Arto, I should stay out of this, but I'll stick my neck out having only seen your message and the quote from RT (those included below).
To me there is only one reason for ET, and that is the chromatic instruments with fixed strings (piano, harp, etc.), and the need to play them in different keys. Even meantone is a corruption of the perfection of the intervals as defined by the overtone scale. We all know the Pythagorean comma, and that all of the temperaments are compromises to handle it. (Don't pick on me, I'm trying to write briefly). The only instruments that don't need a compromise are those with continual pitch ability - like the voice and the unfretted violin. I would have said that ET was "painting by numbers", and meantone was "painting with a lot more numbers" (or shades of tone and interval). But despite that I'm an advocate of ET, it allows us ensemble play (and that is another reason for it) on instruments not set to the same base scale. What we lose in that pure, or near pure, third we gain in the flexibility of ensemble play. There is a place for each in the spectrum of musical performance. As string players we sometimes forget the need to work with instruments not easily retuned (or impossible, in the case some of the winds). ET is a "lingua franca" of tuning. Not the best for everything, but one that will work for all. Best, Jon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Arto Wikla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu> Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 5:40 PM Subject: Non equal contra equal temperament > > On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Roman Turovsky wrote: > > > So, to drive the point as far as humanly possible: > > Meantone is painting-by-numbers, while ET permits one to say something > > meaningful and original, musically speaking. > > It is really confusing to find a "militant" or "fundamantalistic" > fighter for equal temperament in the Lute List! To this guy the ET seems > to be kind of religion? Or perhaps and likely it is just his wish to be > the troll of the List. (The word "troll" is a modern web-equivalent for > "provocator".) But if you have ever heard a pure or near pure third in > your final cadence of a lute piece of let us say 1500-1690 (or more), you > will never accept an ET 3rd there! And if you do, either your hearing or > your aesthetics has something very wrong in it... ;-) > > All the best, > > Arto > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > >
