However, of course, equal temperament allowed exploitation of modulation in a way not permitted by other temperament schemes set by frets or keys. Pick your scheme to serve your musical intent (or that of your ensemble partners), and there's nothing wrong with whatever that is (equal included). The guitar of any era, with a fully frettable neck across its whole range and without diapasons in most cases (regarding both features, unlike most later lute kin), is particularly well suited to modulation. It is thus well suited to being able to fully exploit any benefits of equal temperament. We've been 'round these parts before, including Duffin's text.
Best, Eugene -----Original Message----- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Roland Hogman Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 1:39 PM To: Stewart McCoy Cc: Lute Net Subject: [LUTE] Re: Guitar temperament Hello! For a nice introduction to the subject: How equal temperament ruined harmony by Ross W. Duffin ISBN 978-0-393-33420-3 (paperback) All the best! Roland Hogman 2012/1/19 Stewart McCoy <[1]lu...@tiscali.co.uk> Dear Dominic, It has to be equal temperament. The question of temperament crops up from time to time on this list, and some subscribers have expressed strong views either for or against having fretted instruments in equal temperament. Our debate echoes the same debate musicians had during the 16th and 17th century. Those in favour of unequal temperament will refer to evidence such as: 1) 16th-century vihuela players moving the 4th fret for the sake of pieces in flat keys, e.g. Luis Milan in 1536; 2) Christopher Simpson's _Compendium_ in 1667 describing how some viol players and theorbo men had an extra first fret on their instrument. Those in favour of equal temperament will refer to: 1) Galilei espousing equal temperament for lutes in 1582 with his 18:17 ratio for the placing of frets; 2) Praetorius stating unequivocally in 1619 that lutes and viols were fretted in equal temperament. Much of the evidence may be found in Mark Lindley's excellent _Lutes, Viols & Temperaments_ (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984). One may fairly quibble about his dubious conclusion that Valderrabano must have used equal temperament (page 22), but there is a wealth of information on the subject supporting both sides of the argument. Your evidence derived from Bartolotti is an important contribution to the debate, and adds weight to the argument that baroque guitars were fretted in equal temperament. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy. -----Original Message----- From: [2]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:[3]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Dominic Robillard Sent: 18 January 2012 23:12 Cc: lute list lute list Subject: [LUTE] guitar temperament Hi luters, Bartolotti starts with a passacaille in book I. Each passacaille modulates to a different key. Was he ahead of Wagner? Were performers of passacailles through all keys allowed to stop to tune, and change fret spacing within a work? Was that okay and normal for the audience? Was there an audience? Equal temperament sounds so bad, it just can't be. I refuse to stop using meantone, 1/6, but I can't seem to get passed the 4th fret on my guitar. How many tastinos will it take? I was told by pros, including Stubbs, that things get looser up there, but I think that is just continuo talk. Even playing Sanz doesn't pan out, can anyone help? Dominic -- To get on or off this list see list information at [4]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- /Roland -- References 1. mailto:lu...@tiscali.co.uk 2. mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu 3. mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu 4. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
