >While in the US, I had a fortepiano in my apartment, and I had the
> >opportunity to compare the ease of tuning it with a (well-known)
> single->strung Boesendorfer Imperial and with a run of the mill
> medium-sized >Steinway. All were tuned by ear to a (again well-known)
> tuning with just >fifths and sevenths and then the tunings measured with a
> strobe tuner. The >fortepiano was both the easiest to tune and the closest
> to Just, the >Boesendorfer a respectable second and the Steinway a distant
> third.
>
> I am un-familiar with any single-strung Bosendorfer. Of course they are
> well known for putting a hitch pin on each string... and for their
> inferior sound...
>
> It's far from clear what your strobe tuner was measuring. I own the latest
> and highest-end Peterson model made, and my ear rarely agrees with the
> wheel. I have no problem whatsoever tuning a Steinway to 9-limit JI by
> ear, to a level of accuracy measurable only (maybe) by a Sanderson
> Accu-tuner (I've never used one myself, but they do produce very nice
> tunings).
>
> >But I don't know how to even start arguing with someone who claims the
> >difference between Equal temperament and meantone is hardly noticeable on
> >a clavichord. Are you, sir, deaf?
>
> Don't get me wrong, I love the clavichord. It is an instrument of great
> sensitivity. But it is based on a bad idea: trying to start and stop a
> string at the same place. If the string didn't stretch, you wouldn't hear
> anything at all.
>
> I can hear the difference between meantone and 12tET on my clavichord, but
> the people I play the clavichord for cannot. They can, however, hear the
> difference between these two tunings on my modern piano.
>
> Carl
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 2
>
> Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 20:51:26 -0800
> From: Carl Lumma
> To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
> Subject: Misc
> Message-ID: <19981206015031796.AAA437@nietzsche>
>
> >Like Partch, he realized such Harmonic Constructs were not scales and
> added >first the 6 pitches of the 9 limit plus the 21/20 and the 16/15 and
> their >inversions which he
>
> No, but like Partch, I recognize that the harmonic and subharmonic series
> segments contained within the diamond are scales (as you use the term).
>
> >Is it too silly to expect that such a work will be realised in 7-limit JI
> by >operatically trained singers given their irresistible inclination for
> >vibrato?
>
> It is silly to expect opera singers to perform any music with harmonic
> accuracy. They are trained to deliver melodies, and these before the
> invention of the amplifier. Try a choir.
>
> >I have to disagree here. The word microtonal definitely needs to be on the
> >front jacket. The tuning email address will mean nothing to 99.9% of our
> >customers. Only after they buy the cd will they realize its significance.
>
> I don't have my copy yet (which I paid for in March), and I wasn't a
> contributor, but I don't think that either the email address or the word
> microtonal should be on the cover. Music should stand on its own.
>
> >This is a point that should be repeated more often. The early music
> >community has been intensely engaged with questions of intonation, at least
> >since Wesley Kuhnle's pioneering efforts in the 1950's.
>
> Actually since forever, since no clavichord tuning speciallty has ever
> existed. The comment was clearly about modern pianos only, since they are
> the only acoustic keyboard instruments that will hold a tune long enough to
> make specialist tuners affordable.
>
> >no matter how convenient a particular notation may be, no single notation is
> >neccessary. For example, attempts to standardize Just intonation with
> >Johnston's or my own or some other notation should be discouraged in favor
> >of getting players to think flexibly about pitch in general.
>
> Brother, I'll agree with this!
>
> Carl
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 3
>
> Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 21:55:35 -0800
> From: Carl Lumma
> To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
> Subject: Diagrams
> Message-ID: <19981206025440062.AAA456@nietzsche>
>
> >One way of determining what angles to use that makes more sense that
> >Monzo's proposal is Canright's (in his web article Harmonic-Melodic
> >Diagrams or something -- John Starrett's page is down right now so I
> >can't tell you the address).
>
> Canright's page itself is also down. It has been down since I recommended
> these same diagrams to Joe on the 26th. The URL is...
>
> http://math.nps.navy.mil/~dcanrig/
>
> >>You say you've done this for various scales? Do you have any pics?
> >
> >Yes, and luckily they are ascii! Here is the diatonic scale, scaled down
> >to 3 dimensions, projected onto each of the three orthogonal planes:
>
> Gee... Luckily isn't the word i'd use... I've got Maple. Do you think that
> it could draw us some pretty 3D versions of these?
>
> Carl
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Topic No. 4
>
> Date: Sun, 06 Dec 1998 09:53:54 -0500
> From: Gary Morrison
> To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
> Subject: Re: Tuning List CD comments
> Message-ID: <366A9A7F.83515276@texas.net>
>
> > I have to disagree here. The word microtonal definitely needs to be on the
> > front jacket.
>
> Ah, Good point. Then again, I suppose it might be worth asking whether the
> term "microtonal" means much to the proverbial "average Joe" either.
>
> I think that "The Experience" is catchy though.
>
> > Full color is not that expensive. Complete CD press runs of 1000 copies
> > with full color 4 page booklets are in the $1500-$2000 price range.
>
> The last time I assessed the costs was back in 1992, when I did the graphics
> for the Ivor Darreg CD. In those days anyway, that came to about $1000 more
> than you estimated. It wouldn't surprise me of they've gone down since then
> though.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of TUNING Digest 1604
> *************************

I don't know which mail program you are using, but I use the mail window of
Netscape Communicator. It's better than a Microsoft mail program i.m.o.
You can change the wrap width, even set different values for outgoing and
incoming mail. The default value for outgoing mail is 80 characters.

Daniel Wolf's posts don't look good. Daniel, you mail program breaks lines
in the middle of a word and then puts an = at the end.

Manuel Op de Coul coul@ezh.nl