Sorry, but I didn't even know that Bach used a differantly tuned keyboard. Fascinating. Where can I fined more info on this? Why aren't these techniques used in modern music?

Also, I understand the theory behind all keys being equal. My ears just tell me that it is not true. I used to think that the chord G sounded differant than the chord A when playing in the key of D because of the key, but the G would sound the same in the key of C as the A in the key of D. In other words, I, ii, iii, IV V vi viidim sound the same in any key no matter which chords (or notes) happen to fall on that progression because of the key. But I don't think it is so. I think it is far more complicated than that, and I thought that I was not the only one to think so. But maybe I am. Interasting.

Because I am not (yet) into professional music, I don't know very many people who I can discuss this sort of thing with without going way over their heads. So I am glad I found you people to try and sort this sort of thing out with.

Wendy Carlos is a master at this stuff, applying different tunings at different times (even in the same composition).

Equal temperment notwithstanding, certain notes on every instrument will sound different. On piano, as you move up or down the keyboard notes will have one, two or three strings, the direction the strings stretch across the piano frame changes, sympathetic resonances are more or less pronounced in different sized pianos, etc.

On the clarinet, for instance, the chalumeau register is quite narrow so to have a melody transposed out of that range will result in a markedly different sound.

Chord voicings have effective ranges, as well. Certain note combinations will lose their power or color when moved, chords can become muddy and less distinguished when lowered. The more chromatic a voicing becomes the more pronounced this effect that registration and orchestration will have. What I mean by this is chromatic in a non-diatonic context, NOT "dissonant cluster of notes." The voicings I refer to would be more spread out.

Clark

@clarkcontrol said:

... certain notes on every instrument will sound different.

"Nicht immer, aber immer öfter"

(engl. "not always, but always more often")

.

@Another User said:

Where can I fined more info on this?

The "Book Smart" composer in me did not prolong the license who permitted me to give away information on this matters ---> please ask "Street Smart" composer Clark.

.

OK, well than, Clark, where can I find more information on this?

So, Angelo, it would appear from what you said that you believe that some techniques of the past should be left in the past. But aren't some of the greatest works those which combine the old with the new? I guess I have just never stumbled upon the onformation you are laying out to me, and the idea is intriguing to say the least.

So, to make sure I understand you. Bach would tune his keyboard so that it was not in half-step intervals. But (maybe) they were still all even intervals. Therefore when he got further away from the predetermined (pure) note, the dissonance increased, and therefore the tension? Is that the idea? Fascinating.

Why was this techniques discontinued? Did pianists become lazy and want an easy 'one size fits all' tuning for the piano (or whichever of the names the keyboard had at the time)? Or was it a thought through decision? It seems like usually technique does not become simpler over time, except for this case.

I'll have to spend some time thinking about this. Thanks you.

This is interasting:

http://www.larips.com/

@ColinThomson said:

Why was this techniques discontinued?

It's all about modulation possibilities and freedom of key. It is Bach who hated too pure tuning and very much welcomed Andreas Werckmeister with his well-tempered tuning approach, the predecessor of today's equal tempered system. Bach loved modulating and the more pure tunings didn't allow him that too freely.
On the other hand they really got strong criticised by the "pure tuners" who hated that well-tempered destroys the individual sonic characteristics of the keys (what again was the topic title?).

Colin Thomson - what grade are you on the piano?

Why? Are my questions too naive? Well, OK then. I am actually 17 years old, and there you have it. But I am trying to learn stuff as fast as possible [:)]

Please don't disregard everything I say just because of my age, though.

@ColinThomson said:

Why aren't these techniques used in modern music?

The “Well-Tempered Clavier" (German: Das wohltemperierte Clavier), was the first music composed using all 24 keys. Colin, notice, Bach composed this piano music for applying 24 keys on the piano, this would be all major and minor key, and all progressions and degrees thereof, this is what we call "diatonic system" today.

But a composer today uses a by far larger reservoir of keys, and modulates in progression who are not part of the diatonic system. I personally for example have not composed anything diatonic for orchestra since over twenty years.

Bach was composing in the diatonic system, there was nothing else at that time, it was not before 150 years later, that the first composers started to compose in other harmonic systems.

Also notice that Bach's piano cahier is piano music only. The whole subject of temperament applied to a full ensemble requires an even larger expertise.

.

OK. I guess I need to do more research on my music history.

Just so everyone knows, I do understand the obvious theory behind all keys being equal. I just thought that I had read different elsewhere, and heard differant. But probably what Clark said about the different number of strings and so on was what I was hearing.

Just trying to learn more.

@ColinThomson said:

Why? Are my questions too naive? Well, OK then. I am actually 17 years old, and there you have it. But I am trying to learn stuff as fast as possible [:)]

Please don't disregard everything I say just because of my age, though.

WHAT GRADE ARE YOU ON THE PIANO??????

Well, that is a good question. I take piano lessons from someone, but I am not doing anything like a college course. I have taken piano lessons for about 8 years. I have gone through the six Alfred books. I am working on one of Chopin's waltzes. Does that give you an idea? Sorry I didn't answer you correctly the first time, but I don't know what 'grade' I am in one the piano. So, why the question?

@ColinThomson said:

I have gone through the six Alfred books.

Which Alfred?

Alfred Bauberger as wanderer in Wagner's "Tristan and Isolde"?

http://www.lotz-verlag.de/Liste22/P1240%20Alfred%20Bauberger.JPG">


or this Alfred?




or that one, the absolute super size genius" Alfredo el Loco"?



.

It is called 'Alfred's Basic Piano Library'. It goes through books 1A, 1B, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. I have finnished six.

Sometimes I wish they wouldn't put in those condescending words like 'Basic'. "Wow, Colin finished basic piano".
I am much better at making things up than I am at sight reading sheet music. I have been made to read music, and I can do it fine, but what I love is coming up with something new. Something different. Often I will just come up with chord progression, and I can play with it for a long time. Like right now I have been playing with the very simple A, F#m, D, E (which I know is nothing new, but I still like it). I put all kinds of melodies to it, I change up the mood, I put some chromatic runs in it, and I love it. Now I understand that this is way too simple for most of you out there, but I am still learning. And I do much more complicated things, too.

@ColinThomson said:

... Now I understand that this is way too simple for most of you out there, but I am still learning

Not at all! I remember when I didn't knew that there is a difference between minor and major, or male and female. I can also recall that I found the minor/major thing out at about six, that was about 20 years earlier before I fully relized the other gender thing, I simply didn't had enough time, and interest for the those other thing before being circa 25

[:D]

Angelo, you're hilarious!

Colin, what Angelo said makes good sense. Also, developing your ear is so much more important (IMHO) than becoming a "slave to the page." Playing around with the "Every Breath You Take" or "Heart and Soul" progression is a great way to do this.

Realize, too, that simplicity is powerful and difficult to master. Mozart, for example, is hardly performed for piano competitions like the Van Cliburn here in Texas. The reason? It's too simple! Not to simple in the "there's not enough here" sense but in the "there's not enough here to hide behind!"

Contestants would much rather use Chopin or Beethoven or Liszt. More flashy, less exposed elegance. The economy of notes and their artistic power in Mozart's piano music is unequalled, but devilishly hard to play 'perfectly.'

Clark

I knew only one bloke who was capable playing pianoforte Mozart. Haven't seen him for 30 years, and his name was, give me a minute... he was Austrian, and a little loco, had a house at the lake, damn, don't even remember the name of the lake damit

.

Friedrich Gulda, that was the guy who knew to play Mozart on the pianoforte, never seen anybody alike

.

Okay Colin, and all the other celebrities, here it is, an intelligent text on what we discuss:


An Aspect Of Harmony In Music of Johann Sebastian Bach

by Frans Oort
International Symposium on Johann Sebastian Bach
University of Oxford, 17 and 18 December 2001

http://vsl.co.at/upload/users/57/An_aspect_of_harmony_in_music_of_Johann_Sebastian_Bach.pdf

Read it! It is reduced to one example about Bach's harmony and temperament. Just read it thru, ignore for the moment what you don't understand, there is certainly a lot you will understand right away. For example: "Did Bach use a “correct” tuning in a certain system (temperament), or did he just tried to find the one which was the best for the situation at hand?" Bach seemed simply to have this talent, to tune an instrument in a way who permittet him to be-bop thru all keys without sounding wrong. Bach was a guy living on his own musical level, I mean, just playing his music is one thing, but he composed that music.


If you have a digital piano where you can chose the temperament, simply dial Werckmester, or Kirnberger, for example over the root of D, and play some music who modulates thru all degrees in a diatonic fashion, just diatonic, nothing else. This is the best way to hear and learn what "Affekt" the tonalities produce. The tuning Bach used was not Werckmeister, nor Kirnberger or any other tuning we know of. And as said, it is not known what temperament Bach used and tuned his instruments by. It is only assumed that it was a temperament very similar to Werckmeister's temperament.


Kirnberger was possibly a pupil of Bach, and he wrote some scientific texts about diatonic and temperament, one is titled: “Die Kunst des reinen Satzes in der Musik” 1771. The history of the tuning and temperaments is long and complex. The equal temperament was already published at the time of Bach, but was never applied on a keyboard, and not on a ensemble. For a long time it was also assumed that "well tempepred" is the same as "equal tempered" which is not true.


Notice, when people sing, in choir music and without instrumental accompany, then we are confronted with a whole other phenomenon. Humans are like birds, when they hear an instruments, they adjust to the temperament of this instruments with ease and in no time, just like the male "Blackbird"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackbird
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:Turdus_merula_distribution.jpg

in my garden adjusts to the music they hear coming out of my window, you can make them sing Raga's if you like, or use them as royalty free melody generator. When there are no instruments, human sing most often, and completly natural in a pure tuning and temperament. That's Bach, and only he knew what he was doing… maybe not even he fully knew, but he simply did it!

.