Re: FAQ -- adaptive JI and Vicentino

Hello, there, everyone, and I might offer just one comment, John and
Paul, on the general adaptive JI statement in regard to Vicentino,
maybe a picky one.

Since Vicentino actually built the instruments and played them to
achieve adaptive JI, however mechanically awkward or musically less
than seamless the process might be, I might prefer some term other
than "theoretical," which suggests a system on paper rather than an
instrument making music.

This is a quibble, and since I'm expressing my viewpoint in my own
statement, please feel free to disregard what follows if it doesn't
seem to fit.

Here's a possible slight rephrasing of your current language, John,
warmly inviting your comments also, Paul; the only change involves
the first sentence, with rewriting warmly invited, of course, if you
like the basic idea:

> A theoretical method for FAT was first proposed by Nicola Vicentino
> in 1555. One keyboard manual consists of 19 consecutive fifths
> tuned to 1/4 comma meantone; the other corrects for flat meantone
> fifths (and minor thirds) by being tuned 1/4 syntonic comma (5.38
> cents) higher. For more information, see [Margo's entry].

A method for FAT was first described by Nicola Vicentino in 1555
and implemented on his special harpsichord and organ.

John and Paul, might a sentence like the following just before the
"For more information..." address the concerns which your word
"theoretical" may reflect:

In practice, a very skilled player may have been able to use just
sonorities frequently, but not seamlessly or consistently.

Most appreciatively,

Margo Schulter
mschulter@value.net

[Margo wrote:]
>Hello, there, everyone, and I might offer just one comment, John and
>Paul, on the general adaptive JI statement in regard to Vicentino,
>maybe a picky one.

>Since Vicentino actually built the instruments and played them to
>achieve adaptive JI, however mechanically awkward or musically less
>than seamless the process might be, I might prefer some term other
>than "theoretical," which suggests a system on paper rather than an
>instrument making music.

>This is a quibble, and since I'm expressing my viewpoint in my own
>statement, please feel free to disregard what follows if it doesn't
>seem to fit.

As this is your area of expertise, I'm not likely to "quibble" back at
you regarding your suggestions, Margo!

>Here's a possible slight rephrasing of your current language, John,
>warmly inviting your comments also, Paul; the only change involves
>the first sentence, with rewriting warmly invited, of course, if you
>like the basic idea:

[JdL's draft FAQ (rev 1):]
>>A theoretical method for FAT was first proposed by Nicola Vicentino
>>in 1555. One keyboard manual consists of 19 consecutive fifths
>>tuned to 1/4 comma meantone; the other corrects for flat meantone
>>fifths (and minor thirds) by being tuned 1/4 syntonic comma (5.38
>>cents) higher. For more information, see [Margo's entry].

[Margo:]
> A method for FAT was first described by Nicola Vicentino in 1555
> and implemented on his special harpsichord and organ.

Sounds just fine; thanks, Margo! I've already made the change for rev
2.

>John and Paul, might a sentence like the following just before the
>"For more information..." address the concerns which your word
>"theoretical" may reflect:

> In practice, a very skilled player may have been able to use just
> sonorities frequently, but not seamlessly or consistently.

Well, I have no objection either to including or not including that
sentence, but perhaps, if included, it would go better in the same
paragraph as the above? How about if I just let your write-up cover
the strengths and limitations of Vicentino's methods?

JdL