Re: [tuning] 12-equal vs just tuning-Beethoven

Hi Dave,

As you may remember I wrote of some psychological issues in an unpublished
paper "Phenomenology and Its Application to Microtonality." That said, I've
lately been trying to accept Beethoven as being in Kirnberger II. This has
been suggested by Daniel Wolf and others. It even makes some circumstantial
sense.

I've used Scala to hear Joe Pehrson play some Beethoven in KII and it sounds
rather revelatory. But now that I can sing on my own the opening of Symphony
#5, I still miss the embossed equal tempered opening descending major thirds.
I readily admit only considering 400 cent interval for this opening, which
is mostly thought of for its rhythm, tempo, and length of silence. Try
imagining the openings in 386 cents just. Quite soft in comparison to the
moderns.

I'm trying to loosen up my expectations.

best, Johnny Reinhard

There will always be people who initially react strongly against >
> something which clashes with what they are used to hearing - the fact
> that it sounds "different" becomes psychologically equivalent to
> sounding "off" or "funny" or just "wrong" to them.
>
>

hi Johnny,

> From: <Afmmjr@aol.com>
> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 7:06 AM
> Subject: Re: [tuning] 12-equal vs just tuning-Beethoven
>
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> As you may remember I wrote of some psychological
> issues in an unpublished paper "Phenomenology and
> Its Application to Microtonality." That said, I've
> lately been trying to accept Beethoven as being in
> Kirnberger II. This has been suggested by Daniel Wolf
> and others. It even makes some circumstantial sense.

just thought i'd mention that i started a project about a year
ago, creating a MIDI-file of Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata"
tuned in Kirnberger III. didn't get very far with it, but
someday it will be on the website. i too am pretty well
convinced that Kirnberger III was the most likely tuning
Beethoven would normally have had on his pianos ... my
documentation and speculations will go into that webpage.

> I've used Scala to hear Joe Pehrson play some Beethoven
> in KII and it sounds rather revelatory. But now that I
> can sing on my own the opening of Symphony #5, I still
> miss the embossed equal tempered opening descending major
> thirds. I readily admit only considering 400 cent interval
> for this opening, which is mostly thought of for its rhythm,
> tempo, and length of silence. Try imagining the openings
> in 386 cents just. Quite soft in comparison to the moderns.
>
> I'm trying to loosen up my expectations.

also keep in mind that Beethoven had gotten a lot of experience
playing violin and viola in the court orchestra at Bonn as
a teenager, well before he started losing his hearing, and
that thus a good case could be made for his orchestral music
to be tuned at least somewhat in a meantone ... which, by the
way, Kirnberger III incorporates for some of its intervals.

see my Dictionary page:
http://sonic-arts.org/dict/kirnberger.htm

if Beethoven had something in mind along the lines of 55edo,
which i think is the most likely tuning for his orchestral
music (at least the stuff he wrote before 1810), then the
opening "major-3rd" G down to Eb in the 5th Symphony would
~392&8/11 cents, and the following F down to D would be
~305&5/11 cents.

(an aside: to me, the most brilliant thing about the opening
of Beethoven's 5th is how the first-time listener would
hear those first two phrases, with the pauses, as being in
Eb-major. it's only the _a tempo_ continuation that puts
it clearly into C-minor. unfortunately, most of the world's
ears are so familiar with this opening that this subtlety
has been lost long ago.)

-monz
"all roads lead to n^0"

--- In tuning@y..., "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
>
> hi Johnny,
>
>
> > From: <Afmmjr@a...>
> > To: <tuning@y...>
> > Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 7:06 AM
> > Subject: Re: [tuning] 12-equal vs just tuning-Beethoven
> >
> >
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > As you may remember I wrote of some psychological
> > issues in an unpublished paper "Phenomenology and
> > Its Application to Microtonality." That said, I've
> > lately been trying to accept Beethoven as being in
> > Kirnberger II. This has been suggested by Daniel Wolf
> > and others. It even makes some circumstantial sense.
>
>
> just thought i'd mention that i started a project about a year
> ago, creating a MIDI-file of Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata"
> tuned in Kirnberger III. didn't get very far with it, but
> someday it will be on the website. i too am pretty well
> convinced that Kirnberger III was the most likely tuning
> Beethoven would normally have had on his pianos ... my
> documentation and speculations will go into that webpage.

monz, johnny said kirnberger II -- this is a *very* different tuning
from kirnberger III!

> if Beethoven had something in mind along the lines of 55edo,
> which i think is the most likely tuning for his orchestral
> music (at least the stuff he wrote before 1810),

why would you think that??

> From: "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@yahoo.com>
> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 1:31 PM
> Subject: [tuning] Re: 12-equal vs just tuning-Beethoven
>
>
> --- In tuning@y..., "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
> >
> > hi Johnny,
> >
> >
> > > From: <Afmmjr@a...>
> > > To: <tuning@y...>
> > > Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 7:06 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [tuning] 12-equal vs just tuning-Beethoven
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Dave,
> > >
> > > As you may remember I wrote of some psychological
> > > issues in an unpublished paper "Phenomenology and
> > > Its Application to Microtonality." That said, I've
> > > lately been trying to accept Beethoven as being in
> > > Kirnberger II. This has been suggested by Daniel Wolf
> > > and others. It even makes some circumstantial sense.
> >
> >
> > just thought i'd mention that i started a project about a year
> > ago, creating a MIDI-file of Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata"
> > tuned in Kirnberger III. didn't get very far with it, but
> > someday it will be on the website. i too am pretty well
> > convinced that Kirnberger III was the most likely tuning
> > Beethoven would normally have had on his pianos ... my
> > documentation and speculations will go into that webpage.
>
> monz, johnny said kirnberger II -- this is a *very* different tuning
> from kirnberger III!

ah ... OOPS! my bad. so he did.

OK, paul: please post specifics or references for Kirnberger II.
Johnny: please tell us more about why you think Beethoven's
tuning was Kirnberger II.

> > if Beethoven had something in mind along the lines of 55edo,
> > which i think is the most likely tuning for his orchestral
> > music (at least the stuff he wrote before 1810),
>
> why would you think that??

the concept behind 55edo, 9 "commas" per whole-tone and
5 per semitone, was accepted by musicians of the late-1700s
as the normal tuning in orchestral music.

the reason i used 1810 as the cut-off date in Beethoven's
case is because by that time he was pretty much deaf, and
that's also the start of a period in his life where his
composing really dropped off quite a bit, a sort-of-hiatus
which lasted until about 1820.

then, during that last period, his music was radically
different from what he had composed during the 1803-1810
period, making use of enharmonic equivalences and other
"tricks" that derive from an acceptance of 12edo. this
leads me to speculate that he probably had in mind either
his keyboard tuning (Kirnberger II?) or 12edo itself.

-monz
"all roads lead to n^0"

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

> OK, paul: please post specifics or references for Kirnberger II.

d-a and a-e are each tempered by 1/2 pythagorean comma. all other
fifths are just.

http://www.webcom.com/jawknee/Mirage/UPWARD/multitempdocs.html

> > > if Beethoven had something in mind along the lines of 55edo,
> > > which i think is the most likely tuning for his orchestral
> > > music (at least the stuff he wrote before 1810),
> >
> > why would you think that??
>
>
> the concept behind 55edo, 9 "commas" per whole-tone and
> 5 per semitone, was accepted by musicians of the late-1700s
> as the normal tuning in orchestral music.

yes but some pieces, even by mozart, clearly defied this description,
as they made use of enharmonic modulation.

> the reason i used 1810 as the cut-off date in Beethoven's
> case is because by that time he was pretty much deaf, and
> that's also the start of a period in his life where his
> composing really dropped off quite a bit, a sort-of-hiatus
> which lasted until about 1820.
>
> then, during that last period, his music was radically
> different from what he had composed during the 1803-1810
> period, making use of enharmonic equivalences and other
> "tricks" that derive from an acceptance of 12edo.

maybe . . . i'm not familiar enough with the dates of particular
beethoven works to debate this . . . if i had it available, i might
take a quick look at mathieu to see which beethoven pieces he
discusses . . .

hi paul,

> From: "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@yahoo.com>
> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 2:24 PM
> Subject: [tuning] Re: 12-equal vs just tuning-Beethoven
>
>
> --- In tuning@y..., "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
>
> > OK, paul: please post specifics or references for Kirnberger II.
>
> d-a and a-e are each tempered by 1/2 pythagorean comma. all other
> fifths are just.
>
> http://www.webcom.com/jawknee/Mirage/UPWARD/multitempdocs.html

thanks!

> > > > if Beethoven had something in mind along the lines of 55edo,
> > > > which i think is the most likely tuning for his orchestral
> > > > music (at least the stuff he wrote before 1810),
> > >
> > > why would you think that??
> >
> >
> > the concept behind 55edo, 9 "commas" per whole-tone and
> > 5 per semitone, was accepted by musicians of the late-1700s
> > as the normal tuning in orchestral music.
>
> yes but some pieces, even by mozart, clearly defied this description,
> as they made use of enharmonic modulation.

yep, i'm aware of that. in fact, i was thinking about it
the whole time i wrote that response to you!

so it must be noted that Mozart and Beethoven both had
in mind a flexible enough intonation that they could pull off
these enharmonic modulations. but that still doesn't preclude
a *basis* in 55edo! i mean, after all, these are *orchestral*
instruments, which all have very flexible intonation!

> > the reason i used 1810 as the cut-off date in Beethoven's
> > case is because by that time he was pretty much deaf, and
> > that's also the start of a period in his life where his
> > composing really dropped off quite a bit, a sort-of-hiatus
> > which lasted until about 1820.
> >
> > then, during that last period, his music was radically
> > different from what he had composed during the 1803-1810
> > period, making use of enharmonic equivalences and other
> > "tricks" that derive from an acceptance of 12edo.
>
> maybe . . . i'm not familiar enough with the dates of particular
> beethoven works to debate this . . . if i had it available, i might
> take a quick look at mathieu to see which beethoven pieces he
> discusses . . .

hmmm ... i have Mathieu's book, but doubt if i'll have time
to take a look soon...

In a message dated 10/24/02 3:27:14 PM Central Daylight Time,
monz@attglobal.net writes:

> i too am pretty well
> convinced that Kirnberger III was the most likely tuning
> Beethoven would normally have had on his pianos ...

> and
> that thus a good case could be made for his orchestral music
> to be tuned at least somewhat in a meantone ... which, by the
> way, Kirnberger III incorporates for some of its intervals.
>
I agree. ET only became the standard in 1800 in Germany. Somewhere around
that time Beethoven became deaf. So there'd be no point in him changing his
tuning to ET.

Pauline

--- In tuning@y..., "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
>
> just thought i'd mention that i started a project about a year
> ago, creating a MIDI-file of Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata"
> tuned in Kirnberger III. didn't get very far with it, but
> someday it will be on the website.

Why not just retune an existing version?

--- In tuning@y..., "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote:
> --- In tuning@y..., "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
> >
> > just thought i'd mention that i started a project about a year
> > ago, creating a MIDI-file of Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata"
> > tuned in Kirnberger III. didn't get very far with it, but
> > someday it will be on the website.
>
> Why not just retune an existing version?

monz is a master of programming phrasing, rubato, dynamics, and other
performance attributes rarely developed among midi transcribers.

> From: "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@yahoo.com>
> To: <tuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 3:27 PM
> Subject: [tuning] Re: 12-equal vs just tuning-Beethoven
>
>
> --- In tuning@y..., "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsmith@j...> wrote:
> > --- In tuning@y..., "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
> > >
> > > just thought i'd mention that i started a project about a year
> > > ago, creating a MIDI-file of Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata"
> > > tuned in Kirnberger III. didn't get very far with it, but
> > > someday it will be on the website.
> >
> > Why not just retune an existing version?
>
> monz is a master of programming phrasing, rubato, dynamics, and other
> performance attributes rarely developed among midi transcribers.

wow, thanks, paul!! i really appreciate it when other people
recognize my NON-tuning musical abilities.

... and now that our website is back on track, the public will
have access to my full library of "MIDI hits".

-monz