Re: "well-tempered"?

[BarMusProd <BarMusProd...>]

I sent this yesterday to Roger, but since I didn't see a followup on the list 
regarding the New Harvard Dictionary on "well-tempered," I thought that I 
would send it to the list.

Dear Roger,

In a message dated 3/21/02 4:28:29 PM, ro (at) panix(dot)com writes:

>In other words, Robert, your Harvard dictionary is WRONG.  I'm really
>kind of surprised, the mistaken notion that Bach favored equal
>temperament is long discredited.

Perhaps Robert is using the old Apel edited Harvard. That is the way I 
learned it as well (which tells you how old I am) that equal tempered was the 
same as well-tempered (and I wrote a letter to Robert saying as much). You 
are right, and the newer edition (mine is from 1986) _The New Harvard 
Dictionary of Music_ edited by Don Randle says the following:

Historically, the most important unequal distributions [of the Pythagorean 
comma] are those that eliminate the wolf fifth [a fifth that is noticeably 
out of tune with an acoustically pure fifth]. A number of those "circulating" 
temperaments were propagated during the 17th and 18th centuries, and it is to 
them rather than to equal temperament that the term well-tempered (as in 
Bach's _Wohltempierte Clavier_) rightly refers.

The newer Harvard is at least up to date and I learned something in my old 
age.

Best wishes,
Steve

Steve Barnett
Composer/Arranger/Producer
Barnett Music Productions
BarMusProd (at) aol(dot)com 

---------------------- jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org ---------------------+