source file: mills2.txt Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 19:24:57 +0000 Subject: Re: FWD: Re: Bach's tuning From: Aleksander Frosztega On Tue, 26 Sep 1995 06:39:58 -0700 Johnny Reinhard wrote: >Mr. Frosztega represents a modern reincarnation of Mr. Marpurg it would >seem. As a legend in his own mind he has deduced what Bach did by >his interpretations of what happened after Bach. > >I believe he confuses Bach's intent in saying why all major thirds are >sharp, placing them in an ET context, probably because he is in an ET >context. Using sophistic argument, trailing inconsequential facts, and >finally, making acusations of "revisionism" and implying incompetency are >weak rebuttals for a scholar. Wasn't *that* special? >It is the evidence that is presented here that is in question. The >tuning instructions for Werckmeister III are explicit: they are based on >tuning 5ths, with the 4 larger-than-just thirds merely resulting. Huh? This must be a slip of the pen ("hij zonder zonden werpt de eerste steen..."). To what should this refer? >The Lubeck Marienkirche which contains 2 organs used by Buxtehude kept 2 >organs: the large one in ET, the "kleine" in Werckmeister III...all >before J.S. Bach, according to church records. Based on key >requirements, an organ was chosen, and a Mr. Shoof employs this >practice today with recent recordings of both Buxtehude and J.S. Bach. Hm. Equal temperament on an organ before 1685? (Please, Mr. Reinhard, even *I* wouldn't have gone that far!) Could you cite the source of the organological examination? I would be very curious to read it. >> Kirnberger never wrote a book called "Von der Temperatur." >"Von der Temperatur" is 4 pages long and I have a copy...no one said it >was a book. It is contained at the end of the translated *Kunst...* and >appeared earlier in the preface to the fourth collection of Kirnberger's >*Clavieruebungen* (Berlin, 1766) and later in the preface to his >*Vermischte Musicalien* (Berlin, 1769). You are correct. (Just wanted to see if you were on your toes.) Fragments of it are also contained in Sulzer's _Allgemeine Theorie der Schoenen Kuenste._ (1771); the "Vorbericht" of Marpurg's _Versuch ueber die musikalische Temperatur._ (1776); and Marpurg's _Legende einiger Musikheiligen._(1786). >Please calm your distress and keep a more open mind regarding >historical truths. I have already admitted that I dislike Equal Temperament, yet I find myself defending it (the mind boggles). How much more open-minding would Mr. Reinhard have me be? Perhaps defend the piano as a better vehicle for Bach's keyboard music than the harpsichord? >Music contains many falsities that have been built upon, amount >to a proverbial mountain of cards. I agree that as a performer >phenomenologically captures the intent of a composer regarding >interpretation, he or she must try to ascertain the tuning framework that >the composer, his milieu, and his age supported and/or endorsed. [pause] Hallelujah! Finally something we agree upon... [restart] >it is not a coincidence that most important works on tuning are as yet >unavailable in translated languages, including important tracts by >Zarlino, Fux, and Werckmeister. Why bother with translations? Why not read the originals? [snip] >Face it: there is no evidence that JS Bach favored, or even used ET in >his earlier works. And to some ears, his music is quite enriched by >variegation of keys. Of course I agree that most Bach sounds wonderful in Circular temperaments. But I disagree that there is no evidence to show that the temperament that Bach used was ET or something close to it. Aleksander Frosztega ------------------------------------------------------- Aleksander Frosztega "Odi summusos; proinde aperte University of Utrecht dice quid sit quod times." The Netherlands