LISTSERV 16.0

Help for HPSCHD-L Archives


HPSCHD-L Archives

HPSCHD-L Archives


HPSCHD-L@LIST.UIOWA.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

HPSCHD-L Home

HPSCHD-L Home

HPSCHD-L  April 2001

HPSCHD-L April 2001

Subject:

f[is]-moll, summary

From:

Bradley Lehman <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Harpsichords and Related Topics <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sat, 7 Apr 2001 23:11:34 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (251 lines)

Now that I'm back at my home computer, library, and hpsi and clavi, let's
see if I can dot all the i's and cross all the t's of my argument.  All
this past week (traveling on business) I've been writing from borrowed
computers and without the reference works.

Here's my train of thought on all this, summing up and adding some new
things.  It's not entirely organized, but I don't think it's utter nonsense
either.

FACT: In meantone temperaments, the three specific augmented seconds F-G#,
Bb-C#, and Eb-F# are usable.  Particularly in 1/4 comma meantone, those
intervals are nearly pure!  Not as normal 6:5 minor thirds, but as 7:6
minor thirds.  This phenomenon allows composers to use the key of F minor
even if the keyboard is tuned with G#, C#, and F#.

FACT: In meantone temperaments with G#-C#-..-Bb-Eb, the crucial interval to
worry about is the "wolf" G#-Eb: a diminished sixth but looking like a
fifth on the keyboard.

FACT: The augmented sixths Bb-G# and Eb-C# are similarly special cases in
meantone, being close to pure minor 7ths (very flat to modern ears).  G#
and C# function well as Ab and Db in such a harmonic context.

AXIOM: Bach grew up in an environment where meantone temperaments and their
variants were the norm.  He became acquainted with well temperaments at
some time in his career after he had already formed his understanding of
how all the keys sound in meantone.

AXIOM: A keyboard composer/improviser in a meantone world will develop
habits tending to favor the extreme flat keys more than the extreme sharp
keys, given a choice.  Why?  Because in flat keys the dominant triad has a
major third that is not too sharp.  (The keys of e minor, b minor, f#
minor, c# minor, and E major are all flawed in this way.)

OBSERVATION: Bach himself demonstrated all the usable keys in
meantone-flavored temperaments: his inventions and sinfonias cover exactly
that set.  There are seven flat keys (c, d, Eb, F, f, g, Bb), C, a, and six
sharp keys (D, E, e, G, A, b).

AXIOM: Some chord spacings with the "wrong" enharmonic notes still work OK
in practice; for example, F-G#-C# as a Neapolitan in C major/minor, and
C-Eb-G# as a Neapolitan in G major/minor.  The augmented fifth and
augmented second (or minor third) interact in a way that the ear does not
find unpleasant, even though the notes are "wrong."  This is true even in a
regular meantone, no alteration.

FACT: All the regular meantone temperaments (1/3 comma, 2/7, 1/4, 2/9, 1/5,
1/6, ...) give the same effect, same set of keys, as long as the same set
of notes is chosen.  The difference is only a matter of degree: stability
of the fifths, major thirds, and minor thirds.  The narrower the fifth (up
to about 1/3), the stronger the perceived sense of key center, but the less
the notes can substitute enharmonically for one another.

AXIOM: Choice of which regular meantone temperament to use is a matter of
taste and preference, centuries ago and now.  So is any insistence that the
temperament be regular.  Few composers (for example, Ligeti) specify
exactly which keyboard temperament they want and demand explicitly that it
be regular.

HYPOTHESIS: Most composers, players, improvisers, and tuners likely did not
count beats with mathematical precision (like Jorgensen); they simply
relied on experience and taste to set the fifths and thirds "as the ear
will bear" according to the music to be played.  We have no assurance that
temperaments in practical use on clavichords, harpsichords, or organs were
ever mathematically perfect, or that mathematical perfection was even a
goal *in practice*...only for theorists.  Practical musicians simply made
the instrument sound as good as possible within their tastes and
abilities.  It was an expressive art.  We have no assurance that such
musicians set absolutely regular temperaments.  Such an assumption of
perfection says more about our modern scientific age than about practical
musicianship.  I suspect every musician had his/her own temperaments, all
with a basic meantone flavor but altered deliberately or accidentally to
suit their tastes.  It could have been different from day to day.  This is
what I mean when I say "vernacular" temperaments: generated by some
sequence of tempered (or maybe some pure) fifths, to taste.

AXIOM: If one is going to start modifying a regular meantone temperament to
improve commonly needed keys, the most crucial notes to mess with are Eb,
Bb, and G# (those at the end of the temperament).  Lowering those flats
improves the B major and F# major triads (dominants to E and B).   Raising
the G# helps to tame the wolf, and improves the G#-C diminished fourth.

HYPOTHESIS: People did this fudging as regular practice, to taste and by
experience, according to the music to be played.  It was not necessary to
write this down.  They simply learned where to tweak things for desirable
results, particularly in the Eb and G#.

AXIOM: There are compositional tricks in chord spacing allowing even a
noticeable G#-Eb wolf to be dodged.  For example: the notes can be struck
at different times, or the triad can be inverted, or the spacing of the
voices can be wide, or the fifth of a (notated) Ab major chord can be
omitted.

HYPOTHESIS: John Bull was an example of a composer who knew those tricks;
his chromatic "Ut re mi fa sol la" shows them in practice.  These tricks
are not earth-shattering gnostic knowledge...any reasonably sensitive
composer/improviser playing in meantone-flavored temperaments picks them up
by experience.  They can also be found in Kuhnau's Biblical sonatas.  It
would not be surprising if Bach knew them all as well: if not as a
checklist, at least by trying things in practice.

HYPOTHESIS: Bach's toccata in f# minor, if transposed to f minor, displays
those tricks!  For example, all the major cadences into Ab major omit the
fifth.  Other occurrences of Ab major triads happen on weak beats, or with
non-simultaneous attackes, or with the C in the bass.  This might be
evidence of an f-minor genesis of the piece.  Or it could be coincidence.

OBSERVATION: We have no hard evidence of any specific temperament Bach ever
used on any given day of his career.  We do have a record that, at least at
some point in his career, he could tune an entire harpsichord in fifteen
minutes.  This does not allow much time for scientific precision counting
beats.

HYPOTHESIS: Bach, being a practical musician, composed music that can sound
good when played by other people, not only by himself.  It should sound
good even if the player's temperament is different than the composer's.  A
practical composer should therefore stay mainly within the keys available
on other people's instruments, unless that composer is specifically out to
make a point (as in Fischer's "Ariadne musica" or Bach's WTC).  If a
composition turns up in a strange key, it is logical to assume that the
strange key is due to a pedagogical situation or perhaps a transposition
from a common key.

OBSERVATION: I have tried Buxtehude's f# praeludium in f#, f, g, and e
(playing through on harpsichord for the sound of the temperament).  My
opinion (agreeing with other commentators) is that it works best in e: the
lowest note is C, and requires only the A# and D# to be reasonable as
"wrong" enharmonics.  It does not work in f: there are too many accented Ab
major and Db major triads where the wolf G#-Eb and wide C#-F are
prominent.  G minor is also a plausible key for this piece, by temperament,
but it requires the pedals to have a high eb' available.  The manual parts
go up to c''' in that case.

OBSERVATION: There are already Bach "manualiter" toccatas in g and e.  And
(speaking broadly) within any given genre it is rare for Bach to repeat
himself, writing multiple pieces in the same key while other keys have not
been used.

HYPOTHESIS: The f# minor toccata works well in meantone-flavored
temperaments in either g or f (as I have noted over the past weeks).  And
it does not work well in f# in those temperaments.  It is reasonable to
assume that this *might* be a transposed piece, especially if such a simple
transposition solves more than one practical problem elegantly.

OBSERVATION: Errors of accidentals would be evidence in favor of a
transposition.  As I pointed out last week, bars 89-92 indeed have problems
that suggest a transposition.  So do bars 58, 64, and 99.

OBSERVATION: While making my own transposed edition (into f minor) this
week, working at a desk with white-out and copies, I made about half a
dozen transposition errors myself in the accidentals.  I then corrected
those at the first play-through test, but the point is that it's easy to
make such errors even when being careful.

AXIOM: The musical ear tolerates out-of-tune minor thirds (generally
anything between 6:5 and 7:6) more than it tolerates out-of-tune major
thirds.  Therefore the musical usability of any temperament for
tertian-harmony music is determined mostly by the quality of the major
thirds and the fifths.

OBSERVATION: In the f# toccata several sections end with chord spacings
where the major third is on top, the most exposed position...and they are
G# major and F# major.  Another section ends in C# major with a wide
spacing; the E# is very prominent in the middle.  These are all odd keys in
any known temperament before 1700, even Werckmeister III.

HYPOTHESIS: If we assume Bach was musical and wanted his music to sound
good, he "would not" have spaced these chords with such a prominently
raunchy sound so early in his career.  Of course, he could have done so for
the shock effect.  But if the entire piece is transposed down a half step
or up a half step, all those sectional cadences are in good meantone
keys.  If the piece is in f, those three cadences are in the best keys of
all (G, F, and C), giving a notable repose.

OBSERVATION: The "best keys" in well temperaments are C, G, and F: these
triads have their major thirds nearest to pure.  This is also true in
meantone temperaments where the naturals are generated by narrowed fifths,
and the accidentals are fudged (if anything is fudged).  I believe it is
safe to assume that most musicians c1705 expected the keys of C, G, and F
to sound the best regardless of the temperament (meantone, modified
meantone, or well).  The triads of D, A, and G are also of course good, but
less pure than C/G/F (unless the temperament is completely regular).

OPINION: There is something nicely dramatic about a piece that is in the
remotest plausible key (f minor) but which has its sectional cadences in
the purest-sounding keys.

OBSERVATION: Bar 129's downbeat is a dramatic spot in either f minor
(Bb-Db[C#]-Gb[F#]) or g minor (C-Eb-Ab[G#]).  As I noted above, these
Neapolitan sixths with wrong enharmonics are a special case, usable.  Bach
uses this same effect at several places in the g minor toccata
(915).  Always it comes as a surprise, and the music then relaxes as this
shock resolves into better-tuned intervals.  In the f# toccata (910) this
effect is backwards: the sudden Neapolitan is *in* tune (B-D-G) and
resolves to a chord that is out of tune (C#-E#-G#-B).

HYPOTHESIS: Either this piece was not originally in f#, or young Bach is
experimenting with a backwards universe where key relationships are
reversed.  Did he really intend resolutions and major cadences to be
higher-tension (more out of tune) than the surprising moments?

OBSERVATION: We know that Bach was already fooling around with the
expressive limits of f minor before 1707: the Capriccio in Bb (probably
modeled on the Kuhnau sonatas).  The sections are in Bb, g, f, and
Bb.  This piece works well in this same style of meantone-flavored
"ordinaire" temperaments we've been talking about: slightly lowered Eb and
slightly raised G#, to taste.

HYPOTHESIS: Young Bach did know what he was doing, using the
"out-of-tuneness" of the temperaments for drama.  He did not sling the keys
around haphazardly.  At least in this Bb capriccio: in-tune keys mean
comfort and happiness, g minor (used chromatically) means a warning of
foreign danger, and f minor (used chromatically) means intense sorrow, a
lament.  The f# toccata was probably similarly in f or g, with the
temperament aiding the drama instead of working against it.

QUESTIONS: As for writing a toccata in f#, "What was he
thinking?"  Obviously, nobody really knows.  Perhaps if he originally wrote
it in g he transposed it so there would not be two toccatas in g?  Or if he
originally wrote it in f he transposed it so it could be played on
instruments whose lowest note is C?  Or perhaps someone else initiated the
transposition, for one of those reasons or some other reason (such as "just
for fun"?).  Or perhaps he really did write it in f# just to see what would
happen.  A wild experiment.

OPINION: As a player, composer, improviser, and fifteen-minute-tuner
myself, when I play this piece in f minor it feels right.  In f# minor it
feels wrong; in g minor it is OK but feels like only a "maybe."  Obviously,
some of that opinion comes from the sum of facts, axioms, observations, and
hypotheses above; some of it also comes from intuition.  I cannot "prove"
that intuitive sense.  But I know when it speaks to me.  And I know that I
am not going *only* on feeling or hope: the feeling comes from seeing the
facts line up plausibly, not the other way around.

As I asked earlier: is there any place for intuition and feeling in
musicology?  Often it seems there is not, and that is (I feel) a sad state
of affairs.  Is not music an art more than a science?  An art of
interpretation and finding meaning?


p.s. Ibo, I'm especially enjoying your contributions to this discussion also.


Bradley Lehman, Dayton VA

home: http://i.am/bpl or  http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bpl
clavichord CD's: http://listen.to/bpl or http://www.mp3.com/bpl
trumpet and organ: http://www.mp3.com/hlduo

"Music must cause fire to flare up from the spirit - and not only sparks
from the clavier...." - Alfred Cortot

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995
October 1995
September 1995
August 1995
July 1995
June 1995
May 1995
April 1995
March 1995
February 1995
January 1995
December 1994
November 1994
October 1994
September 1994

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LIST.UIOWA.EDU

UI LISTSERV Documentation | Questions? Contact the ITS Help Desk - (319) 384.HELP (4357) - its-helpdesk@uiowa.edu