tuning with the hilliards

Hi list,

I wanted to let you know about an ear-opening experience I've been having
working with the Hilliard ensemble--some of you might know them, they're a
vocal group who've mostly recorded early music, but they have also been
doing quite a bit of new music recently, and they're very aware of how
they tune things. They're only in town (Boston) for a few days of
rehearsals before concerts on the weekend when they'll be premiering
eight new pieces -- it wasn't going to be possible, given time
constraints, to have them sing in an unfamiliar tuning system, so the
piece I wrote for them is "in 12-tet". Still, it's been a real ear-opener
to listen to them discussing tuning in rehearsals - they are very
conscious of who is tuned with who, when it gets impossible to tune
everyone to everyone else.

For instance, here's a simplified version of a little four-part snippet
they were doing today (fixed-width font):

counter-tenor: A#--------C#-------D#------ (starts above mid-C, goes up)

tenor 1: F#-------E----------- (starts above middle C)

tenor 2: B---------A#---B#---------- (starts just below middle C)

baritone: E------------F#--G#-- (starts below middle C)

The first tenor, Rogers Covey-Crump, demonstrated the difference between
singing his E "as written", tuned 2:1 to the bass, or as a D-double-sharp,
tuned a major third above the B#--which is the leading-tone to ^6, so
25:16 above the tonic--making the Dx a 125:64 above E (the cumulative
ratios are mine not his). He was able, in that context, to move exactly
(or as close as I could tell) the distance of the 128:125 comma, and it
made a big difference as the interval between the two tenors suddenly
locked in like that. When I was writing, it was very hard to decide on the
spelling for passages like this--there are lots of things to juggle, as
you'll see if you try to figure out a tuning for the above. I wonder if
anyone else has thoughts on spelling considerations in the horizontal
versus vertical dimensions, in those situations when you're lucky enough
to have singers who are very sensitive to what the notation suggests,
tuning-wise...

If anyone on the list in the Boston area would like to hear the Hilliards,
I can leave a ticket at the desk for you. They're performing Friday
evening at 8, at Paine Hall on the Harvard campus, and it's free (but you
need a ticket ahead of time in case it's "sold out") -- how often do you
get to hear the Hilliard ensemble for free? They're doing old and new
music, and there's a second, different program on Saturday evening. If
you're interested drop me a line at this address (spelled out in words so
yahoo doesn't munge it):

wild at fas dot harvard dot edu

--
jon

--- In tuning@y..., jon wild <wild@f...> wrote:
>
> The first tenor, Rogers Covey-Crump, demonstrated the difference between
> singing his E "as written", tuned 2:1 to the bass, or as a D-double-sharp,
> tuned a major third above the B#--which is the leading-tone to ^6, so
> 25:16 above the tonic

How can you be sure of this? 25:16 is not a ratio you can "lock in" -- it's too complex. If there
were a G# sounding, that would be a different story . . . but I don't see one.

> When I was writing, it was very hard to decide on the
> spelling for passages like this--there are lots of things to juggle, as
> you'll see if you try to figure out a tuning for the above.

Well in the meantone paradigm usually assumed, wouldn't the difference between writing E and
writing Dx mean exactly the 128:125 diesis you're talking about?

> If anyone on the list in the Boston area would like to hear the Hilliards,
> I can leave a ticket at the desk for you.

I'd love that, thanks so much! Which desk do I go to?