Sauveur 'deaf'?

I have seen it written that the theoretician Joseph Sauveur who wrote
a lot about 43-equal, 55-equal etc. was deaf... sometimes even claimed
to be deaf-mute - but I don't find any historical evidence for this.

His obituary printed in the 1716 Paris Academie papers says only that
he didn't speak until 7 years old and even then with difficulty. This
might be consistent with some hearing difficulties.

In talking about his acoustic researches it says that he had 'neither
voice, nor ear' and was obliged to borrow those of other people. Now
that can't be literally true, since he could actually speak. What I
think was more likely to be meant was that he had no *musical* voice
or ear. Which again would fit with some degree of hearing difficulty
short of deafness.

What you have to ask repeatedly when reading him is: where did he get
his information from, if he had no, or very little, direct experience
of musical tuning. Particularly, how would he know what tuning was
used by which musicians. And whether his opinions were more likely to
be motivated by theory, or by actual musical experience.

Does anyone have more definite information about his supposed deafness?

~~~T~~~

Tom Dent wrote:

> I have seen it written that the theoretician Joseph Sauveur who wrote
> a lot about 43-equal, 55-equal etc. was deaf... sometimes even claimed
> to be deaf-mute - but I don't find any historical evidence for this.
>
> His obituary printed in the 1716 Paris Academie papers says only that
> he didn't speak until 7 years old and even then with difficulty. This
> might be consistent with some hearing difficulties.

Could also be indicative of an autistic-spectrum disorder, or some other developmental disability.

~D.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Dent" <stringph@...> wrote:
>
>
> I have seen it written that the theoretician Joseph Sauveur who
wrote
> a lot about 43-equal, 55-equal etc. was deaf... sometimes even
claimed
> to be deaf-mute - but I don't find any historical evidence for this.
>
> His obituary printed in the 1716 Paris Academie papers says only
that
> he didn't speak until 7 years old and even then with difficulty.
This
> might be consistent with some hearing difficulties.
>
> In talking about his acoustic researches it says that he had
'neither
> voice, nor ear' and was obliged to borrow those of other people. Now
> that can't be literally true, since he could actually speak. What I
> think was more likely to be meant was that he had no *musical* voice
> or ear. Which again would fit with some degree of hearing difficulty
> short of deafness.
>
> What you have to ask repeatedly when reading him is: where did he
get
> his information from, if he had no, or very little, direct
experience
> of musical tuning. Particularly, how would he know what tuning was
> used by which musicians. And whether his opinions were more likely
to
> be motivated by theory, or by actual musical experience.
>
> Does anyone have more definite information about his supposed
deafness?
>
> ~~~T~~~
>

Didn't he write he demonstrated his 43 tuning to the best harpsichord
or organ makers in Paris without negative response?

Clark

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "threesixesinarow" <CACCOLA@...> wrote:
>
>
> Didn't he write he demonstrated his 43 tuning to the best harpsichord
> or organ makers in Paris without negative response?
>
> Clark

Yup - with a monochord (reported 1711). 'The harpsichord makers of
Paris and the King, who set up their tuning according to my monochord,
found it quite pure'.

That doesn't tell us who did the mechanical business of tuning.

He also reported about the converse experiment. The monochord string
was brought to unison with the C of a harpsichord which had formerly
been 'very exactly tuned', then the bridge was brought to the points
which produced a unison with the other notes of the scale. He reported
that these points were closer to the 43-division than the other
divisions (31,50,55) he had marked on the monochord, at least where
these divisions were most divergent from one another.

Again, it is not clear who did the aural comparison. (Usual
'scientific' passive tense - 'On a ensuite place...')

He also said "I know that there are some makers who set up their
harpsichords with more piquant tunings, which maybe approach the other
systems more closely." ... again this may be from direct aural
experience, or from conversations with the other makers.

Anyway I am unwilling to believe he was deaf without clear evidence.

His obituary also says he spent his childhood tinkering with
mechanical stuff - 'He was the engineer for the other children'. Also
one of his sons did not speak until the age of 7...

~~~T~~~

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Dent" <stringph@...> wrote:

> Yup - with a monochord (reported 1711). 'The harpsichord makers of
> Paris and the King, who set up their tuning according to my monochord,
> found it quite pure'.

Which is a data point suggesting that in 1711 in Paris, meantone
tunings in the vicinity of 1/5-comma were standard (there is
essentially no difference between 1/5-comma and 43-et.) Which is
perfectly reasonable.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Danny" <dawiertx@...> wrote:
>
> Tom Dent wrote:
>
> > I have seen it written that the theoretician Joseph Sauveur who
wrote
> > a lot about 43-equal, 55-equal etc. was deaf...
http://library.gallaudet.edu/dr/faq-earliest-deaf.html
"1653-1716 Joseph Sauveur was born deaf at La Fleche, France. Despite
his deafness, he became a royal professor of mathematics and inspector
of engineers, and established the science of musical acoustics."

but MGG_1,Vol.11(1963)p.1437 "(was zu bezweifeln ist)"
doubts just about that claim.

A.S.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Danny" <dawiertx@...> wrote:
>
> Could also be indicative of an autistic-spectrum disorder, or some
other
> developmental disability.
>
> ~D.
>

That sounds most likely- I believe it is quite common to consider
children who don't speak as "deaf". One of my sisters didn't speak
intelligably until 12 years- unlike some others in her speach class,
there wasn't anything wrong with her hearing, which of course was
checked.

So it is perfectly plausible to considered "deaf mute" for the first
years of your life- as far as others are concerned, if you don't
react normally to sounds and don't speak, you are deaf mute.

-Cameron Bobro

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Cameron Bobro" <misterbobro@...> wrote:
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Danny" <dawiertx@> wrote:
> >
> > Could also be indicative of an autistic-spectrum disorder, or some
> other
> > developmental disability.
> >
> > ~D.
> >
>
> That sounds most likely- I believe it is quite common to consider
> children who don't speak as "deaf". One of my sisters didn't speak
> intelligably until 12 years- unlike some others in her speach class,
> there wasn't anything wrong with her hearing, which of course was
> checked.
>
> So it is perfectly plausible to considered "deaf mute" for the first
> years of your life- as far as others are concerned, if you don't
> react normally to sounds and don't speak, you are deaf mute.
>
> -Cameron Bobro

That might be a logical explanation, if a legend had grown up that S.
had been 'born deaf'.

You'd think that people would have thought of quite simple tests like
calling the child's name while they're looking the other way...

The 1716 obituary has the following:

'He was absolutely mute until the age of 7, by the defect of the vocal
organs which did not start to liberate themselves (se debarasser)
until that time, but slowly and by degrees, and were never entirely
freed.'

It also recounts how he took on the job of conducting examinations for
engineers and removed all the unnecessary rigmarole surrounding them,
'keeping nothing but his mild-mannered, but fine and penetrating,
attentiveness. Sometimes the engineers left after a simple
conversation, having been examined without knowing it.'

Some sources that say he was deaf or hard of hearing are also
inaccurate about the extent of his achievements - some saying that 'we
owe the monochord to him' (!) or that he invented the tempered scale
(!!) or discovered the nodes and loops in string vibrations, etc.

~~~T~~~

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Dent" <stringph@...> wrote:
Dictionary of scientific Biography, Vol XII(1975) NY, p.127-9
Sigalia Dostrowski wrote:

"...Born with a voice defect, he did not speak until the age
of seven and retained a lifelong difficulty with his speech...

...Despite his speech problem S. became well known as a good teacher
and was tutor at the court of Louis XIV...

...When he obtained the chair of mathematics at the
College-Royal in 1686, S. was sufficently well known that he dared
to read the required public speech, (earlier he had dropped aplan to
apply for the post because speech seemed to difficult for him)...

...According to Fontonelle, S. was fascinated by music, eventough he
had no ear for it, and consulted frequently with musicians. Despite
the musical foundation of his work, S. proposed the development of a
new subject, wich he named ACOUSTIQE, dealing with sound in general
rather than with the SON AGREABLE of music.
S. began his work in acoustics by developing a method of classifying
temperaments of the musical scale...
...43EQ or MERIDES, each of which was divided into seven EPTAMERIDES.
...approximate those of the 1/5th comma meantone tuning used in 16th
and 17th centuries....

...S. wanted to use a SON-FIXE of 100 cycles per second...

p.128

...S. found that the frequency of an open organ pipe five Paris feet
long was inbetween 100 and 102 cps...

...Newton checked S.'s results...
(2nd & 3rd eds. Principia.. Book 2, Prop. L; 383-384)
..accurate to within 1/2 Cent (1/200 of an ET semitone)...

A.S.