Ed's rant on Temperament

Greetings,
Ah, the temperament skirmish begins again in front of us. Did the old
guys have it right? Is the modern version the superior tuning? How tight does
it have to be to be "equal"? This battlefield has seen action for a long
time, and there are few bullets yet fresh enough to do mortal harm.

I have seen several points made; a few of them are calling for some
comment.
The concept of a 'reverse well temperament' depends on accepting that
micro-deviations have the capacity to make fundamental changes in a tuning's
harmonic nature. I don't agree with this. It appears that audiences don't
make this distinction and I don't think the magnitude is such that modern ears
register it. Yes, by clinical standards, the favoring of the simpler key
fifths can cause there to be more beating in those key's thirds, but not on a
discernible scale.
Aside from the one in a thousand that can tell the difference between
reverse and normal ET, this is not a matter that bears much consideration,
IMO. It is just not a practical distinction for use in the workaday world of
useful tunings, and is certainly no reason to label the ET as currently sold
as invalid and indicative of ignorance.

Also, I want to suggest a reality check. The creation of a temperament,
such as Bill Bremmer's, that no one but himself has yet to properly tune, is
an interesting academic excercise, but if it's production is limited to one
person, it has no chance of having much effect on constantly renewing musical
tastes. Its value will have to rest as a museum piece or an easier way to
achieve it must be found.
The tunings have to be accessible to be effective, which is why the
machines of today are the salvation of our instruments other "voices".
I have also felt pretty secure following Owen Jorgensen's directives,
feeling that the scholarly weight of his work protected me, and the spirit of
Kirnberger or Vallotti would be there as I followed his instructions. I had a
historically protected reason for bending the tunings around, I was legit,
right?.
On the other hand, I had considered the authoring of new temperaments to
be somewhat silly, since we knew what the piano had evolved with, and the
first order of business was to re-acquaint ourselves with its intonational
DNA, so to speak. What use was there is trying to reinvent something??
Then I got my hands on a hot one. Jim Coleman sent me his list of 12
numbers, and I had my small Chickering grand tuned in his "ModX" by noon. I
am impressed beyond all expectations! This is a very sophisticated tuning,
and it provides its tonal variation in a way that keep the added tempering
from becoming noticible, while still providing a textural feel that ET simply
does not have.
Plotting the width of the thirds, (modulating by fourths), as a bar graph,
the shape of the tuning is one of fairly even, but parabolic increase. At
the more Just end of the temperament, the thirds of C-E and G-B are only 7.8
cents wide, with F having a 8.8 cent F-A third, it may as well reside in this
same group of "calm" keys. Next, there is a small step up to almost 12
cent thirds for the keys of Bb and D, ( we are moving out by fourths and
fifths, in both directions from the key of C),and then two more steps of about
a cent for the thirds in Eb and A. Eb and A are usually the keys most like
ET, but in the ModX they are slightly more active.
After E and Ab weigh in with 16.8 cents thirds, there is a trio of very
"expressive" keys across the top of the circle of fifths. B, C#, and Db are
all tempered by 17.8 cents, and have some really nice sounding fifths. This
amount of tempering is noticible to the modern ear, but with clean octaves and
unisons, my customers have come to like the churning contrast in other
temperaments that have 17 cent thirds. It is not too much for today's taste.
This tuning is very active. Good clarity in the fifths, and I think there
are some equal beating aspects in there, but have not had time to analyze that
far. The points of rest are there, and the agressive modulation is rewarded
with a very effective dose of dissonance. I am going to see if this may not
be a good tuning in a small jazz club here in town. The player told me he
sometimes needs a blowtorch to cut through the combo. Hmmmm.
Anyhow, thanks Jim, your temperament is # 8 in my machine. I put it
there thinking what kind of 8-ball idea it might be, but I have now seen the
light, turned the corner, did a 180, changed my tune, etc. and this might
be one really effective tuning. I will let you know how it sails.
Regards,
Ed Foote