Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning Beethoven and ET,(and other stuff)

Greetings,

>> Monz writes:
>>To my knowledge, I have never heard Chopin's music in any

tuning other than (ostensible) 12-tET.

Sadly, that is probably true, however, hang on. We have his fantasy
66 in something completely new on the next recording.

Inre Beethoven:
>>that he used so many extreme changes of key in

his modulations (meaning that the two keys are quite far

removed in the circle-of-5ths, or that he often preferred

mediant/submediant relationships rather than perfect-4th/5th

relationships in the root movement), which implies to me a

tendency toward much freer use of all 12 notes, which in

turn implies a tendency towards equalizing the relationships

between those notes.<<

That the use of all twelve notes implies a tendency towards equalizing
the relationships between them loses me, a bit. A different musical logic,
perhaps? Once equalized, a large degree of contrast in the harmony is lost,
(the use of "key character", as I posted earlier).

>>Perhaps it's more accurate to suggest that while Beethoven

himself may have always thought in terms of well-temperament

<snip< the new harmonic techniques he introduced encouraged composers after

him to view the 12 notes of the chromatic scale as needing to

have the equalized relationships of 12-tET.<<

Perhaps, though he may have actually begun his life by thinking in
meantone, and the continuing refinement of the well-tempered approach (which
occurred at least through Young's presentation to the Royal Society in 1799),
gave him continually increasing access to the more remote keys, the pursuit
of which he seemed to be in the forefront.
The consideration of the syntonic comma as the acceptable limit for a
third seems to have been formed as early as Werckmeister(1690). This was
pre-piano, so organs and harpsichords were the instruments to which this
limit applied. The earliest Cristofori pianos were , from a string tension
perspective, little more than harpsichords.
As the piano rapidly became more tightly strung and string tension
rose,( over the span fom 1730-1850, string tension rose from 3,000 lbs to
30,000 lbs!), the resulting tonal harshness of the syn. comma may have been
increasingly avoided, leading to the tempering evolution we see during this
period. Music was also evolving rather rapidly at this time, so while the
increasing tension was a result of musicians wanting more power, the spectra
was altered by doing so and may have affected the composers tastes. So what
we got here is a scramble of eggs and chickens.
Was there a move by instrument builders to keep all the keys
accessible, and did they do this by encouraging the use of more ameliorating
tempering? And did the composers leap on the increased smoothness of
modulation which this offered? Is this why there was more musical usage to
all twelve keys that occurred between the WTC and Chopin? Seems logical to
me, and it once again puts Beethoven in the middle of two eras, the meantone
and the ET. He seems to be constantly portrayed as standing with one foot
somewhere in time and the other in another, I wonder that he isn't more often
ripped. (and now another foote to spread the analogies wider, yet)

>>Perhaps I'm just wildly speculating again... but hey, it's

food for thought. <<
It is great food for thought, that is why this list is such a banquet,
and I really appreciate finding others that want to dig as deeply into the
dish, (or dish as deeply into the dig!)

>>Future researchers may jump on ideas like this as subjects for
dissertations; then we can really get to the bottom of it.<<

Yes, I hope so, that is a major thrust of my efforts. I would like to
find out if there is a "Beethoven Code". Bill Sethares has the raw data from
some experiments we did here in Nashville several years ago. We used a
Yamaha reproducer grand piano, upon which Enid Katahn played and recorded
several pieces. We then let the piano replay them with a variety of tunings
on it, one of which was equal, the others well tempered. Bill's dissonance
measuring program was to look at the resulting dissonance "scores" and see if
the change from ET to WT created a cohesive pattern, a "code" of subliminal
emotional manipulations. Ooooh, if there really was a secret code in
there, we could shake the ivory towers as badly as McClaren has always
dreamed of!

"You say you want a revolution? Damn right! At least, I do. I
admit, I may still be lost in the '60's, but I can think of nothing more
re-invigorating for the classical music world, or eye-opening for the
composers of today and tomorrow. Dissonance/consonance created
stimulative/sedative control is to music what architectural balance and
texture is to the eye. (Bauhaus sterility or Schoenberg's intellectual music
notwithstanding {small glowing ember there, I realize......})

Inre my posting:

> When Beethoven modulates <snippppppppppppppppp>

Monz asks:
>>My question: why in the world did you not include detailed

technical commentary like this in the booklet accompanying

the CD? <<

Well, if I had, my record company president would have been found hanging
from a rafter! I overloaded them, as it was. I was trying to create an
overview of the historical inaccuracy and emotional cost of ET and perhaps
concentrated on the technical/historical perspective at the expense of the
sensual.
Please forgive me a little, I am a craftsman with an idea, not a
musicologically educated orator. That was my first attempt at publishing
something, and like the first Marines on the beach, mistakes were made. My
second assault is in the works, and I can post the liner notes from "Six
Degrees" here if you like. The major critique I got from the Beethoven liner
notes was that it was too complex and detailed for public consumption. The
"Tuning" list members are far more able to understand the principles
involved.

Joseph writes:

>>And this is why I clock in with my

>protests of adaptive retuning as espoused by John deLaubenfels

despite the fact that I think it's a brilliant bit of problem solving

given a particular approach. But to my mind that approach is a tuning

first, music second one that immediately lops off a huge array of

fascinating and emotionally rich horizons by way of an overriding

(tuning) assumption; all thirds = 5/4 = good, for example...>

I believe that hearing music with the dissonance removed can be a
valuable course. It may be what composers were dreaming of, and wished for
in the meantone era. This assumes that the dissonance was truly viewed as
"the imperfection" of the instrument. There is no doubt in my mind that if
John's adaptive (re) tuning had been able to have been manifested 300 years
ago, music composition, as we know it, would have followed a very different
course. Many attempts were made, (Vincentio, Liston, etal), but the
physical demands pushed them beyond the point of diminishing returns. These
experimental searches for pure tonality came and went long ago.
The sounds are still in the musical gene pool, though, and there is
still hope today, for as Margo dances among her twin keyboards, all these
heretofore dreamed of combinations are swimming into view. (And I would like
to go on record as saying her work has had profound effects on how I view
musical history already!)
Plutarch stated that "Music, to create harmony, must investigate
discord". This may mean compositional discord, or tuning discord, I don't
know. It does sound like the "tight shoe theory", but possibly offers us yet
another perspective, and I firmly believe that the more perspectives we have
experienced, the more valid our observations on everything. So much of what
we do, and how intensely we do it, is a function of our past experiences:
like the Crusades, if you had been eating unflavored gruel for 12 centuries,
you would gladly kill someone for a handful of pepper!

Monz also writes:
>> Ed is trying to present Beethoven's

music the way it would have been *heard* on a piano during

Beethoven's lifetime. John is trying to present it the way

it might have been *imagined* in Beethoven's mind. I'd say

that there's a subtle intimate link there.<<

Links are good. I look for them, and am happy to think we may have one
here. It is pretty subtle to me, but much is.
A small distinction I would like to suggest, inre "Beethoven's music the
way it would have been *heard* on a piano during Beethoven's lifetime". In
order to hear it as it sounded in his lifetime, we must have not only the
instruments of those days, but we would need the audiences of his era, and
today's hearts and ears are not conditioned to be that receptive to emotional
stimuli. We are saturated with music that is trying to sell us something,
sounds that have manipulating our spending habits as their purpose.
Today there are large halls, with large pianos in front of audiences that
treat the musical experience as an intellectual/social/political event.
Restoring the temperament to the music is my way of trying to restore an
emotional respite to the listener. My two most gratifying responses in the
last 6 years have been seeing people in the audience cry during the
Pathetique's middle section, and having listeners tell me that our Beethoven
CD is the one recording that they play only when they have enough time to sit
and listen to a complete sonata, that it is not "background" music for their
activity, but rather, listening to it is the activity itself.
What I am trying to do is create an appreciation of the emotional depth
to Beethoven's music and I don't think it can be plumbed by the straight and
narrow of ET. Thus, my hammer in hand, I crusade. This list is one of the
most important resources I have found for trying out ideas and hearing
other's slants on things. For this, I thank you all.
Regards,
Ed Foote
Nashville, Tn.

--- In tuning@egroups.com, a440a@a... wrote:

http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/17504

>
> Perhaps, though he may have actually begun his life by thinking
in meantone, and the continuing refinement of the well-tempered
approach (which occurred at least through Young's presentation to
the Royal Society in 1799), gave him continually increasing access to
the more remote keys, the pursuit of which he seemed to be in the
forefront. The consideration of the syntonic comma as the
acceptable limit for a third seems to have been formed as early
as Werckmeister(1690).

Hello Ed!

So, I guess the question that I, personally, would like to ask is
this: if, as you claim, the ultimate objective of meantone composers
was to create music with no "dissonance," wouldn't the presence of
the Werckmeister tunings and Beethoven's interest in modulation mean
that he was actually HEARING IN HIS MIND the Werckmeister??

I'm not so certain why Joe Monzo seems to think the the John
deLaubenfel's experiments would necessarily be what Beethoven was
thinking in his mind. Don't people think in their minds what they
have been hearing and the tuning systems they have been working with??

> Joseph writes:
>
> >>And this is why I clock in with my protests of adaptive retuning
as espoused by John deLaubenfels despite the fact that I think it's
a
brilliant bit of problem solving given a particular approach. But to
my mind that approach is a tuning first, music second one that
immediately lops off a huge array of fascinating and emotionally rich
horizons by way of an overriding (tuning) assumption; all thirds =
5/4 = good, for example...>
>

Actually, that was Dan Stearns who said that. I have, personally,
been very much in favor of John deLaubenfel's work, which I
complementarily call "distortions." But, I believed all along that
this was an abstract experiment, not an attempt to render anything
historically accurate.

>
> Monz also writes:
> >> Ed is trying to present Beethoven's music the way it would have
been *heard* on a piano during Beethoven's lifetime. John is trying
to present it the way it might have been *imagined* in Beethoven's
mind.

I guess this is what I am having problems with. Do you really think
that people working in the Werckmeister system were thinking Just
Intonation but had to compromise on a keyboard... or were they
accepting the "givens" of the system and thinking and writing within
that very system in the abstract(???)

Oh... and I just bought your Beethoven CD...

_________ _____ ____ _
Joseph Pehrson

Beethoven and ET,(and other stuff)

🔗a440a@aol.com

🔗Joseph Pehrson <josephpehrson@compuserve.com>

🔗Monz <MONZ@JUNO.COM>

🔗Joseph Pehrson <joseph@composersconcordance.org>