Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Tuner-Technicians Forum HISTORICAL ET AND MODERN ETs

Non of these are ET, nor ar they any fixed intonation at all. It's just good (and occasionally not so good) intonation executed on non-fixed instruments.



Sure, I can do that - although I don't think it would be too hard for you to realize that yourself. You'd just have to think about who have discussed things with you during the time you've been on this forum, and then think about who is still doing so.

If I list them, I'd like to do that in a PM, for one reason only: I do not want to drag them back into a discussion they have chosen not to participate in. Your call.

Alfredo writes:
"That is how you could stop this maso-romantic game, this going through alternate pain and pleasure, wolfish and justish chords, remote and close keys-signature. Today we can explain (and go for) a consistent and solid "in tune" choir. "

Ayyyeee! I haven't been clear enough. Music is an emotional event for me. I like the pain and pleasure in the wolfish and just chords. I don't want to listen with my head, I want to have my breathing changed, and the variety of tempering will do that more strongly than its lack. We know that our bodies react to dissonance, and Beethoven seems to have known it, too.
I want my castles made of natural, inconsistent, field stone, not symmetrical brick. I want to feel the irregularities of wood instead of the perfectly consistent plastic surface. I crave food that is sweet and sour, I like music to be soft and loud, fast and slow, harmony, pure and ragged. I like thirds that are near pure, and I like them even more after glancing off the comma. It is exciting to me to hear a composer gradually taking the ear into very expressive territory without ever making such a big leap that it breaks the spell, and then reminding us how good harmony sounds when it resolves in more pure intervals. I like that stuff, and the composers seem to know how to use it.
So, I don't see the palette formed by a well temperament to be a liability, but rather, an asset. There are places for an edgy dissonant third and curiously, composers rarely put them in the wrong place.
The rise and fall of dissonance from tempering in Classical piano music seems, to me, to be intentionally used by the composers. We can argue the degree of historical plausibility all day long, but that lacks the realness of listening. Since the difference is a sensual one, not an intellectual one, assuming a historical imperative based on research instead of what the music sounds like is, imho, folly.
I try to focus not only on what the music sounds like,( occupational hazard for a professional tuner), but rather, what it feels like. These are not the same thing. (more later, I guess).
Regards,

Originally Posted By: Alfredo Capurso
[@Ed Foote] Today we can explain (and go for) a consistent and solid "in tune" choir. Which non-equal/WT can you detect?

Mozart - The Magic Flute - end of opera (duet and chorus)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFdB8Zz8VOo

The Swingle Singers - Badinerie (Johann Sebastian Bach)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHcNHL8AyfU&feature=related

Patrick, you say: "Non of these are ET, nor ar they any fixed intonation at all. It's just good (and occasionally not so good) intonation executed on non-fixed instruments."...

I ask then: what makes intonation good? What makes intonation "not so good"? Although those are voices, they can not sing "just" intervals (just like we cannot tune just intervals on a piano). So I ask: how do they temper themselves? I used to sing with my sister, we both knew who and when was "occasionally not so good". I'm sure singers themselves could say when they themselves sound not so good. Do they refer to a compromise or to an ideal? Which non-equal or WT could they refer to, all together and in real time? How do they stretch intervals and manage to make me feel (quite) good?

Children's choir Kolibri - Mass in G major, BWV 236 - 4: Domine Deus, Johann Sebastian Bach
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bokZHuCWNP4

AI Josh Groban children choir frm Africa - You Raise Me Up
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OOhd6R2EiY

Originally Posted By: Alfredo Capurso
Yet I'd like you to check yourself (you'd want to be reliable) and list (for me too) all these "mostly everybody else...".

..."Sure, I can do that - although I don't think it would be too hard for you to realize that yourself. You'd just have to think about who have discussed things with you during the time you've been on this forum, and then think about who is still doing so."...

Let me know what you realize. For what I can say and expect, in Chas threads posters come and go freely, anytime.

..."If I list them, I'd like to do that in a PM, for one reason only: I do not want to drag them back into a discussion they have chosen not to participate in."...

Cam'on Patrick, be reliable and tell me/us who you have in mind. After all it was you involving others in public. And you were not playing a ghost game, were you?

Regards, a.c.

CHAS Tuning MP3 - Amatorial recording on a Steinway S (5’ 1”, 155 cm)
http://www.box.net/shared/od0d7506cv

CHAS THEORY - RESEARCH REPORT BY G.R.I.M. (Department of Mathematics, University of Palermo, Italy):
http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Quaderno19_Capurso_09_engl.pdf

If we are talking about a cappella singing, the singers are of course intonating by ear only, not out of any given theoretical model. In my view, intonation on the fly is superior to what we are dedicated to: the tempering of an instrument with fixed pitch. Then again, it's much harder to execute nicely.

Then, if a piano is tuned in ET, singers intonate to ET. If a piano is tuned in a WT, singers intonate into that WT. This happens on the fly, by ear, and is much easier than we often think in this forum. It can be a bit trickier with strings, because a physical, kinetic aspect comes into play - the feel of the fingerboard. Good players usually adjust fast, though.

If there is any doubt about the power of on the fly intonation by ear, you can make the following test (which I've used a lot of times, in both choir and theory classes). What you need is a group of singers, large enough for them to be able to use staggered breath efficiently, produce a continous long tone without breaks.

Play a C major chord, and let them sing C4 and hold that note. Then play different chords that includes C4 (F major, Gb7#11, Ab maj7, Cadd9/E, Eb6, Dm7b5, Db maj7, aso)
, and make that C4 the top note of the chord, including it on the piano too. The choir will sing your ET C4.

Now, do the exact same test, but this time leave out the top note (C4) on the piano. What you will hear is a C4 that constantly varies in pitch, seemingly effortlessly! By ear, the singers raise and lower the pitch to the place where it just "sounds right".

Let me recapitulate: even if the piano is tuned in ET, if the singers are free to intonate to it, not restricted by the same tone played on the piano, they will make more natural choices. This is where we are hopelessly stuck with our fixed pitch on the piano. I've said it before, and here it is again: To me, a WT/UT is a way of bringing some of that liveness into the piano. It is not as effective as free intonation on the fly, but it is - again, to me - much more natural than ET.

But, just as Ed says, unequal tunings have been used to the composers advantage in writing music for the piano. Hence, this shortcoming of fixed intonation has actually been utilized in favor of the composer, for bringing different emotions into the harmonic progressions. No theories claiming otherwise, however vigurously researched, will stand a chance to the proof of the music itself.



No, I stand by this decision, out of respect to others. If that means that you find me less reliable, then so be it. Still, I can PM you if you don't figure it out yourself.

12 tone keyboard instruments are the only instruments which require temperament. All other instruments and voices adjust intonation as the music progresses.

Hello Bill,

you say: "12 tone keyboard instruments are the only instruments which require temperament. All other instruments and voices adjust intonation as the music progresses."

Is that what you hear?

Leonid Kogan Paganini with guitarre
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpXlCheiXY8&feature=related

Kogan Paganini
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ovnky2hwgWM

Regards, a.c.
.

..."12 tone keyboard instruments are the only instruments which require temperament. All other instruments and voices adjust intonation as the music progresses."

Hello. I'd say "...All other instruments and voices adjust intonation as their music-understanding progresses".

For a violinist, in my idea for any musician (on a instrument or voice), intonation may be a gift that he/she would (re)gain in the shortest lapse of time, even with a good teacher, if the teacher could share that talent.

In my idea, any instrumental-voice will be tempered, because "just-related" frequencies all together would not sound good. And it will not be adjustable because every musician ends up singing that gift. This is why, hopefully, they can be and they are musicians.

1.UTO UGHI LE QUATTRO STAGIONI DI VIVALDI S. SABINA DI ROMA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhhLXQok82A

7 years old violinist No.2 (mendelssohn violin concerto)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrMwMQt7MXM&feature=related


What do you think? Regards, a.c.

The violonist adjust his "stretch" to the guitare which have none. As usual thats the non fixed tone instrument that adapt his justness to the one of the fixed tone.

I find the result sounding flat and not very harmonious, may be the guitare would have benefit of enlarging the tuning ...

Best wishes !

a little before 4:00 they lower their intonation (first violin and solist) while when they play tutti, the treble raise and raise, naturally. (as often ) I get no clue about pythagorean justness by listening there, only that they seem to temper more at some moment.

may be simply it is hot and all strings go flat, hence the pitch lower ...

I dont find the Swingle singers are singing particularely just

while they are enjoyeable of course, they have a somehow "loose" intonation, purposely or not.

It is anyway as difficult to sing just than to play just at the violin !

The piano is " dans les choux !" (in the backyard, with the tomatoes and potatoes ! ) the violinist is able to adapt while playing a little lower when in the treble, but the choir is higher, naturally.

The piano would have benefit of a more open tuning (some came to mind !)

Best regards

AI Josh Groban children choir frm Africa - You Raise Me Up
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OOhd6R2EiY

You call that a singer ? sheep sing better ! beeehhh !

Isaac, what a pleasure. I was half way with this post...

Alfredo writes:
"That is how you could stop this maso-romantic game, this going through alternate pain and pleasure, wolfish and justish chords, remote and close keys-signature. Today we can explain (and go for) a consistent and solid "in tune" choir. "

ED:..."Ayyyeee! I haven't been clear enough. Music is an emotional event for me. I like the pain and pleasure in the wolfish and just chords. I don't want to listen with my head, I want to have my breathing changed, and the variety of tempering will do that more strongly than its lack. We know that our bodies react to dissonance, and Beethoven seems to have known it, too.
I want my castles made of natural, inconsistent, field stone, not symmetrical brick. I want to feel the irregularities of wood instead of the perfectly consistent plastic surface. I crave food that is sweet and sour, I like music to be soft and loud, fast and slow, harmony, pure and ragged. I like thirds that are near pure, and I like them even more after glancing off the comma. It is exciting to me to hear a composer gradually taking the ear into very expressive territory without ever making such a big leap that it breaks the spell, and then reminding us how good harmony sounds when it resolves in more pure intervals. I like that stuff, and the composers seem to know how to use it.
So, I don't see the palette formed by a well temperament to be a liability, but rather, an asset. There are places for an edgy dissonant third and curiously, composers rarely put them in the wrong place.
The rise and fall of dissonance from tempering in Classical piano music seems, to me, to be intentionally used by the composers. We can argue the degree of historical plausibility all day long, but that lacks the realness of listening. Since the difference is a sensual one, not an intellectual one, assuming a historical imperative based on research instead of what the music sounds like is, imho, folly. I try to focus not only on what the music sounds like,( occupational hazard for a professional tuner), but rather, what it feels like. These are not the same thing."...


Me too, I'd say "Music is an emotional event for me". Since my head is not involved, I cannot think in terms of (due) pain and pleasure. My emotions flow and do not call for a rational explaination, unless my ear is disturbed. My ear has to do with my brain but not with my rational. My emotions can flow untill my ear recognizes a friendly, warm, euphonious environment.

When my ear detects a wolfish sound, I feel like my castle is not safe anymore, like if those beautyful, ever different field stones (read partials) that could decorate my castle in an orderly way, are now deforming into a mess. It is not a question of symmetry nor dissonance. Actually a "dissonance" is nice as long as it makes sense. It is an "out of tune" dissonance that I find unpleasent, just like an "out of tune" consonance.

You write:..."We know that our bodies react to dissonance, and Beethoven seems to have known it, too."..

I'd mention Beethoven's own words (or music) only (please). Our body reacts to dissonance, my body reacts even more to unjustifiable, over-dissonances. Yes, sweet and sour can be nice, not for the sake of it though, i.e. not as a theoretical/conceptual reason. Take any usual tuning, depending on the chords sequence, we can play "sweet and sour" and still sound quite in tune. Isn't this banal?

You write:..."I want to feel the irregularities of wood instead of the perfectly consistent plastic surface"...

Have you read about one actual non-equal Vs ET compareson? Even "educated", lined up listeners could confuse the two. Which "plastic" are you talking about? Is yours a bizarre (or exploitable) issue?

You write:..."It is exciting to me to hear a composer gradually taking the ear into very expressive territory without ever making such a big leap that it breaks the spell, and then reminding us how good harmony sounds when it resolves in more pure intervals. I like that stuff, and the composers seem to know how to use it."...

For what I can say, the scale and chords geometry itself can variate from "tense" intervals to "calm" ones, and the temperaments (historical) main issue was the wolf, i.e. where could we relegate the wolf, how could we circumscribe the (today-solved) problem.

You write:..."So, I don't see the palette formed by a well temperament to be a liability, but rather, an asset. There are places for an edgy dissonant third and curiously, composers rarely put them in the wrong place."...

I'd say: Composers may rarely (?) refer to them. Do you really think composers wait for you/us to give them a temperament?

..."The rise and fall of dissonance from tempering in Classical piano music seems, to me, to be intentionally used by the composers."...

Yes, dissonance and consonance, on the bases of the harmonic structure, not on dayly "out of tune" gimmicks.

..."Since the difference is a sensual one, not an intellectual one, assuming a historical imperative based on research instead of what the music sounds like is, imho, folly."...

So, why do you bother whether it should be WT or ET? I did bother, I needed to bother firstly as a musician, secondly as a pro tuner.

..."I try to focus not only on what the music sounds like, (occupational hazard for a professional tuner), but rather, what it feels like. These are not the same thing."...

Yes, you could work on that and line up your feelings.

Regards, a.c.

Alfredo writes:
.
>>When my ear detects a wolfish sound, I feel like my castle is not safe anymore, like if those beautyful, ever different field stones (read partials) that could decorate my castle in an orderly way, are now deforming into a mess.>

If the point and intention of listening to music is to feel "safe", then we are talking at cross-purposes. Perhaps meantone, with its perfectly safe thirds, would do this, but would it not get boring? Life is messy.

a.c. >>Actually a "dissonance" is nice as long as it makes sense. It is an "out of tune" dissonance that I find unpleasent, just like an "out of tune" consonance.<

We got a semantics problem. Maybe some definitions are in order? Let's consider Just to be consonant. Everything else is simply degrees away from it. Let's consider "out of tune" as anything that calls attention to itself rather than the music. There is no point to go assigning values of good and evil, since taste is subjective.
With that, we can ask the question, where does your limit of tolerance occur? Consonance is nice, but we can't live there, so how far from consonant is too far. It seems to be a 13.7 cent third. This is an odd size, resulting from physical limits of our hands and fingers colliding with the physics of vibrating strings. Why would that resulting compromise be of particular harmonic interest? It is certainly not consonant, since it beats like crazy.

A.c. asks: Have you read about one actual non-equal Vs ET compareson? Even "educated", lined up listeners could confuse the two.<

I have presented exactly this program at 7 National conventions of the PTG,the CAPT, as well as numerous other events for non-technicals. We listen, very carefully, to both tunings. This is after I have taken the entire audience on a tour through the keys of the WT. We listen to what Brahms wrote in Eb,other pieces in Ab, Bm,G, you name it. I point out the variety of thirds, and what they sound like as 17ths. And we compare the same piece on both pianos, and there is NEVER any confusion as to which is which.
ET has a profoundly different sound that, once recognized, is usually easily identified. There are passages in the middle keys, which are tempered so close to ET that it could be confusing to those that don't have pitch recognition, but there are big differences in how the WT keys feel, and the skill to sense them is not hard to develop, even for modern ears. It just requires a willingness to listen from another perspective.
As a sidebar, the effect on the artists that play is profound. Most of them have never touched a WT, and they all, every one, loved it.


>>Which "plastic" are you talking about? Is yours a bizarre (or exploitable) issue?<<

I don't know about "bizarre. Plastic was a figure of speech. It refers to a man-made chemical artifact (polymers and such) as a metaphor for the artificial intonation that results from dividing an octave up into 12 steps, destroying consonance everywhere for the sake of control.
Exploit that, if you must, but I really don't understand the question.

In response to me saying, "It is exciting to me to hear a composer gradually taking the ear into very expressive territory without ever making such a big leap that it breaks the spell,

A.C. writes:
For what I can say, the scale and chords geometry itself can variate from "tense" intervals to "calm" ones,

That may be enough for some. The intellectual processing of the music may be creating as much emotional involvement as a particular person seeks. However,our autonomic nervous systems are not being stimulated the same way as if given varying doses of dissonance. Variety has its effect in all senses. The rubato is a prime example. Crescendos, likewise. Why not harmonic variety? Almost all other instruments provide it.
The musical complexity, both physically and in composition, is greater with a non equal temperament, since there is more than one change when there is a modulation. In any ET, the only thing to change when modulating is the pitch center. In a WT, there is the change of pitch center, and, if desired, the change of tension due to tempering. This change can be higher, or lower, or it can be missing in action, all dependent on the composers intentions. How can the options be anything but a feature? One has to really love the sound of a 14 cent third to give that all up.

>> and the temperaments (historical) main issue was the wolf, <<

I think there was too much interest in temperament, long after the wolf had been spread out to dry, to dismiss intentional placing of the tempering according to key signature, as virtually all WT's do. It was done too consistently to ignore.

a.c.
>> Do you really think composers wait for you/us to give them a temperament?<<

No, I don't. I think they simply used the intonation they inherited. Giving something up in the most used keys to make the remote ones usable would have been a very natural progression from thinking in restricted meantone sense.
What is implausible is that the complete Classical era would have suddenly happened because equal temperament made it so, and no composer said anything about it. Modern composers don't specify ET,(Gershwin? Rachman,etc), why would we expect differently 200 years ago? They worked with the status quo,and in Beethoven's time, I don't think ET was the norm.

a.c. <<So, why do you bother whether it should be WT or ET? I did bother, I needed to bother firstly as a musician, secondly as a pro tuner.>>

I bother 'cause I love music, and I want as intense an experience as possible. After becoming familiar with alternatives, ET has come to sound boring and aesthetically bankrupt for music composed prior to 1900. It places terrible tempering in places it has no business being, and gentrifies wildly dissonant passages. It averages everything out in a bland sameness, like tapioca. The music deserves more, and so do we.
Regards,

Hello.

ED writes:..."If the point and intention of listening to music is to feel "safe", then we are talking at cross-purposes. Perhaps meantone, with its perfectly safe thirds, would do this, but would it not get boring? Life is messy."...

"Safe" was a figure of speech, as a metaphor for a natural (referred to nature's geometry), home-ish (referred to my own geometry), possibly euphonious environment (referred to a warm, reliable, shareable scale-geometry). As a metaphor for explaining when can my emotions flow. Nothing to do with Meantone pure thirds, actually nothing to do with pure fifths or octaves either, since they would give rise to messy tunings (I should not tell you).

To be able to tell how your life is messy, I should know you better, see your house, check your habits...but would not "ever-messy" get boring too? And ever-sweet'n sour? Ever intense? No, I do not think that can be a way. If anything, music composition is "order", and not for the sake of it but to make music shareable. Infact, the common line seems to be "share order", not mess as an order, you may just go out and check. In nature we find both, mess and order, and this helps me understand your craves, be them your own craves. I'd rather go for my own mess and would not expect to share it.

So, the porpuse of this writing is to understand what is behind the preference for WT and I thank you ED. It seems that we (ear-equipped people) can say when intervals and chords sound good or if they can sound better, and even agree on that. But it seems also that "sounds good" is a matter of personal taste. In any case, it seems that we should not have all chords sound ever "in tune", otherwise it gets boring. It seems that a fixed mess can contrast boredom, but wasn't life messy enough?

ET is mentioned as normally tuneable, commonly down to perfection, and ET's regularity with its rule applied to perfection makes it boring. It seems that music can be much more emotional if we deviate few cents, if we go through pain-and-pleasure, and it seems that we can be told the (ever?) fixed and correct amount of pain and the (ever?) correct amount of pleasure, so that we can finally enjoy music (ever?) in the proper, intented way. Am I with you?

a.c. >>Actually a "dissonance" is nice as long as it makes sense. It is an "out of tune" dissonance that I find unpleasent, just like an "out of tune" consonance.<

ED:..."We got a semantics problem. Maybe some definitions are in order? Let's consider Just to be consonant. Everything else is simply degrees away from it. Let's consider "out of tune" as anything that calls attention to itself rather than the music. There is no point to go assigning values of good and evil, since taste is subjective."...

Say that what you say is true, how can you ensure my "emotional" then? And why do you go for fixed good and evil?

..."With that, we can ask the question, where does your limit of tolerance occur? Consonance is nice, but we can't live there, so how far from consonant is too far."...

In my case, also dissonance (read dissonant chords) can be nice, and beat-proportions (read nature's geometry) drive my ear and tell me where I am.

..."It seems to be a 13.7 cent third. This is an odd size, resulting from physical limits of our hands and fingers colliding with the physics of vibrating strings. Why would that resulting compromise be of particular harmonic interest? It is certainly not consonant, since it beats like crazy."...

I shall tell you about Chas. It cannot be called a compromise, as it can stretch all intervals into a self-referencial beat-geometry. Chas describes a self-contained beat structure which can be modelled into an ET form to perfectly fit our 12 semitones scale.

A.c. asks: Have you read about one actual non-equal Vs ET compareson? Even "educated", lined up listeners could confuse the two.<

..."I have presented exactly this program at 7 National conventions of the PTG,the CAPT, as well as numerous other events for non-technicals. We listen, very carefully, to both tunings. This is after I have taken the entire audience on a tour through the keys of the WT. We listen to what Brahms wrote in Eb,other pieces in Ab, Bm,G, you name it. I point out the variety of thirds, and what they sound like as 17ths. And we compare the same piece on both pianos, and there is NEVER any confusion as to which is which.
ET has a profoundly different sound that, once recognized, is usually easily identified. There are passages in the middle keys, which are tempered so close to ET that it could be confusing to those that don't have pitch recognition, but there are big differences in how the WT keys feel, and the skill to sense them is not hard to develop, even for modern ears. It just requires a willingness to listen from another perspective.
As a sidebar, the effect on the artists that play is profound. Most of them have never touched a WT, and they all, every one, loved it."...

Ok, I'll avoid telling you how Chas ET is successful. That would not be an argument.

>>Which "plastic" are you talking about? Is yours a bizarre (or exploitable) issue?<<

..."I don't know about "bizarre. Plastic was a figure of speech. It refers to a man-made chemical artifact (polymers and such) as a metaphor for the artificial intonation that results from dividing an octave up into 12 steps, destroying consonance everywhere for the sake of control.
Exploit that, if you must, but I really don't understand the question."...

Can you actually devide an octave up into 12 steps, down to absolute and steady perfection? You seem to anticipate what nobody can achieve, i.e. a perfect and steady ET. And a perfect WT, can you tune it on 88 keys? To me, that sounds a bit like a pretext, like debatable, aleatory concepts for approximate, aleatory deviations from sound tunings.

..."In response to me saying, "It is exciting to me to hear a composer gradually taking the ear into very expressive territory without ever making such a big leap that it breaks the spell,

A.C. writes:
For what I can say, the scale and chords geometry itself can variate from "tense" intervals to "calm" ones,

..."That may be enough for some. The intellectual processing of the music may be creating as much emotional involvement as a particular person seeks. However,our autonomic nervous systems are not being stimulated the same way as if given varying doses of dissonance. Variety has its effect in all senses. The rubato is a prime example. Crescendos, likewise. Why not harmonic variety? Almost all other instruments provide it."...

The variety you talk about is our drama and we get that in any case, no need to theorize it.

..."The musical complexity, both physically and in composition, is greater with a non equal temperament, since there is more than one change when there is a modulation. In any ET, the only thing to change when modulating is the pitch center. In a WT, there is the change of pitch center, and, if desired, the change of tension due to tempering. This change can be higher, or lower, or it can be missing in action, all dependent on the composers intentions. How can the options be anything but a feature? One has to really love the sound of a 14 cent third to give that all up."...

About these concepts, I think I've said enough. And I tend to think that any composer, if anything, would go for his/her own urge for an original temperament, they would not wait for our artistic, fixed non-equal temperament.

>> and the temperaments (historical) main issue was the wolf, <<

..."I think there was too much interest in temperament, long after the wolf had been spread out to dry, to dismiss intentional placing of the tempering according to key signature, as virtually all WT's do. It was done too consistently to ignore."...

I think there were too many difficulties in ET temperament, long after the wolf had been theoretically spread out to dry, to dismiss intentional placing of the tempering according to key signature, as virtually all ET's and WT's end up doing. It was done too consistently to ignore, but this tragic "consistency" can not make an argument.

a.c.
>> Do you really think composers wait for you/us to give them a temperament?<<

..."No, I don't. I think they simply used the intonation they inherited. Giving something up in the most used keys to make the remote ones usable would have been a very natural progression from thinking in restricted meantone sense.
What is implausible is that the complete Classical era would have suddenly happened because equal temperament made it so, and no composer said anything about it. Modern composers don't specify ET,(Gershwin? Rachman,etc), why would we expect differently 200 years ago? They worked with the status quo,and in Beethoven's time, I don't think ET was the norm."...

For what I can read, ET is not the norm, not even today. This is why I'm trying to share Chas.

a.c. <<So, why do you bother whether it should be WT or ET? I did bother, I needed to bother firstly as a musician, secondly as a pro tuner.>>

..."I bother 'cause I love music, and I want as intense an experience as possible. After becoming familiar with alternatives, ET has come to sound boring and aesthetically bankrupt for music composed prior to 1900. It places terrible tempering in places it has no business being, and gentrifies wildly dissonant passages. It averages everything out in a bland sameness, like tapioca. The music deserves more, and so do we."...

I agree, we deserve good tunings and I cannot really say how horrible your ET experience might have been. May a good tuning free your mind of pain and pleasure routines and unconvenient prejudices, may you acknowledge that 12 root of two ET has evolved.

Best regards, a.c.

Hi Alfredo :

here is may be what you are trying to understand :


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gU8uREFN3CU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/user/PersianTunedPiano#p/u/1/XB8oD5lUFIU

Personally I like that very much, and I understand it is a contextual thing.

Now the way the piano is tuned allow most probably for one and only one mode.

... confusing the discusssion a bit more !!!

It's possible to tune the piano so all the Persian "modes" except one (which is often omitted anyways) can be played, but each in one specific "key" only.

A common technique, also used on santur, is to tune a different key (scale) on say C2-C4 and C4-C6. So if you need microtones not available in C4-C6 you "steal" them from C2-C4.

In this tuning some notes need to be raised 40cents so often the whole piano is tuned 40 cent flat. Not a problem in Persian music.

For just one mode you sometimes can get away with instead of raising e.g. Eb by 40cent just lower E by 60 cent. Often you don't need the Eb and E at all, or you can steal them from the lower octave if needed.

Kees

Kees that is interesting, get me bluffed ! you know about those different modes apparently.

Where can I find some information on that ?

What is the name (Persian modes ?)

I was expecting the fact that only one key (or very little) was available then.

In any case I like that music, that is refreshing , sound "authentic" .

Kamin, I have a website on it: Persian music
which has some information on Persian music theory. It is of course a large subject.

Kees

Hello.

Just for sharing two good news. On the academic front, an article on Chas has recently been written by Prof. Nicola Chiriano and published by P.RI.ST.EM (Progetto Ricerche Storiche E Metodologiche) of the University "Bocconi" - Milano. Here it is, in the original version (Italian):

http://matematica.unibocconi.it/articoli/relazioni-armoniche-un-pia...

After Babel, it is now being translated in English.

On the practical side (for VT (ETD) users), in C.A.P.T. piano forum, Ernest Unrau (RPT - Canada) has released an updated tuning simulation.

To All, best regards, a.c.

CHAS Tuning MP3 - Amatorial recording on a Steinway S (5’ 1”, 155 cm)
http://www.box.net/shared/od0d7506cv

CHAS THEORY - RESEARCH REPORT BY G.R.I.M. (Department of Mathematics, University of Palermo, Italy):
http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Quaderno19_Capurso_09_engl.pdf

Discussion (PW):

http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/1194874/1.html

Approach, method and sequence (PW):

http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/1383831/1.html