On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 15:47:59 -0700, Chuck Israels wrote: > On Oct 14, 2004, at 2:55 PM, Owain Sutton wrote: > > Darcy James Argue wrote: > > > >> Owain, > >> It's a different theoretical model. Of course it's "wrong" according > >> to the standard theoretical model -- it's an alternative theory of > >> tonality, modality, harmony, etc. If it didn't reject the norms of > >> the standard model it wouldn't be an alternative theory, would it? > > > > Sure it's wrong, but only as wrong as the claims that western tonality > > is some inherent product of the overtone series. > > Isn't it? Where else did it come from?
Western music's twelve-tone scale is based on a series of perfect fifths (as defined by Pythagoras). Unfortunately, twelve perfect fifths do not end up in excatly the same place as seven perfect octaves, and that has for centuries been the bane of music theorists and players of keyboard instruments. Read Stuart Isacoff's book, "Temperament," for more info. Realize, however, that he clearly favors equal temperament and that he pretty much just glosses over the irregular (or "well") temperaments. Further reading is necessary to understand the usage of the scale in Bach's day. And yes, I realize that "well" is not an adjective; "well temperaments" sounds odd, but more people will know what you're talking about if you use it rather then "irregular." -- Brad Beyenhof [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://augmentedfourth.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
