# How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Has anyone read this book by Ross W. Duffin?


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

No but I'd be interested in knowing how he came to the conclusion stated on the cover.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

violadude said:


> No but I'd be interested in knowing how he came to the conclusion stated on the cover.


Yes, I hope to read it soon, though I haven't bought it yet. I think it's generally about how equal temperament is an "unnatural" squaring of the circle that is the problem of balancing a numerically pleasing tonal system with one that is capable of changing through keys effortlessly. I think his opinion is that equal temperament is too far towards the latter at the sacrifice of other aspects of tonality, and that we end up hearing many familiar pieces from the classical period with incorrect tunings.


----------



## Manok (Aug 29, 2011)

So what's the conclusion then? How do we decide what is a right tuning? Interesting discussion I may be reading this soon .


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

I have heard of this book. I'm not sure what its about though.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

USA composer Harry Partch had similar opinions. Eg. like between J.S.Bach and Schoenberg, what happened in music was a lost opportunity, partly due (or in a big way?) to equal temperament. He invented instruments to play his own 43 tone microtonal scale.

I love his music, very intense, but the rhythm somehow makes up for all the complexity, it's kind of primal and very visual/theatrical/etc.

Partch is rarely if ever mentioned on these forums. He was mentioned to me by a acquaintance into music, I said to this person that I like Carter, I like his complexity, the reply was something like "Carter is not complex, you should listen to Harry Partch cos he's REALLY complex!"

Anyway, here's the thread I did about him, if it's of any use -

http://www.talkclassical.com/8960-harry-partch.html


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

The premise is that when the unequal harmony was in use a modulation would be more pronounced, and it would have a distinct relative set of ratios within that key area, with a different sound and personality from the Tonic. The Dominant and Sub Dominant would be more similar, yet have their own color as well. A modulation to a mediant, sub, etc. would be that much more pronounced, and audible to the listener.

Because of that, composers wrote with that in mind.

It somewhat falls apart in my thoughts when it comes to the instrumental ensembles, especially strings, though they are most capable of making intonation variance. 

The fact much was written in a handful of keys had more to do with the inherent limitations of the wind and brass instruments of the era.

It would be more than fantastic to have an accurate and real recording (time travel, please!) of a pre-baroque ensemble, or early baroque ensemble, playing some of this music. That would put everything either to rest, or adjust all present speculations.

The only semi-concrete vestiges of the earlier tunings we have are themselves not wholly reliable - antique organs which have been maintained and here and their repaired or re-built over centuries.

It is anybody's guess the argument 'for' would rest greatly on the chordophone keyboards, and the literature for them, or including them.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

The unequal harmonies preceding equal temperament, were largely derived from the overtone series weren't they? Maybe this book makes a case for the perfect ratios being artificial? I was wondering why my mind always tends to miss the exact tritone intervals and round it to something closer to a 4th or a fifth, and why my 6ths sometimes are perceived in between the major and minor sixths? I wonder if its an ear in need of more training as a sole symptom, or if there is something about equal temperament that goes against our natural perceptions and must be beaten into us pretty thoroughly.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

clavichorder said:


> The unequal harmonies preceding equal temperament, were largely derived from the overtone series weren't they? Maybe this book makes a case for the perfect ratios being artificial? I was wondering why my mind always tends to miss the exact tritone intervals and round it to something closer to a 4th or a fifth, and why my 6ths sometimes are perceived in between the major and minor sixths? I wonder if its an ear in need of more training as a sole symptom, or if there is something about equal temperament that goes against our natural perceptions and must be beaten into us pretty thoroughly.


Naw, it is just our lifelong conditioning of what we have unconsciously and consciously taken in: that is our point of reference and anything outside of it is 'a bit strange.'

All scale systems, tunings, etc. no matter what the number-crunchers say, or how someone may rave over the elegance of the number ratio or sound of an interval tuned a certain way, are conceits. At some point, 'collectively' people agreed it sounded good to their ears and that was that. A purely tuned pentatonic scale is a breathtaking thing to hear - it is also almost static, regardless of the interval relationships - either a 'down side,' with little push or pull as we think of it, or an upside, that they are so even once can float around readily and all will sound harmonious - again at some point it became an agreed-upon conceit.

Stravinsky was asked why he was not interested in (or was it hadn't gone to) music in quarter tones. He said that he was used to and heard only in half-steps, again a matter of a lifetime of conditioning.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Now with new technology, perhaps we can go back to natural tuning. Someone could invent a piano that will tune to a certain key at the click of a button, which would electronically stimulate a mechanism to change the tightness of all the strings into a programmed setting. Playing music that goes in and out of various keys would be hard to work out, but as with an organ, it's not impossible for the pianist to click a button while playing.


----------



## Dadof5 (Mar 25, 2011)

This already possible with the digital piano that I have. You can select between Equal Temperament, Just Intonation, and several Mean Tone temperaments. With Just Intonation, you can also select the base note so that you would have an appropriate tuning for all keys.

I read the book in the OP and found it very informative and enjoyable. I think the author's final point is not that natural tuning should be used in all cases, but that some systems are appropriate for different circumstances and musicians should be aware of what they can use.


----------



## Dadof5 (Mar 25, 2011)

For the opposite view point, take a look at "Temperament: The Idea That Solved Music's Greatest Riddle" by Stuart Isacoff:


----------



## Argus (Oct 16, 2009)

Dadof5 said:


> I read the book in the OP and found it very informative and enjoyable. I think the author's final point is not that natural tuning should be used in all cases, but that some systems are appropriate for different circumstances and musicians should be aware of what they can use.


I agree with that. For most music I create equal temperament is perfectly fine, the only time just intonation, or any unequal tunings, become beneficial for myself is when I'm using long tones/drones and don't want those fast beats that are characteristic of ET. Obviously, for xenharmonic stuff (7- and 11-limit intervals etc) you have to use JI or a high numbered ET to approximate.

Modulations are the big problems with JI. You have to have two major seconds (9:8 and 10:9) and two minor sevenths (16:9 and 9:5) to avoid some bad wolfs cropping up, then you need some other intervals to make modulation into distant keys remotely viable.

Still, for the most part 12 TET is a great tuning for the diatonic system, and JI is a great tuning for modal systems.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> Now with new technology, perhaps we can go back to natural tuning. Someone could invent a piano that will tune to a certain key at the click of a button, which would electronically stimulate a mechanism to change the tightness of all the strings into a programmed setting.


This has actually been done! I've lost track of the article, but I read last week that someone in the U.S. has invented an electronic tuner for acoustic pianos that, using heat, can tune all the strings in just a few minutes.


----------



## Philip (Mar 22, 2011)

I don't have anything to add to this thread, PetrB, Dadof5, Argus, have pretty much covered what i had in mind. I just wanted to say that i love everything about this, temperaments, i don't know why; I love temperaments, tunings <3


----------

