More on Bach/tuning

A few questions/thoughts on the Bach/tuning issue. First, and I mentioned this a while back but got no answer...it's well known that Bach
(and other musicians of his time as well) would transcribe works from other composers, often from French or Italian musicians, and redo them for other instruments. So, how were these musicians tuning their instruments, and did Bach (and the others) change the tuning to whatever temperament he was using? And if so, did it destroy, or alter in some way, the original musical intent of the piece?
And, I've just been listening to some CD's of Sylvius Weiss's lute music (very beautiful); it mentions in the liner notes that he was court lutenist at Dresden for 32 years, and was very highly regarded by the musicians of his time. So, since he was obviously interacting with all sorts of musicians at the court, how did THEY tune? We know lutes were in 12 eq; did the clavier players he played with retune to him? Or, did they just plow ahead in a well temperament? How about the singers, flutists, and whoever else was there? And, it's my understanding that there were other famous and highly talented lutenists on the scene as well; the same question applies to their careers and interactions with other musicians as well. And I don't think these are insignificant questions; this issue, to me, is much bigger then just how Bach tuned; there were many musicians, on many different instruments, all interacting in various ways at that time (obviously). So, the way different musicians tuned as they played together was, most likely, an important issue.
One more thing...Bach's 5th suite for solo cello was originally in C minor; Bach himself transcribed it for lute, and changed the key to G minor. So...was the original cello version intended for Werckmeister, or something similar? And, when it was transcribed to the other key, if it WAS in a well temp, then all the intervals would have changed slightly for the G minor version...oops, since that was for the lute, it was in 12 eq, so obviously, there goes the subtle shadings of well temp. And, since Bach was responsible for the 12 eq version, I'm assuming it didn't make much difference to him WHAT key it was played in.
So, when Bach wrote his unaccompanied suites for cello and violin, which of course were unfretted instruments, would a well temperament have been the intended tuning? Or, would the performer maybe tweak the intervals to retain pure 3rds (and other intervals) if possible? Would they possibly have aimed for a more Pythagorean based scalar approach, since they tuned in 5ths? Could there have been a number of approaches, depending on the performer?
Hey, this is a cool subject...and, these scenarios have been on my mind for a long time, actually. I am not a Bach scholar, but love his music deeply, so any insights from folks who are more learned in this field would be appreciated...and perhaps more light can be shed on just what was happening in that era, in the field of tunings...best...Hstick
myspace.com/microstick microstick.net

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, <microstick@...> wrote:
>(...)
> One more thing...Bach's 5th suite for solo cello was originally
in C minor; Bach himself transcribed it for lute, and changed the key
to G minor. So...was the original cello version intended for
Werckmeister, or something similar? (...)
> So, when Bach wrote his unaccompanied suites for cello and
violin, which of course were unfretted instruments, would a well
temperament have been the intended tuning? (...)

No. Unaccompanied string players on unfretted instruments didn't
play "in" any keyboard temperaments (and still don't, unless they've
been badly influenced by misguided practice staring at electronic
tuners on their stands!).

At least some of them slightly narrowed the 5ths of their open
strings (the better to come out to nicer major 3rds), instead of
having pure 5ths there, but that's not the same thing as trying to
play "in" any particular temperament...and especially not in
irregular temperaments.

For starters, take a look at Bruce Haynes's article "Beyond
Temperament" in _Early Music_ 1991, pp 357-81, and John Hind
Chesnut's "Mozart's teaching of intonation" in _JAMS_ 1977, pp 254-71.

Let's also be clear about one side thing: Werckmeister III (the
widely-used one *today*) was for *organs*, not harpsichords or other
keyboard or non-keyboard instruments. Werckmeister himself gave a
separate temperament for harpsichords, but I don't believe either of
those (or any of Werckmeister's other published schemes) had anything
to do with Bach, on any instrument tuned personally by Bach. He
might have encountered an organ or two, using some Werckmeister
scheme or other, PERHAPS; but that's all.

Bradley Lehman
http://www.larips.com

Re. lutes, these were known as the 'charlatan of instruments' at some
point - presumably because tuning that sounded bad on any other
instrument (specifically ET) was OK with them. Maybe something to do
with the weakness and/or slight inharmonicity of upper overtones.

The notion of fixed temperament, indeed, makes no sense for violinists
and 'cellists.

Patrizio Barbieri has a rather comprehensive article in Early Music
1991 about violin intonation, just one or two issues before Haynes.
Search the well-known 'Huygens' bibliography webpage on 'Barbieri' for
more. Just intonation was not unheard(-of)!

With regard to open strings, I think it is clear that during the
Baroque period when the open strings were regularly used, their fifths
were slightly narrowed; even Werckmeister says that if they were not,
the violin sixth G-E would be false. However, fifths occurring between
stopped notes could still be just.

~~~T~~~