>Ok, let me try this again.
I sympathize with Rebecca's schedule and I would agree that *re-tuning* the
harpsichord is absolutely out of the question.
BUT: I beg of Rebecca to accept that the harpsichord won't work as well at
440 (assuming she cares a teense more about those 415 gigs!). DON'T
complain to the builder that it feels funny or doesn't repeat beautifully
or that the dampers leak here and there. DON'T mess with the thing. Is
anybody gonna HEAR you in that Meffiah performance? Isn't there a halfway
decent church-owned Burton or something like that, built at 440, around for
you to borrow?
>Forgive me for boring you all with the above itinerary (but note especially
>the concert on Dec. 8 at 415 and rehearsal on Dec. 9 at 440); however, I think
>it illustrates rather vividly the problem that we 20th century harpsichordists
>face. Well, you might say, you simply have to do a lot of tuning and expect to
>break a few strings here and there. So what? If this is what you think, I
>suspect you have never been faced with the sour look (and possibly even verbal
>abuse) that an oboist might give you if your A is not what he or she expects!
>(And, of course, an instrument that is constantly tuned up and down really has
>a difficult time achieving any degree of stability.)