Will I be able to finish Temperament?

The book starts on page 3, and by page 5 has already accumulated enough factual errors and tendentious, silly statements that I don't know if I can finish it. Who called this mess "scholarly"? Please!

The key to it all is that Isakoff is a pianist and editor of a piano magazine, I think. This is a polemic.

In a message dated 2/23/02 8:48:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,
genewardsmith@juno.com writes:

> The key to it all is that Isakoff is a pianist and editor of a piano
> magazine, I think. This is a polemic.
>
>
>

It sure is. Johnny

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

> It sure is. Johnny

I've read a bunch more, and I really wish I had a way to sort out the information from the misinformation. He gets things wrong often enough that when he tells us something interesting--such as that Newton discovered the 612-et--I'd like to see a footnote. Of course, Isakoff is hardly alone in this sort of thing.

--- In tuning@y..., "genewardsmith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_34755.html#34757

> --- In tuning@y..., Afmmjr@a... wrote:
>
> > It sure is. Johnny
>
> I've read a bunch more, and I really wish I had a way to sort out
the information from the misinformation. He gets things wrong often
enough that when he tells us something interesting--such as that
Newton discovered the 612-et--I'd like to see a footnote. Of course,
Isakoff is hardly alone in this sort of thing.

****Thank you Gene, and Johnny Reinhard on your commentary concerning
this book. I took it to "work" to read during slow times, feeling I
have more important things to do at *home...* :)

Well, frankly, if it is so loaded with errors, I wish that people on
this list, including myself... although I don't know if I have enough
background to contribute much, would write a *COUNTER* Isakoff
article or book, written in *layman's* terms.

The reason is, apparently the Isakoff book really *is* taking off to
a degree commercially, and it would be good to get the *corrections*
in the public eye, if possible. I don't know if it *is* possible,
but I believe it would somehow be a good thing to try!

Joe Pehrson

--- In tuning@y..., "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:

> Well, frankly, if it is so loaded with errors, I wish that people on
> this list, including myself... although I don't know if I have enough
> background to contribute much, would write a *COUNTER* Isakoff
> article or book, written in *layman's* terms.

You could always write a review for Amazon, I suppose. I wrote one for Marilyn vos Savant's book on Fermat's last theorem (a much worse book than Temperament, by the way, so things could be worse) and while it may have done little good it *felt* good. :)

>Message: 24
> Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 04:45:16 -0000
> From: "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@rcn.com>
>Subject: Re: Will I be able to finish Temperament?

>
>Well, frankly, if it is so loaded with errors, I wish that people on
>this list, including myself... although I don't know if I have enough
>background to contribute much, would write a *COUNTER* Isakoff
>article or book, written in *layman's* terms.
>
>The reason is, apparently the Isakoff book really *is* taking off to
>a degree commercially, and it would be good to get the *corrections*
>in the public eye, if possible. I don't know if it *is* possible,
>but I believe it would somehow be a good thing to try!

Greetings,
Well, we are trying! There was a letter to the editor published in the New
York Times Book review that mentioned our temperament recordings by name, as
a rebuttal to the Jamie James reviewer. The writer of the letter didn't rant
an rage enough, of course, but it certainly started some interest in what has
happened to the scale over the last 300 years.
Many reviewers got heat for their "glowing" reviews of "Temperament", so I
think that there is possibly some fear on many reviewers' part to even
approach the subject. We could possibly do more to educate them, but there
is resistance, even to that.
I'm still working on the piano tuning community, but have begun to
enlighten the students that I get around. So far, two universities here are
now "temperament friendly", and a another is interested. This is all local,
of course, but eventually the format will present itself for Isacoff to find
himself engaged in debate over just what "equal" means.
Regards,
Ed Foote
Nashville, Tn.

--- In tuning@y..., "genewardsmith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_34755.html#34765

> --- In tuning@y..., "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
>
> > Well, frankly, if it is so loaded with errors, I wish that people
on
> > this list, including myself... although I don't know if I have
enough
> > background to contribute much, would write a *COUNTER* Isakoff
> > article or book, written in *layman's* terms.
>
> You could always write a review for Amazon, I suppose. I wrote one
for Marilyn vos Savant's book on Fermat's last theorem (a much worse
book than Temperament, by the way, so things could be worse) and
while it may have done little good it *felt* good. :)

***That's probably a good idea, Gene and I'll run it by the list, of
course, for accuracy.

I can think of at least a couple of places that could also pretty
immediately be "published" including Jacky Ligon's _Microtonal
Activist..._

JP

My concern regarding Isacoff is that it is a polemic (as exemplified by his
letter to The Village Voice in reaction to Kyle Gann). I for one do not want
to give any extra attention to it. It's too bad so many of us had to get a
copy to know what people are talking about, ratcheting up sales.

My guess is there was little research and that Isacoff did the book out of
his head. This would explain his easy acceptance of old rumors in music, and
then building upon them. Criticism of issue by issue is perhaps wasted
(except to bat around on the List) since the author's foundations are built
on sand.

Best, Johnny Reinhard

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

/tuning/topicId_34755.html#34780

> My concern regarding Isacoff is that it is a polemic (as
exemplified by his
> letter to The Village Voice in reaction to Kyle Gann). I for one
do not want
> to give any extra attention to it. It's too bad so many of us had
to get a
> copy to know what people are talking about, ratcheting up sales.
>
> My guess is there was little research and that Isacoff did the book
out of
> his head. This would explain his easy acceptance of old rumors in
music, and
> then building upon them. Criticism of issue by issue is perhaps
wasted
> (except to bat around on the List) since the author's foundations
are built
> on sand.
>
> Best, Johnny Reinhard

****Well, that makes sense, Johnny and, besides, Kyle Gann *already*
reviewed it.

It might be worthwile just to discuss a few things on the list,
though, that people might be confused about.

I don't know, though, what they might be, since I haven't read the
book yet...

Just can't wait... but never get around to it... :)

best,

Joe

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

> My concern regarding Isacoff is that it is a polemic (as exemplified by his
> letter to The Village Voice in reaction to Kyle Gann).

It's curiously inconsistent--he seems to want to hold up the present system as the best possible, and at the same time he sometimes subverts that judgment.

I for one do not want
> to give any extra attention to it. It's too bad so many of us had to get a
> copy to know what people are talking about, ratcheting up sales.

That's why God created public libraries.

> My guess is there was little research and that Isacoff did the book out of
> his head.

He must have gone somewhere for all his anecdotes about Hooke and what not. He cites Will & Ariel Durant and the Grove Dictionary of Music, but that wouldn't have told him that sort of thing.

This would explain his easy acceptance of old rumors in music, and
> then building upon them.

He does that a lot. He also gets a lot of stuff *not* about music wrong, however, which I hope he didn't just get out of his head.

> From: <Afmmjr@aol.com>
> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2002 7:30 AM
> Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Will I be able to finish Temperament?
>
>
> My concern regarding Isacoff is that it is a polemic (as exemplified by
his
> letter to The Village Voice in reaction to Kyle Gann). I for one do not
want
> to give any extra attention to it. It's too bad so many of us had to get
a
> copy to know what people are talking about, ratcheting up sales.
>
> My guess is there was little research and that Isacoff did the book out of
> his head. This would explain his easy acceptance of old rumors in music,
and
> then building upon them. Criticism of issue by issue is perhaps wasted
> (except to bat around on the List) since the author's foundations are
built
> on sand.
>
> Best, Johnny Reinhard

Yes, well, it's too bad (and is pissing off Gann and many people here,
especially including myself) that Isacoff is getting so much money and
notoriety in the "wider world" for his error-laden effort, when many of
us here (again, especially including myself) are getting neither for
their carefully prepared work.

again, if anyone out there would like to be my agent, or has any
ideas on how i may be able to earn a living doing the work i love
to do (without having to take time from that to handle the business
end of things), please offer suggestions.

meantime ... Isacoff seems to have the spotlight right now, and
s o m e o n e should certainly try to push that light into a
more worthy direction. i'm glad that at least Kyle Gann and
Ed Foote made an effort.

-monz

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

> From: <Afmmjr@aol.com>
> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2002 7:30 AM
> Subject: Re: [tuning] Re: Will I be able to finish Temperament?
>
>
> My concern regarding Isacoff is that it is a polemic (as
> exemplified by his letter to The Village Voice in reaction
> to Kyle Gann). I for one do not want to give any extra
> attention to it. It's too bad so many of us had to get
> a copy to know what people are talking about, ratcheting up sales.

and for this reason, i strongly urge everyone to borrow
the book from the library for a first reading, rather than
purchase a copy. none of my local libraries have it yet,
which is why i haven't yet read it.

-monz

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

--- In tuning@y..., "monz" <joemonz@y...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_34755.html#34793

>
> Yes, well, it's too bad (and is pissing off Gann and many people
here, especially including myself) that Isacoff is getting so much
money and notoriety in the "wider world" for his error-laden effort,
when many of us here (again, especially including myself) are getting
neither for their carefully prepared work.
>

***Well, the question *I* would like to ask is why is this? I mean,
why is the Isakoff book *getting* such big publicity? Is it the way
he marketed the book, the timing, the agent. Wazzup?

This may be a *metatuning* topic if it goes on too long...

J. Pehrson

--- In tuning@y..., "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> ***Well, the question *I* would like to ask is why is this? I
> mean, why is the Isakoff book *getting* such big publicity?

Let's try and keep a perspective on this: it *seems* big because it
is a subject that a lot of people here are interested in. But this
community is a speck in the real world, so what seems big here isn't
exactly that out in the 'real' world. But beyond that...

> Is it the way he marketed the book, the timing, the agent.

Every so often an off-beat subject can be written up in such a manner
as to make it something of a historical mystery play, or an
intriguing window into human nature. Without having read the book but
simply the info on the author, the responses, the press blurbs, etc.,
this is what seems to be the case. And I am pretty certain that
whatever notice he has gotten is already waning. C'mon: it's tuning -
how many of the general public could really be interested,
*especially* WRT the tiny factual details?

> This may be a *metatuning* topic if it goes on too long...

I'll let someone else make that call. But if anyone wonders why
Isakoff may get press and notice for stuff like this, it is probably
attributable to being within the establishment, and therefore a safe
bet for a publisher, etc. I wouldn't think that there are people
among us in the same position of 'street cred' that would be afforded
a similar platform to rebut him. Unless one of our university
professors can put it in an academic journal, or someone can hook up
with a star-class performer (and I mean visibility, not ability),
then we remain a marginalized collective of well-meaning
intonationalist, most of 'us' amateurs, non-academics, and hobbyists.

See, that doesn't bother *me*, because I frankly don't give squat
about the Isakoff book. But if someone seriously wants to have a
counter-book to his, it better be in partnership with someone or some
institution that will give it instant credibility.

Cheers,
Jon

--- In tuning@y..., "jonszanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_34755.html#34800

But if anyone wonders why Isakoff may get press and notice for stuff
like this, it is probably attributable to being within the
establishment, and therefore a safe bet for a publisher, etc. I
wouldn't think that there are people among us in the same position
of 'street cred' that would be afforded a similar platform to rebut
him. Unless one of our university professors can put it in an
academic journal, or someone can hook up with a star-class performer
(and I mean visibility, not ability), then we remain a marginalized
collective of well-meaning intonationalist, most of 'us' amateurs,
non-academics, and hobbyists.
>

****Are you certain, Jon, that Isakoff has such splendid
credentials?? Editor and Chief of _Piano Today_ magazine?? I'd
never even heard of him...

JP

----- Original Message -----
From: "monz" <joemonz@yahoo.com>

> again, if anyone out there would like to be my agent, or has any
> ideas on how i may be able to earn a living doing the work i love
> to do (without having to take time from that to handle the business
> end of things), please offer suggestions.

Since nobody's been stepping forward to help you,
why don't you look for an agent? You know...do it yourself.

Get out there and start ringing some door bells man.

If I'd never told you to learn some simple html,
you'd probably still trying to find someone
to make web pages for you.

* David Beardsley
* http://biink.com
* http://mp3.com/davidbeardsley

--- In tuning@y..., "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> ****Are you certain, Jon, that Isakoff has such splendid
> credentials?? Editor and Chief of _Piano Today_ magazine?? I'd
> never even heard of him...

I'm not certain of anything. But when someone asked for an email
address for him, I did what anyone could have: typed it into Google.
I got a bunch of bio stuff about him, working with the piano stuff,
magazines, judging competitions, etc. I don't remember it all right
now, because, frankly, I don't care.

But the Point is that whatever his credentials are (and you, as well
as any smart person on this list, certainly knows how puffed up a
resume can be), they are good enough to snare a publisher and to get
press for himself. My guess: he is a very self-promotional person,
and *wanted* to get this book published.

This parallels a topic that comes up from time to time on this list:
why things don't happen. I mean Absolutely No Disrespect to my
colleagues on the list(s), but putting a paper up on a website, or
posting an mp3, is NOT going to make you either a household word, or
attract the attention of Big Media or Big Concert Promoters.

You gotta make it happen if that is what you want to do; there are so
many bajillion "authors" out there that you must muster every bullet
point, every contact, every line of type that Makes You Appear
Impressive (tm) to get it done. Either that, or you publish within
the academic environment.

Answer this: which will be noticed more - Isakoff's book, flawed as
it might be, or an article in a journal such as Perspectives of New
Music? I know which one I might give more credence to, but you can't
fault someone for their ability to have written what should have been
a musicological text in a way that someone, somewhere, thought they
could market to a larger, more generalized audience.

I've got some thoughts on where and how the group could make a
response, but I gotta dash for a couple of hours. Later...

Cheers,
Jon

----- Original Message -----
From: "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@rcn.com>

> ****Are you certain, Jon, that Isakoff has such splendid
> credentials?? Editor and Chief of _Piano Today_ magazine?? I'd
> never even heard of him...

I've never even heard of this magazine. Has anybody on
this list even seen a copy?

http://www.pianotoday.com/

Let's seem them publish the score to one of
Ben Johnston or Michael Harrison's pieces!

Oh, I see he's written books before:

http://www.pianotoday.com/isacoff.html

* David Beardsley
* http://biink.com
* http://mp3.com/davidbeardsley

----- Original Message -----
From: "jonszanto" <JSZANTO@ADNC.COM>

> You gotta make it happen if that is what you want to do;

Exactly.

> I've got some thoughts on where and how the group could make a
> response,

How about if everybody on this list, who is concerned about
this book write a review for Amazon.com?

dB,
cheese

* David Beardsley
* http://biink.com
* http://mp3.com/davidbeardsley

In a message dated 2/24/02 9:56:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, JSZANTO@ADNC.COM
writes:

> Answer this: which will be noticed more - Isakoff's book, flawed as
> it might be, or an article in a journal such as Perspectives of New
>

They are actually quite similar, the same side really Perspectives favors
academics over people making music in the trenches.

Johnny Reinhard

--- In tuning@y..., Afmmjr@a... wrote:
> They are actually quite similar, the same side really Perspectives
> favors academics over people making music in the trenches.

I must have not been clear: the point I was making is that PNM is an
academic journal published for academic readers; Isakoff's book may
have some basis in musicalogical fact, but the only reason we are
even discussing it with gnashed teeth is that it has been marketed to
a wider, non-music-involved public.

And *that* is something that will never happen with PNM. If Isakoff's
writing had taken the form of a long article in a journal similar to
PNM, then virtually no one in the public at large would have heard
about it.

They wrapped it in a package that could reach beyond the original
musical audience one would have assumed. In this regard, it was very
canny, and I'll wager some of the frustration is "why couldn't I have
done that" (mostly coming from Monz...)

Cheers,
Jon

----- Original Message -----
From: "jonszanto" <JSZANTO@ADNC.COM>

>In this regard, it was very
> canny, and I'll wager some of the frustration is "why couldn't I have
> done that" (mostly coming from Monz...)

It's because he didn't even try.

* David Beardsley
* http://biink.com
* http://mp3.com/davidbeardsley

--- In tuning@y..., "jonszanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_34755.html#34807

> They wrapped it in a package that could reach beyond the original
> musical audience one would have assumed. In this regard, it was
very canny, and I'll wager some of the frustration is "why couldn't I
have done that" (mostly coming from Monz...)
>
> Cheers,
> Jon

***I happen to agree with Jon here. The book is an
*educational/scholarly/tuning* flop but it's *real* success is in its
*marketing*... something we could *all* learn from and, hopefully,
we'll have *better content* to promote...

JP

--- In tuning@y..., "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:

> ***I happen to agree with Jon here. The book is an
> *educational/scholarly/tuning* flop but it's *real* success is in its
> *marketing*... something we could *all* learn from and, hopefully,
> we'll have *better content* to promote...

It's real success is that he aims to amuse, and keep the reader turning pages. It would be hard to counter, because the actual tuning information content is stripped down to almost nothing.

--- In tuning@y..., "genewardsmith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote:
> It's real success is that he aims to amuse, and keep the reader
turning pages. It would be hard to counter, because the actual tuning
information content is stripped down to almost nothing.

Bingo! And not unlike the liberties taken and motivations in the
film "A Beautiful Mind". Entertainment trumps reality these days...

Cheers,
Jon

In-Reply-To: <a5c8ue+v9i1@eGroups.com>
jonszanto wrote:

> I'm not certain of anything. But when someone asked for an email
> address for him, I did what anyone could have: typed it into Google.
> I got a bunch of bio stuff about him, working with the piano stuff,
> magazines, judging competitions, etc. I don't remember it all right
> now, because, frankly, I don't care.

As a similar experiment, I did a search for "isacoff temperament" in
Google. Here's what I got:

<http://www.randomhouse.com/boldtype/1201/isacoff/>

A positive review, includes links to sound files. And a couple of clicks
away is

<http://www.randomhouse.com/boldtype/1201/isacoff/harrison.html>

a pro-JI essay.

<http://www.bookreporter.com/reviews/0375403558.asp>

Another positive review.

<http://www.thenewrepublic.com/121001/franklin121001_print.html>

This one's been mentioned here before. Fairly balanced, mentions problems
with the book, and ends with the startling revelation that good pianists
are good to listen to.

<www.villagevoice.com/issues/0205/gann.php>

This looks like Kyle Gann's anti-review. A list member at number 4! I
got assaulted by so many popups, cookies and Active X controls that I
backed out without reading it, but I'm assuming it's the same one I read
before.

<http://www.michaelharrison.com/Reviews/reviews.html>

Reviews for the bloke who wrote the JI essay above. A quote from Isacoff
is included.

<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0375403558/002-8643404-1020028>

The book's page at Amazon, so David Beardsley's advice was good. Covers
both sides of the story.

<http://www.missoulanews.com/AE/News.asp?no=2228>

Good review, but still pro-microtonal. Spells "Partch" as if he were
German.

> But the Point is that whatever his credentials are (and you, as well
> as any smart person on this list, certainly knows how puffed up a
> resume can be), they are good enough to snare a publisher and to get
> press for himself. My guess: he is a very self-promotional person,
> and *wanted* to get this book published.

Getting a publisher is one thing. Getting press takes more than a resume.
Either it's an unusually good book or he got lucky.

> This parallels a topic that comes up from time to time on this list:
> why things don't happen. I mean Absolutely No Disrespect to my
> colleagues on the list(s), but putting a paper up on a website, or
> posting an mp3, is NOT going to make you either a household word, or
> attract the attention of Big Media or Big Concert Promoters.

Putting up a website can get your message across to thousands of people.
That's very good if you aren't a household word, and don't have the
attention of Big Media or Big Concert Promoters (TM). As I think the
examples above show, the web's doing a good job of presenting the
objections to Isacoff's (alleged -- I haven't read it) simplistic thesis.
It's also going to reach more people than one popular-academic book.

If somebody here actually spent the time to list the factual errors in the
book, and put them on a web page, it might well be picked up by the search
engines. That could make a difference, but somebody has to do some work
first.

> Answer this: which will be noticed more - Isakoff's book, flawed as
> it might be, or an article in a journal such as Perspectives of New
> Music? I know which one I might give more credence to, but you can't
> fault someone for their ability to have written what should have been
> a musicological text in a way that someone, somewhere, thought they
> could market to a larger, more generalized audience.

If Isacoff (note the speling) had written an unsuccessful book, very few
people would have got to see it. An unsuccessful article in PNM will
equally have little impact. A successful article in PNM could get onto
the curriculum in music colleges around the world, and be a direct
influence on leading composers. A successful web page can be read by
millions of people. The tricky part's always the "successful" bit.

> I've got some thoughts on where and how the group could make a
> response, but I gotta dash for a couple of hours. Later...

See ya,

Graham

--- In tuning@y..., graham@m... wrote:

/tuning/topicId_34755.html#34821

***Thanks, Graham, for culling all these reviews of the Isacoff...

>
> <http://www.bookreporter.com/reviews/0375403558.asp>
>
> Another positive review.
>

>Like a pianist sitting down at the keyboard to tackle Prokofieff or
Messaien, Stuart Isacoff --- himself a pianist and the editor of
Piano Today magazine --- faced a daunting task when he decided to
write this book. He sought to write for the general reader about an
abstract and highly technical musical subject, one to which even many
professional musicians give little thought as they go about their
daily work.

***I thought this probably summed up something important.. the fact
that this book was for the *general* reader. That, probably, is the
key to it's broad readership.

>
> <http://www.thenewrepublic.com/121001/franklin121001_print.html>
>
> This one's been mentioned here before. Fairly balanced, mentions
problems with the book, and ends with the startling revelation that
good pianists are good to listen to.

****This was a pretty good one, as we discussed before, but Ed Foote
made the comment on how "odd" it was to think that tuning a piano in
meantone would mean that it would have to be totally *restrung* and
that somehow a piano's shape "conforms" to the tuning. That's pretty
limber steel, there...

>
>
> <http://www.michaelharrison.com/Reviews/reviews.html>
>
> Reviews for the bloke who wrote the JI essay above. A quote from
Isacoff is included.
>

***Well, the fact that this book has fostered an interest in Just
Intonation, among other things, leads me to believe that maybe it's
not quite as pernicious as some claim. At least people are *talking*
and *reading* about tuning...

But the most *peculiar* thing about this entire book is it's dust
jacket. It's brand new, but made to look ancient.... rather like a
pair of expensive designer jeans that are torn to shreads in the
store...

I threw my dust jacket out immediately... :)

JP

Graham,

Some very good points. I won't belabor...

--- In tuning@y..., graham@m... wrote:
> Getting a publisher is one thing. Getting press takes more than a
> resume. Either it's an unusually good book or he got lucky.

Or he has the 'people skills' to have an agent, to schmooze the right
people, to shake hands at parties, etc. He obviously knows how
to "play the game".

> Putting up a website can get your message across to thousands of
> people.

You are ignoring something that is also obvious: if *I* can put up
said website, so can virtually anyone else. There are no standards,
and there is so much bad information and disinformation that simply
publishing on the web does not yet have the cachet or respectability
of a hardcover book.

To a certain audience, that is.

> It's also going to reach more people than one popular-academic book.

I don't agree, and if it is like the way this particular subject is
being handled, then it is mainly a "preaching to the choir" - all the
tuning people will be up in arms, but the general public that reads
the book will miss the uproar. Or not miss it, actually...

> That could make a difference, but somebody has to do some work
> first.

Make a difference to *who*?

> > I've got some thoughts on where and how the group could make a
> > response, but I gotta dash for a couple of hours. Later...
>
> See ya,

Well, I figure that there are more people knowledgeable about his
lapses within reach of this list than just about anywhere. If 3 or 4
people wanted to get a rough draft together, put it up for public
comment, and then write it up properly, and affix no more than 3 or 4
people's names, titles and institutions, maybe *then* it might have
some effect, especially if it was also sent out in some form as a
press release and to all the places the book has been reviewed. No
matter who the authors were, you'd need to have bylines (with input)
from people who might be seen as credible in these circles. Maybe
Kyle Gann (again), Bill Sethares, David Doty (JI Network), John
Chalmers (Xenharmonikon), Bill Alves, maybe a testimonial from
someone like Lou Harrison.

I'm not saying that *these are the people* that need to be there, but
they have affiliations with organizations, institutions, and
something *other than* just being microtonal wonks on a mailing list.
No one will bother to take notice - valid as the arguements might be -
if you don't match some of the posture of Isacoff's book. And
credentials, thin as they might seem in our circle of friends, give
that glaze of respectability so often lacking in niche research like
the tunings lists.

Or at least that's how it seems tonight.

That's enough from me on Temperament. It's been interesting, in a
socialogical sense, but I need to move on to other things...

Cheers,
Jon

hi Graham,

> From: <graham@microtonal.co.uk>
> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 5:02 AM
> Subject: [tuning] Re: Will I be able to finish Temperament?
>
>
> ... I did a search for "isacoff temperament" in
> Google. Here's what I got:
>
> <good list of links snipped>

thanks for all of those. here's one that you didn't post:

http://www.randomhouse.com/boldtype/1201/isacoff/excerpt.html

it's the "prelude" to the book, which i presume is Isacoff's
witty title for the preface.

the last two paragraphs:

>> It is a tale that includes "temperament" in all its
>> diverse meanings: from the elements that shape the
>> temperament, or character, of pivotal thinkers; to endless
>> efforts to temper-or transform-the material world into
>> something more desirable; to the practice of tempering,
>> or altering, the purest, most beautiful harmonies,
>> following the startling revelation that in certain
>> situations they must be reshaped or they will transform
>> music, Jekyll-and-Hyde-like, into something grotesque.
>>
>> This last definition, though arcane sounding, marks a
>> profound moment in cultural history. Temperaments, settling
>> like tracks along the winding path of Western civilization,
>> unfettered the engine of musical progress. Once freed, and
>> fueled by the sparks of those most human of qualities -
>> imagination and passion - musical art, with religion,
>> politics, and science in tow, chugged its way inescapably
>> toward our own era.

this smacks enormously of Schoenberg's concept of musical
evolution. nothing new.

i find the bit about "Jekyll-and-Hyde" particularly amusing.
if anything was able to "transform music ... into something
grotesque", it was 12edo! (and with no little help from
Schoenberg in arriving at that!) the compositions (i.e.,
the results) speak for themselves.

centuries of meantone wolves never made music sound as
"grotesque" as what many 12edo composers of the 1900s did.

boy, i really would like to read this book and write a review.
i'm still forcing myself not to respond to Isacoff's dumb
reply to Gann's review of the book.

-monz

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

--- In tuning@y..., "David Beardsley" <davidbeardsley@b...> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jonszanto" <JSZANTO@A...>
>
> > You gotta make it happen if that is what you want to do;
>
> Exactly.
>
> > I've got some thoughts on where and how the group could make a
> > response,
>
> How about if everybody on this list, who is concerned about
> this book write a review for Amazon.com?

great idea, but please, not until it's available in the library --
i'd hate for us to buy so many copies of it, and certainly we
shouldn't be writing reviews of a book most of us haven't even read.