Re: [tuning] Re: Werckmeister and maximal proximity of intervals Digest Numbe...

In a message dated 2/21/02 9:39:22 PM Eastern Standard Time,
paul@stretch-music.com writes:

> > I have always assumed that Werkmeister
> > planned it that way,
>
>

As Paul said. Though Werckmeister claimed his temperament (as it was also
known) was a natural consequence of Praetorian (read quarter-comma meantone)
tuning. Rather than split keys for more pitches like Michael Praetorious and
Georg Frederick Handel preferred, Werckmeister argued for keeping only 12 for
techniques sake. He didn't want to disenfranchise some of the chromatics
over more basic notes.

Also, Werckmeister never claimed invention. He was aware of it being in
regular practice in Thuringia. Johann Cristoph Bach, J.S. Bach's uncle who
lived next door in Eisenach, was likely using it before J.S. Interestingly,
J.C. Bach was born the same year as Werckmeister, 1645, right after the
plague and at the end of the 30 Years War. It's likely J.C. Bach was
acquainted with Werckmeister and met up in Muhlhausen when Werckmeister was
studying Latin for 2 years in Nordhausen. Independent city Muhlhausen was
the great get away city for the Bachs of Eisenach.

It seems to me that the Bachs did not criticize Werckmeister at all. With
lots of stated criticism coming from all directions, the fact that J.S. Bach
borrowed Werckmeister's term "Wohl temperirt" for the well-tempered clavier
is certainly honorific.

Wow, 39 intervals at the melodic threshold...Manual...I'm still amazed!

Best, Johnny Reinhard

Best. Johnny Reinhard

--- In tuning@y..., Afmmjr@a... wrote:

> It seems to me that the Bachs did not criticize Werckmeister at
all. With
> lots of stated criticism coming from all directions, the fact that
J.S. Bach
> borrowed Werckmeister's term "Wohl temperirt" for the well-tempered
clavier
> is certainly honorific.

i'll buy this . . . but i'm still wondering (in case you missed this
question today), what were the status of werckmeister iv, v, and vi
with respect to bach?

On 2/21/02 10:06 PM, "paulerlich" <paul@stretch-music.com> wrote:

> i'll buy this . . . but i'm still wondering (in case you missed this
> question today), what were the status of werckmeister iv, v, and vi
> with respect to bach?

I never knew there was a IV V and VI. Actually for some reason I never
wondered if there was an "I" or "II". What exactly are these?

m