Re: tuning with the Hilliards

A few days ago I wrote about how the Hilliard Ensemble were dealing with
tuning in a rehearsal of a new piece, and Paul Erlich wrote:

> How can you be sure it was 25:16?

the context was:

B--A#--B#
E

The relationship that I hear is that the B# is poised to lead into a C#
tuned justly (5:3) to the E. Sure, I can't be sure I was hearing exactly
25:16 -- I guess what I really mean is that you can totally hear that it's
a B#, and not a C-natural tending back down towards B. And when the other
tenor tuned his note as a Dx, compared to an E:

----E---(Dx)--
----B#--------
----E---------

you could hear him locking in to the B# at a just major third, as opposed
to locking in to the E at a just octave. Again, it's true that I can't
hear whether the augmented 7th was tuned to exactly 1159 cents (125:64)...
but you can hear, with a little context, that the intention is "a major
third above the leading-tone to scale-degree 6" as opposed to simply an
octave over the bass. (if you missed the earlier post, the enharmonic
shift was not part of the piece, but something the tenor demonstrated to
me - he wanted to tune to the B#, and sang it both ways for me)

I got copies of the 4 CDs on their new label, HilliardLIVE. Each CD
contains notes on tuning for that repertoire, by Rogers Covey-Crump, one
of the tenors. When I've had a chance to sit down and have a proper read
I'll let the list know of anything interesting.

--
jon

--- In tuning@y..., jon wild <wild@f...> wrote:
>
> A few days ago I wrote about how the Hilliard Ensemble were dealing
with
> tuning in a rehearsal of a new piece, and Paul Erlich wrote:

By the way, this was a wonderful piece, Jon! Thanks so much for
facilitating my attendance to such a fine musical experience.

>
> The relationship that I hear is that the B# is poised to lead into
a C#
> tuned justly (5:3) to the E. Sure, I can't be sure I was hearing
exactly
> 25:16 -- I guess what I really mean is that you can totally hear
that it's
> a B#, and not a C-natural tending back down towards B.

Curiously, the question of whether B# or C is the higher of the two
pitches has one answer in Medieval practice (B#), and a different
answer in Renaissance through Classical practice (C). And since 1800,
there's been an increasing tendency to revert to the Medieval answer.

> And when the other
> tenor tuned his note as a Dx, compared to an E:
>
> ----E---(Dx)--
> ----B#--------
> ----E---------
>
> you could hear him locking in to the B# at a just major third, as
opposed
> to locking in to the E at a just octave.

I have no doubt you're correct about that.

> Again, it's true that I can't
> hear whether the augmented 7th was tuned to exactly 1159 cents
(125:64)...
> but you can hear, with a little context, that the intention is "a
major
> third above the leading-tone to scale-degree 6" as opposed to
simply an
> octave over the bass.

Understood -- given that we're assuming a Renaissance-to-Classical
leading-tone praxis. Which is good to be clear about, since a lot of
people, like Pablo Casals and one-time list member Gerald Eskelin
(remember him?) will advocate the opposite practice, regardless of
which period the music is from or is trying to relate to.

> (if you missed the earlier post, the enharmonic
> shift was not part of the piece, but something the tenor
demonstrated to
> me - he wanted to tune to the B#, and sang it both ways for me)

I did understand that from your post and I'm delighted dat you were
able to discuss dese diesis distinctions with dem.

> I got copies of the 4 CDs on their new label, HilliardLIVE. Each CD
> contains notes on tuning for that repertoire, by Rogers Covey-
Crump, one
> of the tenors. When I've had a chance to sit down and have a proper
read
> I'll let the list know of anything interesting.

Please do! If I'm not mistaken, I heard an attempt at Pythagorean in
the Dufay, while at least one of the other early composers was sung
with just thirds and wider diatonic semitones.