Re: Key book on tunning by Barbour

> > it's marred by his viewpoint that 12edo is the "best"

> > tuning,

>

> a popular misconception, i don't think that's really his viewpoint.

> he says meantone was best for what it was designed for. he does

> compare each tuning to 12-equal (and may use certain adjectives

> rather loosely in comparing these comparisons) but it's unfair to

> conclude that therefore he felt 12-equal to be best.

>

> > and his historical stance is skewed by the

> > process he uses of viewing all other tunings as

> > approaching 12edo more-or-less well, as tho it were

> > the goal of musical history to arrive at 12edo hegemony

> > after a long process of trial and error.

>

> bull$#!^. i think you need to go back and read your photocopies again.

>>

Greetings,
I discussed Barbour's ideas with Owen Jorgensen, who was personally and
professionally acquainted with him. I asked if Barbour had any thoughts on
well-temperament being a goal, since it appeared that Barbour actually did
consider them all inferior tunings.
Owen responded that Barbour was very much a product of his time, and that
he did consider ET to be the ideal. He quoted Barbour (regarding a
well-temperament) as saying " That would sound out of tune!" He seemed to
consider tuning to be divided into two basic forms, restrictive meantone and
equal. Barbour had never heard a well-temperament until Jorgensen's
presentation in the mid-60's! At that time, Owen said Barbour encouraged him
to continue his investigation.
So, I don't think it too far offbase to believe that when Barbour wrote
his book he considered ET to be the ideal. It appears that he did, though
was willing to embrace another perspective once he had heard what the
difference is.
Regards,
Ed Foote RPT
Nashville, Tn.

Ed Foote RPT
www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/
www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/well_tempered_piano.html