Wanting really to be frindly I continue: On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 17:42:09 -0400, "Roman Turovsky" <r.turov...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not really. Not really what? > There is no contradiction between ET and preJSB styles either. Even after JSB there never was any ET for many, many years! For example Chopin never met ET. ET is an invention of 20th century. > In my opinion ET lends ANY music noble and unaffected delivery. Just listen to, let us say, Antonio Cabezon, or any other keyboard guy of 16th c. in ET and "good temperament", and tell your feelings.. (You said "ANY music") > And there is no necessity of liking dodecaphony if you like ET. I do agree. But is there really any other reason of liking ET than the want to feel equally every possible interval, chord. key or any sequence of notes, starting where ever? Do you really want to hear - let us say - F-major sound like E-major? The F-major - to me - is very soft, happy and royal, and btw. also green to me; the E-major is much more sharp and angry, and btw. to me its colour is blue. And what is most intersting to me, is that in the so called "baroque" tuning (a'=415Hz) and in the modern tuning (a'=440Hz) those characteristics follow the name of the key? Or better said, players tune their instruments so... Is it so? And an entertaining poll: What is the colour of your F-major and E-major? Those two are clearest to me: to me there are no other alternatives to these two. D-major perhaps could be yellow? A-minor grey possible? C-major white? Well, that's enough... Best, Arto > I am > certainly no fan of the former, and it can be done in any temperament > anyway. Current forms of neomodernism are not pitch-dependent, and often > avoid all definite pitch (as well as meter). > As to actual temperaments- none are absolute, and even fewer are > sufficiently stable to discuss. > > Another point - > There is a belief that intonational espression is largely a product of ET, > because the latter permit minute deviations therefrom which actually > produce > expression. > Minute deviations from MT are plain old ugly, and the natural consequence > of > this is the so-called Rooley Principle, according to which any expression > is > entirely inappropriate in Early Music in general. > RT > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "wikla" <wi...@cs.helsinki.fi> > To: "Lute list" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu> > Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 5:29 PM > Subject: [LUTE] Re: New lute music > > >> Dear Roman and other dears, >> >> On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:23:21 -0400, "Roman Turovsky" wrote: >> [...] >>> I am for one is absolutely happy to use ET, and I use it exclusively. >> >> Poor you... ;-) I guess you'll never get your ET absolute. Neither does >> anyone else. We non ET's in our side neither are able to achieve the >> optimum. But to us it is simplier: we know we cannot reach the "truth" to >> every key - we just optimise the sound. To us non ET's there is no need >> to >> make Eb sound like D#; But if just only that is what is needed, we can do >> that easily while spoiling something else instead. I guess you know the >> system, Roman? While you favorite one key, you spoil another. If you >> prefer >> - let us say Schönberg's 12 tone music to - let us say JS Bach in his >> tonalities - you should prefer also ET. If tonality is a message to you, >> I >> would recommend non-ET to you. >> >> Best, >> >> Arto >> >> >> >> To get on or off this list see list information at >> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
