source file: mills3.txt Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 20:22:26 +0100 Subject: RE: !@#$%^&* to Dan Wolf From: "Paul H. Erlich" This message I posted on December 5 was not only insulting to Mr. Wolf, but ended up insulting him behind his back, as he already signed off the list. Daniel brought a great deal of knowledge and experience to the discussions here, and I felt that it would be a great loss to have him sign off. I felt insulted on behalf of the list subscribers, especially the newer ones, as I interpreted Daniel's comments to indicate that he had nothing more to learn and it was not worth his while to teach. Another interpretation is possible, however; Daniel may simply have been too busy to keep up with the influx of new subscribers and (often) old topics and needed to focus more time on real life for a while. With insulting brats like myself around having no lives ourselves, who could blame him? My sincerest apologies to Daniel Wolf and here's hoping he returns to the fold soon. >-----Original Message----- >From: Paul H. Erlich >Sent: Friday, December 05, 1997 3:53 PM >To: 'tuning@eartha.mills.edu' >Subject: !@#$%^&* to Dan Wolf > >>after [the mid 70's], basically no self-respecting early keyboardis= >>t >>would be caught dead tuning in ET. > >>We have been through this discussion so thoroughly before that I figure >>that I have gone full circle with the tuning list. So, I'll sign off for = >>a >>while with a suggestion that new subscribers should spend some time with >>the list archives. = > > >>Daniel Wolf > > >You're probably gone already, so I won't bother trying to come up with the >right Yiddish expression to describe your arrogance. I joined this list in >the #600s, and Paul Rapoport and I have been repetedly asking the same >question (deleted above: what recordings of WTC 1&2 exist in unequal >temperaments) to no avail (except that I already knew of the Anthony Newman). >The archives, which I read, only go up to about #350, so the "so thorough >discussion" of this must have occured between 350 and 600. Will somebody just >name a good recording of WTC 1&2 in some kind of pseudo-authentic tuning, >PLEASE, so I don't have to plunk $50 on some equal-tempered or lousily played >version? P.S. I think you're dead wrong about most harpsichordists, but God >bless your optimism. SMTPOriginator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu From: John Chalmers Subject: EMI PostedDate: 05-02-98 21:38:07 SendTo: CN=coul1358/OU=AT/O=EZH ReplyTo: tuning@eartha.mills.edu $MessageStorage: 0 $UpdatedBy: CN=notesrv2/OU=Server/O=EZH,CN=coul1358/OU=AT/O=EZH,CN=Manuel op de Coul/OU=AT/O=EZH RouteServers: CN=notesrv2/OU=Server/O=EZH,CN=notesrv1/OU=Server/O=EZH RouteTimes: 05-02-98 21:37:07-05-02-98 21:37:08,05-02-98 21:35:41-05-02-98 21:35:41 DeliveredDate: 05-02-98 21:35:41 Categories: $Revisions: Received: from ns.ezh.nl ([137.174.112.59]) by notesrv2.ezh.nl (Lotus SMTP MTA SMTP v4.6 (462.2 9-3-1997)) with SMTP id C12565A2.00714006; Thu, 5 Feb 1998 21:36:59 +0100 Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA09064; Thu, 5 Feb 1998 21:38:07 +0100 Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 21:38:07 +0100 Received: from ella.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA09062 Received: (qmail 14215 invoked from network); 5 Feb 1998 12:37:19 -0800 Received: from localhost (HELO ella.mills.edu) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 5 Feb 1998 12:37:19 -0800 Message-Id: Errors-To: madole@mills.edu Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu