Kirnberger

Getting back to the idea that it was commonplace, historically, for
composers and theoreticians to be concerned with many different
aspects of music, harmony, counterpoint and TUNING, we can cite
Johann Phillipp Kirnberger, who also wrote about counterpoint as well
as devising his Kirnberger system of tuning…

A couple of brief quotes from Knud Jeppesen's _Counterpoint_ may be
entertaining:

"Johann Phillipp Kirnberger, who studied with Bach in Leipzig,
retained throughout his life the deep impression which he received
from the personality of the great master; in fact he even seemed
somewhat ridiculous to his contemporaries because of the obvious
fanaticism with which he defended everything pertaining to Bach's
honor and greatness. His critique of every art other than Bach's was
harshly derogatory, yet he did no seem to have a truly critical
judgment himself…"

"He assumes quite as a matter of course that the Bach style is the
only right one; if the earlier theorists do not agree with this style
then their teaching has thereby condemned itself. On the other hand,
Kirnberger writes concerning his great teacher:

'Johann Sebastian Bach uses a thoroughly pure style in all his
compositions; every work of his has a definite unified character.
Rhythm, melody, harmony, in short, all that makes a composition
really beautiful, he has completely at his command as is attested by
his works. His method is the best, for he makes the transition from
the easiest to the most difficult step by step in a thorough manner,
and for this very reason the step to the fugue itself is no more
difficult than any of the other steps on the way. For this reason I
consider THE METHOD OF JOHANN SEBASTIAN BACH THE ONE AND ONLY METHOD.
[ed. emphasis Kirnberger's]'"

Curiously, unlike Fux, Kirnberger begins in the opposite direction --
with four part harmony -- and urges students to attempt writing in
two or three parts only they have FIRST mastered the 4-part
exercises. This is, of course, due to the fact that, by this time
HARMONY was taking a certain predominance to melody. As we recall,
Margo Schulter has carefully delimited this transition for us in
previous posts on counterpoint and interval usage, as well as the
tunings used in the various periods and the changes brought about by
the predominance of certain intervals and chords, as well as the
different practice.

As Kirnberger states (again from Jeppesen) NOTE THIS ONE:

"'Simple strict counterpoint can be in two, three, four, or more
parts. It is best to begin with four-part counterpoint because it is
hardly possible to write in two or three parts perfectly until four-
part writing has been mastered. For since the complete harmony is in
four parts, something must always be missing in two- and three- part
works, so that one cannot judge safely as to what is to be omitted
from the harmony in the different cases which arise unless he has a
thorough knowledge of four-part writing…'"

As we can see, there are no "trines" for Kirnberger and no "perfect"
fifths! Everything is part of a 5-limit chord, that is
somehow "incomplete" or even "defective" without the missing "link!"

Finally, and this is the humorous part, Kirnberger urges students to
take great care in studying and playing Bach, since, despite Bach's
basic chordal viewpoint, Bach uses linear elements so strongly and
independently that they become "harsh" or "confusing" since they can
only be interpreted through the logic of the voice leading.

Kirnberger was obviously contrapuntally "outclassed" by his own
master!

________ ______ _ _____
Joseph Pehrson