Werckmeister

I just received the recently published booklet "Andreas Werckmeister - Die
historische Einordnung seiner Schriften" by Pieter Bakker. It's a study of
the sources which form the background of Werckmeister's
orientation. Written in German. The title can be translated as: the
historical placement of his writings. It's nice to read since we're often
tended to read these writings with modern eyes.
Size is 31 pages, ISBN 90 804609 2 3. It can be ordered for 9 Dutch
guilders at De Studenten Uitgeverij, Smidstraat 12, 8746 NG Schraard, tel.
+31 517-531583 or in the bookshop.

Manuel Op de Coul coul@ezh.nl

Schoenhof's Foreign Books in Cambridge Mass. has a website and might be a
better source than Holland for Americans who want to read German books.

And it anyone wants to read Werckmeister in English, there are 5
fascinating pages of his writing in "Music Mysticism and Magic: a
Sourcebook" selected and annotated by Joscelyn Godwin; Arkana Press;
London; available from Penguin Books; 1986

He concludes that changes in prevailing musical temperament are caused by
changes in the constellations from century to century!

Judith Conrad, Clavichord Player (jconrad@tiac.net)
Music Minister, Calvary Baptist Church, Providence, RI
Director of Fall River Fipple Fluters
Piano and Harpsichord Tuner-Technician

Wim, Werckmeister uses the monochord for setting his temperament.
Interestingly, there is a passing reference to beats, at least as translated
in my edition. "For the beats are often forgotten and yet highly necessary."
?

In reading the treatise of 1691 I believe that that the Orgel Probe (1698)
was originally released in an earlier form in 1685. The 1691 treatise
mentions the Orgel Probe throughout as having received much criticism. The
Werckmeister criticism of meantone and extended meantone must have roused up
a ruckus.

Werckmeister wrote in 1691 "Good organ builders are despised and the bunglers
receive in some pieces, shelter and consolation. A reasonable man who by
chance gets a hold of the author's thesis or the abusing writings should
confront then with my "Orgel-Probe". He will see how too much is happening
to me and how my good intentions are misunderstood and slandered against all
reasoning. I am amazed how envy disavows that which the eyes can see, the
ears can hear, and the hands can hold, and thus dares to suppress the truth."

The tuning for Werckmeister's "our temperament" is to refuse to flat each and
every fifth as in meantone. By tuning 8 fifths pure, and only 4 fifths flat
so as to complete a full circle of 12 major and minor modes. I suspect
Helmholtz and many others through Western history confused the anti-meantone
writing of Werckmeister with a pro-equal temperament advocacy. To the
readership of the time, it is likely the first time writing about a complete
circle of 24 major and minor modes that took center stage. The fifths to
flat are C-G, G-D, A-E, & B-F#.

Johnny Reinhard
AFMM

Johnny Reinhard wrote:

> Werckmeister concludes Chapter 26 with "Those who dare to make subsemitones
> on organs, instruments, lutes, etc. are stuck in a big mistake, act against
> nature, and want to be smarter than God. The 1/4 tones are a lot of
> imperfect work and only make weak sounds etc." (ouch!)

That's a bit of a misquote, since it Werckmeister quoted it himself:
"Mag. A. Bartholdi redet in seiner _Musica Mathematica_ hiervon also:
Diejenigen, welche subsemitonia auf Orgeln, Instrumenten, Lauten &c. zumachen
sich unterstehen, stecken in grossen Irrthum, handeln wider die Natur, wollen
klueger als Gott seyn: Die halb halben Thoene sind lauter unvolkommenes
Werck, und machen nur ein lahmes Gethoene. u.s.w."

> I suspect Helmholtz and many others through Western history confused
> the anti-meantone writing of Werckmeister with a pro-equal temperament
> advocacy.

But Werckmeister was an equal temperament advocate. Only in a later part
of his life than when he wrote Musicalische Temperatur.

> Later in the same work, Werckmeister wrote in conclusion at the top of
> Chapter 28 (Concerning the temperament as a whole) that "all major thirds
> have to be tempered upwards from their fundamental pitch." This is exactly
> how Marpurg quoted Kirnberger pertaining to J.S. Bach. And here,
> specifically in the context of Werckmeister temperament by the Author
> himself.

Here's it:

Das XXVIII Capitel. Von der Temperatur insgemein.

Aus allen obigen Umstaenden wird man nun nicht anders schliessen
koennen dass alle Tertiae majores von ihren Fundament clave, wie
gemeldet in die hoehe schweben muessen: denn wenn alle quinten 1/4
com. herunter schweben, so werden zwar die meisten tertien reine,
allein es laufft zuletzt auf ein lami hinaus, da die leste quinta und
Octava, item etliche Tertien falsch und unbrauchbar werden; Diesem
vorzukommen, ist kein ander Mittel zu finden als dass man diese
tertias majores lasse aufwaerts schweben, denn wenn man sich an keinen
Modum in Stimmen will binden lassen, als: Wann C-G. G-d. D-A. A-e. so
weit und nicht weiter herunter gelassen, dass C und e eine in die
hoehe schwebende Tertiam geben: so viel das Gehoer vertragen kann, so
ists schon gut. Weiter wird die quinta E.H. wieder so hoch gebracht,
dass G und H eine in die hoehe schwebende Tertiam geben, so viel das
Gehoer ertragen kann, denn H ins fis, wird es wieder also gemachet,
dass fis vom d scharff in die hoehe schwebet, und also durchs ganze
clavier. Sind nun die Tertien c-e. d-fis. e-gis. f-a. g-h. a-cis. also
eingerichtet, dass sie so viel nur das Gehoer immer vertragen kann,
herauf schweben, so werden auch die quinten in ihrer Ertraeglichkeit
schweben, und also haenget immer eines im andern, und kan nicht anders
seyn, die Natur will es nicht anders haben, und ob man schon auf
vielerley Weise die Temperatur haben kan, so muessen doch die Tertiae
majores herauf - die minores herunter schweben, man ueberlege es wie
man will. ..etc.

Manuel Op de Coul coul@ezh.nl

In a message dated 1/7/00 7:45:11 AM Eastern Standard Time,
manuel.op.de.coul@ezh.nl writes:

<<
But Werckmeister was an equal temperament advocate. Only in a later part
of his life than when he wrote Musicalische Temperatur.
>>

Manuel could you provide some evidence for Werckmeister's later support of
equal temperament.

The quotes from Werckmeister I posted are from an unpublished English
translation by Elizabeht Hehr (1974). The English was never finalized, but
my excerpts are direct quotes from Werckmeister (1691).

Thank you.

Johnny Reinhard
AFMM

Wim:
> Does he clearly say that all four fifths should be tempered in the same way
> or does he speak about beats (Schwebungen).

Yes, both.

Johnny:
Rudolf Rasch writes in the conclusion on p. 34-35 of the introduction to his
edition of Mus. Temp.: [snip] Werckmeister was a rather prolific author
who published very regularly from 1681 until his death in 1706. During
these 25 years he changed his opinions more than once. In the older
works (1681-1691, to which the Musicalische Temperatur belongs) only
unequal temperaments have been described explicitly. In the middle
works (1697-1698) equal temperament has been mentioned as a possible
solution when all keys are to play an equal part in musical perfor-
mance. Since this was not the case, Werckmeister prefers unequal tem-
perament, because it favors the common, diatonic keys. In his late
works (1702-1707) Werckmeister is an unambiguous propagator of equal
temperament because it makes possible unlimited modulation and trans-
position as well as any enharmonic change of notes and intervals.
With this information in mind, the divergent views on Werckmeister
can be explained easily. [snip] It (Mus. Temp.) must, nevertheless,
not be seen as a book representative for the 'whole' Werckmeister.

Manuel Op de Coul coul@ezh.nl

Hmm. Manual, I don't think this proves anything. I did not agree with
Rudolf when he published his ideas and challenged them in my Bach's Tuning
paper. As you make clear, the 1691 work had nothing to do with ET.

We need real evidence that Werckmeister had the views you expressed.
Helmholtz says that the Orgel Probe which was published late (1698) expressed
a support for equal temperament. However, Orgel Probe was written years
earlier than "Musicalische Temperatur" (1691). And Bakers lists W.'s death
as 1706 (October).
Please help with unambiguous evidence of W. as an "unambiguous propagator of
equal temperament. And what exactly was incorrect in the translation I made
of W. railing against subsemitonum meantone?

There has been so much rumor that if we could pin down any specific place
where Werckmeister is clearly in favor of ET then this is the time to
discover it, with a brand new year 2000.

> Please help with unambiguous evidence of W. as an "unambiguous propagator of
> equal temperament.

I don't have a copy of the original text of his latest two writings.
Only what Rasch writes about it. The evidence should be in
_Harmonologia musica_ (1702), paragraph 27, p. 15-18.
This paragraph is (according to Rasch) a straightforward
plea for equal temperament, based on the argument of unlimited
transposition and enharmonic exchanges. Moreover he points out
the fact that the impurity of the consonances is just equal
to the acceptable impurity: the fifth a little, the major
third a bit more and the minor third even more. This is what
you found also in the essay 'Does Well-temperered ...'.
But he goes on to say that in _Musicalische
Paradoxal-Discourse_ (1707) W. has the same opinion,
but goes even further to compare equal temperament with true
Christianity, and seeks a theological foundation for the
necessity of temperament. It is a very unsystematic work, full
of allegoric indications of musical notions. A quote from
p. 110: "Wir schreiten weiter und wissen, wenn die Temperatur
also eingerichted wird, das alle Quiten 1/12 Commat: die
Tert: maj: 2/3 die min: 3/4 Comm. schweben, und ein accurates Ohr
dieselbe auch zum stande zubringen, und zustimmen weiss, so dann
gewiss ein _wohl temperirte_ Harmonia, durch den gantzen Circul
und durch alle Claves sich finden wird. Welches dann ein Vorbild
seyn kan, wie alle fromme, und wohl temperirte Menschen, mit Gott
in stets waehrender gleicher, und ewiger Harmonia leben, und
jubiliren werden." On the next pages he writes that his previous
tunings indicated already the way to equal temperament and
refers to Neidhardt (1706) who divided the comma in twelve parts.

> And what exactly was incorrect in the translation I made
> of W. railing against subsemitonum meantone?

Only that the passage was written by Abraham Bartholus and quoted
by W. because it was a strong expression of his own opinion.

Manuel Op de Coul coul@ezh.nl

Well, it appears that after reviewing a lot of data that Werckmeister favored
irregular circular until the end. Even Lindley and Barbour agree on this
one. Dutch scholarship on this point has not uncovered anything new to
change this fact.

Barbour does a good job of debunking meantone for Bach, as well. But he
cannot connect Bach with ET in any direct way. Perhaps Bach did not teach
his tuning to students (maybe they had to develop their own?) That would
explain why Kirnberger begins his great tome on composition with his own
tuning system, explained in ratios. It is not Bach's tuning one feels. And
Werckmeister III feels so right.

Is feeling a criterion? When listening with Al Giusto to Brandenberg #4 in D
Major in Werckmeister III the other day, we heard something new. D Major is
practically ET and the music Bach wrote actually fits this fact in its scalar
movement. Now what instrument would be ideal to play perfectly in any key
than the harpsichord? Bach features the harpsichord which because of his use
of chords gives off the most intensely lush sound. Totally experiential.

Al has been trying different tunings for Bach and has himself been falling
back to Werckmeister III. It does seem that Bach had to be irregular
circular throughout his entire life. He was 55 when he taught Kirnberger in
1739. There was no late life revelation, and Werckmeister did not reverse
himself. By determining that Werckmeister did not reverse himself at the end
of his life, it becomes clear that neither did Bach.

Johnny Reinhard

Johnny Reinhard wrote:

> Well, it appears that after reviewing a lot of data that Werckmeister favored
> irregular circular until the end.

Have you read _Musicalische Paradoxal Discourse_? I think one must have read
this and explain evidence to the contrary of what you claim above.
Unfortunately I don't have time to go after this myself. Is there a
German-speaker
on the list who likes to do this? The chapters to investigate are 23-24 on
page 104-114.

> By determining that Werckmeister did not reverse himself at the end
> of his life, it becomes clear that neither did Bach.

What do you mean by "reverse himself"? In his time, the movement was
_towards_ equal temperament, not away from it, like now.

Manuel Op de Coul coul@ezh.nl

After doing some nosing around in my files I found that Werckmeister did
_not_ advocate equal temperament in Orgel-Probe. Where did people get this
information? Why did (do) they persist in misinterpreting Werckmeister's
intentions concerning intonation.

Some quotes by Werckmeister in Orgel-Probe (p. 65-69):
"With regard to the matter of temperament, there is no need to add anything
in particular, since the kind reader can find a detailed discussion and
demonstration in our treatise on temperament with an appendix on the
monochord." - this was "Musical Temperament" which I have established has no
support for 12TET at all.

This is a clincher: "Therefore, it is better to reserve the best temperament
for the most used thirds."

In support of irregular temperament as in what we call Werckmeister III:
"Thus, this temperament must also incorporate variance, consistent with all
of nature; one day is not quite so warm or cold as the next."

Werckmeister describes the "eighty-one eightieths" as a bandwidth to play
with for temperamental reasons, citing the ancients "ears were perfectly
happy with thirds all of which were either too large or too small by one
coma, one should really be able to accept deviations one comma too large or
too small, in just a few rarely used thirds."

Manual - you mentioned that things were going the way of equal temperament.
However, I am challenging that orthodoxy. All the evidence points to
Werckmeister being quite proud of his irregular well-temperament. Please, if
there is something, anywhere that promotes 12TET late in life, let's find it,
or end this charade of history, once and for all.

Johnny Reinhard
AFMM

Johnny Reinhard:

No one was making such a claim for the 1681/1698 _Orgel-Probe_. The
critical work for Werckmeister's use of ET is his 1697 _Hypomnemata musica
oder musicalisches Memorial_.

Daniel Wolf

> From: Afmmjr@aol.com
>
> After doing some nosing around in my files I found that Werckmeister did
> _not_ advocate equal temperament in Orgel-Probe. Where did people get
this
> information? Why did (do) they persist in misinterpreting Werckmeister's
> intentions concerning intonation.

Johnny,

Werckmeister indeed rejects equal temperament in _Hypomnemata
musica_.

> Manuel - you mentioned that things were going the way of equal temperament.
> However, I am challenging that orthodoxy. All the evidence points to
> Werckmeister being quite proud of his irregular well-temperament.

As I said earlier, the critical work to be examined is _Musicalische
Paradoxal-Discourse_.
Another piece of evidence that Werckmeister was later not quite proud of
his irregular temperament is _Erweiterte Orgel-Probe_ of 1698. This is
an improved and extended reprint of _Orgel-Probe_ of 1681. In the
last chapter the tuning issue is brought up, but the tunings given in the
first edition of 1681 are not repeated. So why would he remove his tunings
if he was so proud of them?
In _Die nothwendigsten Anmerckungen und Regeln wie der Bassus continuus..._
of 1698 there is an appendix on how to tune and well-temper a keyboard.
He gives two tunings: equal temperament and an unequal one which is close
to equal temperament.
I'm not a musicologist but I believe that unlimited transposition and
enharmonic exchanges in the time of Werckmeister and Bach are much more
important than key characteristics, which becomes more important in the
time after Bach.

W. was very devote and perhaps more obsessed with Christianity, God,
mysticism and numerology than with tuning. To understand him and his
way of thinking even in regard with tuning it might well be worthwhile
to investigate this aspect of his personality.

> Please, if there is something, anywhere that promotes 12TET late in life,
> let's find it, or end this charade of history, once and for all.

You haven't examined or disproven all the evidence so calling it a charade
of history is premature.

Manuel Op de Coul coul@ezh.nl