Isacoff on the BBC

The Isacoff book on temperament (which I haven't read by the way) was
discussed on the hallowed airwaves of BBC Radio 3 today (Sunday). And I
missed it - BUT a friend who heard it tells me that he got a bit of a
pasting for historical innacuracies, though his discussion of tunings
was deemed to be interesting. It seems that the two reviewers didn't
agree with what he had to say on Pythagorean tunings and early music for
voices. Bach was also discussed.

I've just emailed the BBC to ask if they have a transcript or tape of
the broadcast because my gut feeling is that the reviewers' expertise in
the field is probably as suspect as Isacoff's. I'm bearing in mind the
heavy traffic we had a few weeks back on the matter. S'about time I read
the book - it's all over the place.

And some of you guys should take time out to write a more definitive and
accurate account than Isacoff's would seem to be. If I tell you that
words to the effect of 'blinkered New Jersey outlook' were used, perhaps
that might inspire you to get on BBC Radio 3 and level things
out........I'll keep y'all posted if I get a reply from the BEEB. Stay
cool.

Kind Regards

--- In tuning@y..., Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@w...> wrote:
> The Isacoff book on temperament (which I haven't read by the way)
was
> discussed on the hallowed airwaves of BBC Radio 3 today (Sunday).
And I
> missed it - BUT a friend who heard it tells me that he got a bit of
a
> pasting for historical innacuracies, though his discussion of
tunings
> was deemed to be interesting. It seems that the two reviewers didn't
> agree with what he had to say on Pythagorean tunings and early
music for
> voices. Bach was also discussed.
>
> I've just emailed the BBC to ask if they have a transcript or tape
of
> the broadcast because my gut feeling is that the reviewers'
expertise in
> the field is probably as suspect as Isacoff's. I'm bearing in mind
the
> heavy traffic we had a few weeks back on the matter. S'about time I
read
> the book - it's all over the place.
>
> And some of you guys should take time out to write a more
definitive and
> accurate account than Isacoff's would seem to be. If I tell you that
> words to the effect of 'blinkered New Jersey outlook' were used,
perhaps
> that might inspire you to get on BBC Radio 3 and level things
> out........I'll keep y'all posted if I get a reply from the BEEB.
Stay
> cool.
>
> Kind Regards

Thanks, Alison! Sounds good. Please do.

Cheers,

Bob

In-Reply-To: <3CC31F7C.8B0AE16@which.net>
Alison Monteith wrote:

> The Isacoff book on temperament (which I haven't read by the way) was
> discussed on the hallowed airwaves of BBC Radio 3 today (Sunday). And I
> missed it - BUT a friend who heard it tells me that he got a bit of a
> pasting for historical innacuracies, though his discussion of tunings
> was deemed to be interesting. It seems that the two reviewers didn't
> agree with what he had to say on Pythagorean tunings and early music for
> voices. Bach was also discussed.

Oh, I heard it. Yes, they did bring up the inaccuracies. They actually
mentioned most of the objections that came up here. And they were more
dismissive of his writing style than the reviews I read. They suggested
it might have been intended for children, but you wouldn't want children
reading it because of the inaccuracies.

As to Bach, they did point out that the 48 were written for well, rather
than equal temperament. This is the first time I've heard the distinction
made on Radio 3. And they criticised the book for not giving much
attention to well temperaments.

However, the introduction, where they played the introduction to the 48 on
different harpsichords, didn't include Werckmeister. Also when they
played the 1/4 comma meantone in a "good" key, the final arpeggio was so
slow that it didn't work as a chord, leaving no examples at all of the
pure 1/4-comma triads. There was also a bizarre comment about Pythagorean
intonation having perfectly tuned thirds (surprisingly similar to one of
Vicentino's comments, BTW). Unfortunately my ear wasn't well enough
polished enough to tell if it was really JI or what was going on.

> I've just emailed the BBC to ask if they have a transcript or tape of
> the broadcast because my gut feeling is that the reviewers' expertise in
> the field is probably as suspect as Isacoff's. I'm bearing in mind the
> heavy traffic we had a few weeks back on the matter. S'about time I read
> the book - it's all over the place.

Roderick Swanson was it? He seemed to be some kind of expert, although I
think it was him who made the comment about perfect thirds in Pythagorean
tuning mentioned above. The other chap was a regular musician, and so
closer to the target audience.

Some time ago (I think last year) there was a demonstration of harpsichord
tunings as an interval feature in a Bach concert. I thought that was
poor, although didn't mention it at the time. They completely ignored the
well temperaments, and made a few comments about Bach using equal
temperament. Also no mention of split keys for meantone. But worst, they
blithely gave an example of how bad meantone sounds in a remote key
without saying that, when meantone was in fashion, nobody used those
remote keys. So it gave the impression that until equal temperament was
discovered, people had to put up with music being out of tune.

I mention this now because yesterday's feature did head down the same
path, but in the review they redeemed themselves. In fact, I wonder if
the introduction could have been an edited version of that interval
feature.

And another thing... On Saturday's CD Review, they played a piece of
harpsichord music and the prat of a presenter complained both before an
after how difficult the tuning was to get used to. Sounded like 1/4-comma
meantone to me.

> And some of you guys should take time out to write a more definitive and
> accurate account than Isacoff's would seem to be. If I tell you that
> words to the effect of 'blinkered New Jersey outlook' were used, perhaps
> that might inspire you to get on BBC Radio 3 and level things
> out........I'll keep y'all posted if I get a reply from the BEEB. Stay
> cool.

One thing that struck me about the review is that they could easily have
done a web search as research and turned up Kyle Gann's review, maybe even
some Tuning List posts. In fact, I think they did exactly that. The only
alternative would be if the objections raised here are obviously correct
;)

Yes, there was something about New Jersey although I don't remember the
word "blinkered" being used. They were suggesting he had a parochial
attitude, but the word "parochial" wasn't used either. Could have been
thinly veiled anti-Americanism.

Graham

Allison:

> > And some of you guys should take time out to write a more definitive and
> > accurate account than Isacoff's would seem to be. If I tell you that
> > words to the effect of 'blinkered New Jersey outlook' were used, perhaps
> > that might inspire you to get on BBC Radio 3 and level things
> > out........I'll keep y'all posted if I get a reply from the BEEB. Stay
> > cool.

I'm afraid that only those in Britain will have any effect in Britain. When
I telephoned the Grove Dictionary people about Ives, they dismissed anything
I had to say because H. Wiley Hitchcock, the American editor of the American
Grove, would have to make any and all recommendations on the article, even
though it was Kirkpatrick who wrote the article so many years ago. Since I
am an editor for Grove I took the opportunity to discuss this and was soundly
(or unsoundly) rebuffed. And I gave up with them. Hopefully things will
change once my book is out (self-published).

Best to Britain, Johnny Reinhard

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

/tuning/topicId_36523.html#36541

> I'm afraid that only those in Britain will have any effect in
Britain. When I telephoned the Grove Dictionary people about Ives,
they dismissed anything I had to say because H. Wiley Hitchcock, the
American editor of the American Grove, would have to make any and
all recommendations on the article, even though it was Kirkpatrick
who wrote the article so many years ago. Since I am an editor for
Grove I took the opportunity to discuss this and was soundly
> (or unsoundly) rebuffed. And I gave up with them. Hopefully
things will change once my book is out (self-published).
>
> Best to Britain, Johnny Reinhard

***Hi Johnny!

I'm assuming you meant to say here that "since you are *not* an
editor for Grove...." Yes? If you've become one, you've been
very "mum" about it...

Oh... they do have a pretty nice Web encyclopedia, which comes with
Sibelius in a "trial run."

It's here, and you can access it by what they call a "metropass."
The cheapest is one hour per year for $30. But then, again, how long
does it really take to look up an article??

http://www.grovemusic.com/

best,

Joseph

--- In tuning@y..., graham@m... wrote:
> There was also a bizarre comment about Pythagorean
> intonation having perfectly tuned thirds (surprisingly similar to
one of
> Vicentino's comments, BTW). Unfortunately my ear wasn't well
enough
> polished enough to tell if it was really JI or what was going on.

Perhaps the fellow meant schismic temperament thirds?

--- In tuning@y..., "genewardsmith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote:
> --- In tuning@y..., graham@m... wrote:
> > There was also a bizarre comment about Pythagorean
> > intonation having perfectly tuned thirds (surprisingly similar to
> one of
> > Vicentino's comments, BTW). Unfortunately my ear wasn't well
> enough
> > polished enough to tell if it was really JI or what was going on.
>
> Perhaps the fellow meant schismic temperament thirds?

or third harmonics?

In a message dated 4/22/02 9:01:02 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Afmmjr@aol.com
writes:

> . Since I am an editor for Grove

Joseph, what I might have written is that I have edited an article on Tui St.
George Tucker for several years, updating as prompted by Grove. It is while
updating said article that I had the opportunity to speak about Ives.

Best, Johnny Reinhard

P.S. sorry for misspelling your name, Alison.

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

/tuning/topicId_36523.html#36579

> In a message dated 4/22/02 9:01:02 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
Afmmjr@a...
> writes:
>
>
> > . Since I am an editor for Grove
>
> Joseph, what I might have written is that I have edited an article
on Tui St.
> George Tucker for several years, updating as prompted by Grove. It
is while
> updating said article that I had the opportunity to speak about
Ives.
>
> Best, Johnny Reinhard
>

***Oh! Thanks, Johnny. Well, since you've already worked for them,
they really should pay more attention to your opinions, it would
seem...

jp

> P.S. sorry for misspelling your name, Alison.