source file: mills2.txt Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 21:28:08 +0200 Subject: Re: Point of Well Temperaments From: Joseph Downing On Wed, 2 Jul 1997 A440A@aol.com wrote: > The entire point of well temperaments is that they are > > about equally well in tune in all keys. > > I have to disagree. Even in the Young, the difference between F and F# > is too great to call equally well in tune. This is a big difference. > To my ears and history, the point of well temperament was to provide > a suitable palette of tonal differences between the keys. It is the > irregularity of these tunings that was an art form, as opposed to the > scientific procedures we have to use to create a 12TET. > I have to agree with your disagreement. :) I have not seen anyone else voice this opinion, but I believe that the development of sonata form in the classic period was directly related to the inequality (but acceptability) of the different keys. Perhaps the greatest difference between the classic period sonata form and its baroque binary form predecessors was the use of a development section. Although many beginning students think of the development as developing themes, this, in fact, does not occur (in the sense of altering, expanding, treating fugally, etc.) much in the classic period. Instead, many different keys are visited. I believe that the purpose of visiting the many different keys was partly to 'feel out' the relative tension of the different keys. To put it simplistically, just as beginning musicians will play "Mary Had A Little Lamb" in minor 'just to see how it sounds,' I believe that the development section visited many different keys to see how they sounded, since they did NOT sound the same. Of course, this effect is totally lost on an equally tempered instrument. Joe Downing, Syracuse, NY Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Thu, 3 Jul 1997 23:13 +0200 Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA04427; Thu, 3 Jul 1997 23:13:48 +0200 Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 23:13:48 +0200 Received: from ella.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA04399 Received: (qmail 1214 invoked from network); 2 Jul 1997 22:01:41 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ella.mills.edu) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 2 Jul 1997 22:01:41 -0000 Message-Id: Errors-To: madole@mills.edu Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu