FWD: Re: FWD: Re: "well-tempered"?

[Jennifer Wollock <jennifer...>]

I forwarded some of the messages about "well-tempered" to
my husband, Itsik-Leyb Volokh (Jeff Wollock)
a klezmer violinist and alumnus of this list, 
and heard back from him as follows: 

Jeff writes:

Well, a violinist doesn't have to play in tempered pitch (and 
shouldn't!), and a mandolin is tuned exactly the same as a violin 
and has the same number of strings. Where a mandolin suffers 
tuning constraints is with the frets. There may be ways of 
tweaking pitches even with the frets (?) I've also noticed that 
ancient fretted instruments like viols seem to have adjustable gut 
frets, probably for just that reason. 

About Roger Reid's 21 March 2002 discussion
(in response to the definition in the Harvard Dictionary
of Music (older edition) as reported by Bob Cohen)
I received the next note:

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Jeff Wollock" <jeff (at) nativecouncil(dot)com>
Reply-To: <jeff (at) nativecouncil(dot)com>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 19:14:56 -0500

Jen,
  This is the best damn explanation of temperament I've ever read. 
And you can tell 'em your husband said so. By the way, it explains
what I said about why a vioinist shouldn't play in tempered pitch 
and why it's nice to have adjustable frets.
I-L

>---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
>From: "r l reid" <ro (at) rreid(dot)net>
>Reply-To: ro (at) rreid(dot)net
>Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 17:24:45 -0500 (EST)
>
>Robert Cohen wrote:
>> 
>> I'm puzzled:  The Harvard Dictionary of Music, in its 
discussion 
>of Bach's 
>> "Well-Tempered Clavier," says "the name refers to the then 
novel 
>system of 
>> equal temperament."  So what's the difference?--and Roger, what 
>did you mean 
>> by this playful signature?
>
>The Harvard Dictionaryu of Music should know better.  Bach never 
>used
>nor advocated equal temperament.  He *did* use well temperament.
>
>To keep it as shors possible, western musical theory comes from
>the Greeks, who brought us lots of strange ideas like 
Christianity.
>
(Snip)

>Roger "Just say NO to the Twelth Root of Two!" Reid

And about the next one -

>Yay, this is exactly what Aristoxenus said to the Pythagoreans. 
Sing a scale and screw the math. Tell 'em I said so. Itsik-Leyb 

>---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- 
>From: "r l reid" <ro (at) rreid(dot)net> 
>Reply-To: ro (at) rreid(dot)net 
>Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 17:42:29 -0500 (EST) 
> 
>r l reid wrote: 
>> To: World music from a Jewish slant <jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org> 
>> 
>> There's no reason to tune by fifths if you aren't trying to 
>> play music such as European art music of the last 4 centuries. 
>> Just play in just intonation (with perfect ratios everywhere) 
>> and screw tuning in fifths. 
> 
>Rereading this, it's got its logic wrong.  Please replace that 
idea 
>with the question "why is everyone so eager to generate octaves 
>by going up the circle of fifths?" 
> 
>The circle of fifths is a fascinating phenomenon.  I think I see 
>the figurative habd of God in that little trick of the fifths 
>and the octaves - so close, and yet... 
> 
>But there are other ways to generate a scale.  One good one 
>is to sing one right out and screw the math! 

> (Snip)

>r l reid       ro (at) rreid(dot)net 
> 
> 
Jennifer Wollock

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