Well Temp questions

Because Bach is my favorite musician, the well temp discussion interests me, and I've been thinking about what has been said so far, and I have a few questions/comments. First, perhaps the focus just on Bach is not the only issue here; obviously, there were hundreds, perhaps thousands of other keyboard players in Germany (not to mention the rest of Europe) at the time of Bach...so, what tunings were they using? And, what about the rest of the musicians, from string players to horns? I would imagine when keyboards were used in a composition, everybody would follow that tuning; but, what about when keys weren't part of an ensemble (I assume there was music being made that did not feature keys)...how would the musicians tune then?
And, although lute music was not a very large part of Bach's compositions, he did write some things, as well as rearrange some other works for lute (definitely pieces from the violin sonatas and cello suites)...and, he was known to have played with lutenists on occasion, and I imagine the lutes were in 12 equal, or very close. He was also known to have a clavier with the tone of a lute, and his lute works, perhaps, were composed to be played on lute or clavier. So, when he and Sylvious Weiss jammed, did Bach retune to 12 eq? Or, did it matter? Did he care? In fact, the eminent lutenist Lutz Kirchof said in the liner notes for his recording of the lute suites, that Bach wrote pieces for lute that may have been unplayable in the form he wrote them...but, he would give them to the lutenists, and expect them to make the necessary alterations to the original, so they were then playable on lute. So, it sounds like he was a very open minded sort, open to various interpretations of his works.
It seems to me, and I am not an expert by a long shot, that Bach, who was a very practical, working musician, and in touch with all sorts of musicians in his area, would have been familiar with many of the tuning theories of the time, and may well have used different tunings, depending on the circumstances he found himself in...why not? Perhaps he favored one particular tuning for his compositions, but maybe he experimented...again, why not? He seems like a most intelligent, curious man, who transcribed music by many other composers from various countries, which means he was exposed to many theories of composition by other masters...which also brings up an interesting question: when Bach was transcribing works from Italian or French composers, what tuning were THOSE pieces in, and did Bach leave them in the original tuning, or put them in one of his favorites? And if he did change the tuning from what the original composer intended, did it change the piece? In a good way or negative way?
I had never considered some of these issues before this discussion, and now I am. Again, I think it's a lot bigger than Bach, and I'm not sure how many definitive answers there are for some of these issues...I'm looking forward to seeing what some of you forum folks have to say about all this...best...HHH

Neil,

Nice questions. I think they boil down to: was Bach a tuning pluralist or not?
Conidering his knowledge of Italian, French, and English masters and trends,
each with their own regional and historical tuning trends, I imagine he
embraced plurality of means, and maybe, where he had control of it, came up
with one or maybe more of his own tunings to suit the needs of a 'general
practice universal musician'.

Anyway, I'm would be surprised if he didn't know of French Temperamant
Ordinaire that Rameau used, 1/6 comma meantone, Werckmeister,
1/5-commameantone, 12-equal on fretted instruments, perhaps some
proto-Neidhardt or proto-Sorge tunings, and for sure experimented with
homegrown varieties, eventually arriving at something
exactly equivalent or closely equivalent to what Brad Lehman describes, which
is incidentally, close to what Neidhardt and Sorge, and Sorge in particular,
proposed.

In answer to transcribing from other sources, I can imagine that the
transcribed music would work in Bach's German tuning of choice, but might
lose some character of its sound, and this would be particularly true of
anything French which might have used Temperament Ordinaire, which is a
modified meantone of the Rameau perios where the wolf fifth gets distributed
through 4 wide fifths.

In Italian music, where you have the Vivaldi Concerti transcriptions, I'm not
certain what Vivaldi's tuning would be. I'm guessing 1/6-comma meantone,
because I think Vivaldi's music doesn't venture outside the meantone keys,
but I haven't listened to or studied all 60,000 concerti that he wrote!
Anyway, my guess is that Italy continued in the meantone tradition longer
than Germany. Does anyone know what, say Frescobaldi's organ was tuned to?
My guess is 1/5 or 1/6 comma....

-Aaron.

On Wednesday 17 August 2005 1:23 pm, Neil Haverstick wrote:
> Because Bach is my favorite musician, the well temp discussion interests
> me, and I've been thinking about what has been said so far, and I have a
> few questions/comments. First, perhaps the focus just on Bach is not the
> only issue here; obviously, there were hundreds, perhaps thousands of other
> keyboard players in Germany (not to mention the rest of Europe) at the time
> of Bach...so, what tunings were they using? And, what about the rest of the
> musicians, from string players to horns? I would imagine when keyboards
> were used in a composition, everybody would follow that tuning; but, what
> about when keys weren't part of an ensemble (I assume there was music being
> made that did not feature keys)...how would the musicians tune then?
> And, although lute music was not a very large part of Bach's
> compositions, he did write some things, as well as rearrange some other
> works for lute (definitely pieces from the violin sonatas and cello
> suites)...and, he was known to have played with lutenists on occasion, and
> I imagine the lutes were in 12 equal, or very close. He was also known to
> have a clavier with the tone of a lute, and his lute works, perhaps, were
> composed to be played on lute or clavier. So, when he and Sylvious Weiss
> jammed, did Bach retune to 12 eq? Or, did it matter? Did he care? In fact,
> the eminent lutenist Lutz Kirchof said in the liner notes for his recording
> of the lute suites, that Bach wrote pieces for lute that may have been
> unplayable in the form he wrote them...but, he would give them to the
> lutenists, and expect them to make the necessary alterations to the
> original, so they were then playable on lute. So, it sounds like he was a
> very open minded sort, open to various interpretations of his works. It
> seems to me, and I am not an expert by a long shot, that Bach, who was a
> very practical, working musician, and in touch with all sorts of musicians
> in his area, would have been familiar with many of the tuning theories of
> the time, and may well have used different tunings, depending on the
> circumstances he found himself in...why not? Perhaps he favored one
> particular tuning for his compositions, but maybe he experimented...again,
> why not? He seems like a most intelligent, curious man, who transcribed
> music by many other composers from various countries, which means he was
> exposed to many theories of composition by other masters...which also
> brings up an interesting question: when Bach was transcribing works from
> Italian or French composers, what tuning were THOSE pieces in, and did Bach
> leave them in the original tuning, or put them in one of his favorites? And
> if he did change the tuning from what the original composer intended, did
> it change the piece? In a good way or negative way?
> I had never considered some of these issues before this discussion, and
> now I am. Again, I think it's a lot bigger than Bach, and I'm not sure how
> many definitive answers there are for some of these issues...I'm looking
> forward to seeing what some of you forum folks have to say about all
> this...best...HHH
>
>
>
>
>
> You can configure your subscription by sending an empty email to one
> of these addresses (from the address at which you receive the list):
> tuning-subscribe@yahoogroups.com - join the tuning group.
> tuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com - leave the group.
> tuning-nomail@yahoogroups.com - turn off mail from the group.
> tuning-digest@yahoogroups.com - set group to send daily digests.
> tuning-normal@yahoogroups.com - set group to send individual emails.
> tuning-help@yahoogroups.com - receive general help information.
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

<And, what about the rest of the musicians, from
string players to horns? I would imagine when
keyboards were used in a composition, everybody would
follow that tuning; but, what about when keys weren't
part of an ensemble (I assume there was music being
made that did not feature keys)...how would the
musicians tune then?>

Neil,
you can irritate even seasoned baroque woodwind
players immensely if you ask them the simple question
what temperament their instrument is in. No, it is not
the case that the non-keyboarders follow the keyboard
temperament, it is the other way round. Every
harpsichordist knows that he is not allowed by his
fellow musicians to play the major third in the final
chord other than in passing because they want it pure,
i.e. meantone. The entire discussion about keyboard
temperaments in the 17th and 18th century was the
result of split chamber and larger orchestras
appearing which combined instruments with completely
different temperament histories.

Even when playing without an organ or other keyboard
instruments, players had to adjust:

The valveless trumpet was a partials instrument, but,
as Walther (1732) notes, players were able to produce
notes outside the partials by �treiben� and
�fallenlassen�. And Gottfried Reiche, Bach�s top
trumpet man, had a coiled trumpet which would have
enabled him to bend notes by stuffing his free hand
into the funnel.

The lute and theorbo have a Pythagorean history, as
any Arab source will testify, but they had movable gut
frets, and thus, like the viola da gamba, they were
able to adjust to other temperaments, particularly
meantone ones, as long as the universe of tonalities
remained limited.

The early three-part transverse flute was meantone,
but by fingerings, separate Eb keys like Quantz�, and
rotation of the flute towards or away from the player
he could adjust individual notes.

The baroque oboe started as a colla parte instrument
to back up the violins, and it would follow the
strings� propensity for pure thirds in parallel. But
by altering the pressure on the reeds, any bending of
individual notes was possible.

My own conviction is that Baroque instrumental
(non-keyboard) temperament was basically meantone, and
that players would adjust individual notes as demanded
by different keys � this is how it is still done today
by EM ensembles. It was thus the keyboard that was the
problem, and in particular the organ, because there
you couldn�t make a quick retuning during the break.

Michael

___________________________________________________________
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com

Michael Zapf wrote:
> <And, what about the rest of the musicians, from
> string players to horns? I would imagine when
> keyboards were used in a composition, everybody would
> follow that tuning; ...

[I thought that might get a bite! :-)]

> ... but, what about when keys weren't
> part of an ensemble (I assume there was music being
> made that did not feature keys)...how would the
> musicians tune then?>
>
> Neil,
> you can irritate even seasoned baroque woodwind
> players immensely if you ask them the simple question
> what temperament their instrument is in. No, it is not
> the case that the non-keyboarders follow the keyboard
> temperament, it is the other way round. Every
> harpsichordist knows that he is not allowed by his
> fellow musicians to play the major third in the final
> chord other than in passing because they want it pure,
> i.e. meantone. The entire discussion about keyboard
> temperaments in the 17th and 18th century was the
> result of split chamber and larger orchestras
> appearing which combined instruments with completely
> different temperament histories.
>
> Even when playing without an organ or other keyboard
> instruments, players had to adjust:
>
> The valveless trumpet was a partials instrument, but,
> as Walther (1732) notes, players were able to produce
> notes outside the partials by �treiben� and
> �fallenlassen�. And Gottfried Reiche, Bach�s top
> trumpet man, had a coiled trumpet which would have
> enabled him to bend notes by stuffing his free hand
> into the funnel.
>
> The lute and theorbo have a Pythagorean history, as
> any Arab source will testify, but they had movable gut
> frets, and thus, like the viola da gamba, they were
> able to adjust to other temperaments, particularly
> meantone ones, as long as the universe of tonalities
> remained limited.
>
> The early three-part transverse flute was meantone,
> but by fingerings, separate Eb keys like Quantz�, and
> rotation of the flute towards or away from the player
> he could adjust individual notes.
>
> The baroque oboe started as a colla parte instrument
> to back up the violins, and it would follow the
> strings� propensity for pure thirds in parallel. But
> by altering the pressure on the reeds, any bending of
> individual notes was possible.
>
> My own conviction is that Baroque instrumental
> (non-keyboard) temperament was basically meantone, and
> that players would adjust individual notes as demanded
> by different keys � this is how it is still done today
> by EM ensembles. It was thus the keyboard that was the
> problem, and in particular the organ, because there
> you couldn�t make a quick retuning during the break.

Hi Michael,

This is one of the things, I feel, that gives much of the
colour to Baroque ensemble music with a keyboard - the
fact that the tuning of the harpsichord or organ is more
mechanically limited than of the other instruments means
that you invariably end up with some notes almost identical
and others defiantly, determinedly, a little bit "off". It's
also one of the factors that helps melodic lines to stand out.

Tone colour _and_ thematic clarity - quite a contribution
for a little well-considered deliberate error to add!

I like your explanation of the woodwinds' temperament.
Clearly, some can show their temper (!) But do you mean
to state a historical fact that the woodwinds were mostly
or always in a meantone temperament in Baroque times?

Also, what are the techniques you alluded to by their
German names for the valveless trumpet: �treiben� (lit.
"drive, impel, urge, press") and �fallenlassen� (lit "let fall")?
My interest arises from recent discussion of overtone
flutes, and I was wondering whether the techniques you
mentioned might usefully apply there too.

Regards,
Yahya

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.12/77 - Release Date: 18/8/05

<I like your explanation of the woodwinds'
temperament.
Clearly, some can show their temper (!) But do you
mean
to state a historical fact that the woodwinds were
mostly
or always in a meantone temperament in Baroque times?

Also, what are the techniques you alluded to by their
German names for the valveless trumpet: �treiben�
(lit.
"drive, impel, urge, press") and �fallenlassen� (lit
"let fall")?
My interest arises from recent discussion of overtone
flutes, and I was wondering whether the techniques you
mentioned might usefully apply there too.>

Yanya,
as to the temperament of baroque flutes, just have a
look at the Quantz transverse flute fingering scale. A
baroque flutist did have a 12-note-octave, he had a
18-note-octave, and all the discussions about how to
tune the twelve keys on a keyboard instrument are
typically done by keyboarders who stare at their own
insturment only. But Bach, when composing a piece for
flute and harpsichord, he would be aware of that,
because Buffardin for sure wasn't playing
Werckmeister, he was playing meantone.
As to the trumpet techniques - I was using the German
words which Walther uses in his dictionary because we
don not know for sure what they mean. Valveless
trumpet playing techniques were guild secrets for
which the little German town of Weissenfels had the
monopoly. Practically all famous trumpeters came from
there, and they had learnt it from their relatives.
Michael

___________________________________________________________
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com

Sorry for the repeat, there was a crucial mistake in
the text.

<I like your explanation of the woodwinds'
temperament.
Clearly, some can show their temper (!) But do you
mean
to state a historical fact that the woodwinds were
mostly
or always in a meantone temperament in Baroque times?

Also, what are the techniques you alluded to by their
German names for the valveless trumpet: �treiben�
(lit.
"drive, impel, urge, press") and �fallenlassen� (lit
"let fall")?
My interest arises from recent discussion of overtone
flutes, and I was wondering whether the techniques you
mentioned might usefully apply there too.>

Yanya,
as to the temperament of baroque flutes, just have a
look at the Quantz transverse flute fingering scale. A
baroque flutist did not have a 12-note-octave, he had
a
18-note-octave, and all the discussions about how to
tune the twelve keys on a keyboard instrument are
typically done by keyboarders who stare at their own
insturment only. But Bach, when composing a piece for
flute and harpsichord, he would be aware of that,
because Buffardin for sure wasn't playing
Werckmeister, he was playing meantone.
As to the trumpet techniques - I was using the German
words which Walther uses in his dictionary because we
don not know for sure what they mean. Valveless
trumpet playing techniques were guild secrets for
which the little German town of Weissenfels had the
monopoly. Practically all famous trumpeters came from
there, and they had learnt it from their relatives.
Michael

___________________________________________________________
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com

The big difference is the issue of enharmonic identities. Werckmeister III
has them but meantone does not.

Sixth comma meantone was the coin of the realm during the Baroque period, the
primary tuning used by Quantz for the court of Emperor Frederick the Great,
the Prussian city Halle, Hamburg, and even the Saxon capital of Dresden. Quantz
’s description of his disappointment with the loss of frets on the double
bass is a good opportunity to acknowledge the match of Quantz’s music with
meantone for it does not recognize enharmonic identities.

If it is objected that frets might cause difficulty in playing the flat
semitones, since they could not be clearly differentiated from the sharp ones, one
may reply that this is not as harmful on the double bass as on the
violoncello, since the difference between notes marked with sharps and flats is not as
noticeable in the very low notes of the double bass as in the higher notes of
other instruments (Quantz, p. 248).

In a message dated 8/19/2005 1:27:03 AM Eastern Standard Time,
yahya@melbpc.org.au writes:
Hi Michael,

This is one of the things, I feel, that gives much of the
colour to Baroque ensemble music with a keyboard - the
fact that the tuning of the harpsichord or organ is more
mechanically limited than of the other instruments means
that you invariably end up with some notes almost identical
and others defiantly, determinedly, a little bit "off". It's
also one of the factors that helps melodic lines to stand out.

Tone colour _and_ thematic clarity - quite a contribution
for a little well-considered deliberate error to add!

Hi Yahya,

As it turns out, based on a number of large concerts in Werckmeister III, one
CANNOT benefit by "standing out" by being off (unless it is by a few cents).
Since there are 4 sizes of thirds, each at 6 cents apart, if one does not use
vibrato, too much deviance provides a nauseousness. It happened in
Brandenburg #4 with the 2 recorders at the start of the piece.

Players normally (today) start above or below a targeted pitch. Can't do it
in WIII. We, as a group learned this lesson (to hear the pitch in the head
and start ON the pitch. It has made all the difference in our results.

best, Johnny

I like your explanation of the woodwinds' temperament.
Clearly, some can show their temper (!) But do you mean
to state a historical fact that the woodwinds were mostly
or always in a meantone temperament in Baroque times?

Adjusting meantone woodwinds into well-tempered tuning is easily achieved
today by scotch tape. The tape is used to either change the shape of a tone
hole, or to lower a key towards the bore. Back then it was to beeswax that the
tone holes were altered, and there were few keys, if any.

all best, Johnny

Michael Zapf wrote:
> Sorry for the repeat, there was a crucial mistake in
> the text.
>
> > <I like your explanation of the woodwinds'
> > temperament. Clearly, some can show their temper (!)
> > But do you mean to state [as] historical fact that the
> > woodwinds were mostly or always in a meantone
> > temperament in Baroque times?
> >
> > Also, what are the techniques you alluded to by their
> > German names for the valveless trumpet: �treiben�
> > (lit. "drive, impel, urge, press") and �fallenlassen� (lit.
> > "let fall")?
> > My interest arises from recent discussion of overtone
> > flutes, and I was wondering whether the techniques you
> > mentioned might usefully apply there too.>
>
> Yanya,
> as to the temperament of baroque flutes, just have a
> look at the Quantz transverse flute fingering scale. A
> baroque flutist did not have a 12-note-octave, he had
> a
> 18-note-octave, and all the discussions about how to
> tune the twelve keys on a keyboard instrument are
> typically done by keyboarders who stare at their own
> insturment only. But Bach, when composing a piece for
> flute and harpsichord, he would be aware of that,
> because Buffardin for sure wasn't playing
> Werckmeister, he was playing meantone.
> As to the trumpet techniques - I was using the German
> words which Walther uses in his dictionary because we
> don not know for sure what they mean. Valveless
> trumpet playing techniques were guild secrets for
> which the little German town of Weissenfels had the
> monopoly. Practically all famous trumpeters came from
> there, and they had learnt it from their relatives.

Michael,

Thanks for your reply.

I was referring specifically to overtone flutes - that is,
end-blown flutes without fingering holes - rather than
to the baroque flute. But your information is quite
interesting nonetheless! I take it that the 18 holes per
octave were required to distinguish, say, D# from Eb -
notes which are enharmonic equivalents in 12-EDO, and
indeed in 12-UDO (12 Unequal Divisions ofthe Octave)?
What were the 18 notes per octave? The only way I can
arrive at 18 notes is by including both ends of the octave,
thus:
8 naturals (say) C to C'
+ 5 sharps on C D F G and A
+ 5 flats on D E G A and B.

Or have I completely missed the boat here?

Re the trumpet techniques, if they are now unknown in
Germany, I guess they're waiting to be reinvented!
Anyone who'd like to become famous might spend some
time trying that ... Still, if necessity is the mother of
invention, ease is the mother of conservatism. When it
became a little easier to produce the required pitches
using valves, very few players would have seen much
point in continuing to do things the hard way, so it's
understandable that those techniques were lost.

Regards,
Yahya

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Yahya Abdal-Aziz" <yahya@m...> wrote:

> What were the 18 notes per octave? The only way I can
> arrive at 18 notes is by including both ends of the octave,
> thus:
> 8 naturals (say) C to C'
> + 5 sharps on C D F G and A
> + 5 flats on D E G A and B.

Michael already answered this -- there was also a B# in there. The two
Cs don't count as different notes.

<I take it that the 18 holes per
octave were required to distinguish, say, D# from Eb -
notes which are enharmonic equivalents in 12-EDO, and
indeed in 12-UDO (12 Unequal Divisions ofthe
Octave)?........
Or have I completely missed the boat here?>

Yahya,
My boat description was probably deficient. I am not
talking 18 holes. The baroque transverse flute is an
inverse-conical, normally wooden tube with d as the
fundamental, with six open finger holes and one d#
key. Quantz added a second eb key to the flute, which
however did not become the standard. The 18 different
fingerings were done by cross fingering. I.e. f#' is
fingered 1234---, while gb' is fingered 123-56-. For
any flutist, there would be even more notes per octave
than the 18 I mentioned, because e#' for instance you
can play meantone by fingering f' and rotating the
flute inwards to lower the tone - Quantz actually
provides fingerings for e#', fx', cx'' with the
fingerings for f', g', and d'', with the implication
that you alter the sounding note by rotation.

<Re the trumpet techniques, if they are now unknown in
Germany, I guess they're waiting to be reinvented!>

As the techniques were a Weissenfels secret, there is
no written record, and the art is lost. Bach must have
known a lot about it, because Anna Magdalena was from
Weissenfels, and her father was a court trumpeter.
Reinventing the technique is an ordeal which would
take a major part of one's life, amidst constant
frustration because the valve trumpeters grin at you
all the time, and for no economic benefit and most
likely no students to teach, so why do it?

Michael

___________________________________________________________
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com