Francesco Gasparini's Twenty-One Keys: Do they reflect the use of meantone?

by Carl Sloane

Carl Sloane is a pharmacist by education, a freelance translator by vocation, and an amateur harpsichordist.

In his famous treatise on continuo playing,1 Francesco Gasparini gives a table of twenty-one keys which the student could expect to encounter. The absence of certain keys proves that the contents of the table are determined by the tuning which Gasparini used, and because of his standing, it would be of particular interest if the precise nature of this tuning could be established.

There are immediate indications that Gasparini had in mind some type of regular meantone (RMT)2 with the usual range of Eb to G# and the wolf between G# and Eb. These indications, supported by substantial evidence that meantone was common in Italy well into the eight-eenth century,3 include the complete absence of Ab and the apparent expectation that the table would be universally applicable. However, the matter cannot be automatically considered settled, since the the book was written at a time when meantone was being discarded in favor of temperaments with no wolf. Tempérament ordinaire, which eliminated the wolf by spreading it over several fifths, had been in use in France for some time when it was described by d'Alembert,4 and Werckmeister's tunings,5 which usually solved the problem by reducing the number of tempered fifths, had been published at least by 1691. In addition, there are apparent inconsistencies in the table itself.

The keys are illustrated in the form of figured scales which begin on the tonic, rise to the sixth degree, descend a ninth to the dominant, then leap back to the tonic. They are divided into two groups, those of "great usefulness" (gran giovamento):

G, g, a, A, Bb, b, C, c, d, D, Eb, e, E, F, f, f#, and those used in modulations:

bb, B, c#, eb, F#.

Major keys in group 1 thus run from Eb to E around the circle of fifths, minor keys from F to F#.

Tagliavini6 argues against RMT, pointing out that the absence of Db major is difficult to understand when the more highly inflected Gb major (enharmonic F#) is present. To his rhetorical suggestion that this paradox may be due to the presence of the wolf in the dominant chord of Db, he replies that C# minor should then logically be absent as well. He does not attempt to establish the criterion used to exclude keys from group 1.

The composition of group 1 does not initially seem compatible with the use of RMT: F minor, with its poor tonic chord, and E and Eb majors, with a poor chord on V and IV respectively, would not be expected in this group. On the other hand, there is plenty of contemporary evidence showing that poorly tuned intervals were used regularly in practice (Ref. 3, 156-8, 193), and on this basis, the makeup of group 1 can be logically explained.

In RMT, the most complex major keys in group 1, Eb and E, each have a single note outside the range Eb to G#; the most complex minor keys, F and F#, each have two such notes, at least one of which is on the sixth or seventh degree (see Fig. 1). Accordingly, the keys in group 1 may have been chosen on the understanding that major keys were allowed a maximum of one unavailable note and minor keys a maximum of two, the greater freedom in the minor keys being due to the variable inflection of VI and VII.

It is worth noting that even in group 2, Gasparini's key signatures never have more than three flats or four sharps, thus staying within the same limits as the major keys in group 1. (The section on modulation--(pp. 111-114)--gives key signatures which exceed these limits, but it also illustrates keys not included in the table, so that Gasparini has here presumably sacrificed some degree of rigor.) In addition, the order within each pair of parallel keys in group 1 is obviously determined by the complexity of the key signature, suggesting a certain preoccupation with key complexity and unavailable notes.

 Owing to the manner in which unavailable notes enter as one moves around the circle of fifths, exact location in the scale was probably of secondary importance in group-1 keys. But ultimately position must have become of critical importance. From Fig. 1 it is apparent that the most elementary keys not in the table would have an unavailable note on at least one of I, II or V. Although the presence of the wolf on either I or V (an unavailable note on one member of either of the pairs I/V or II/V) may have been the underlying reason for outright rejection, I think that a more likely working criterion was the spelling of I, II and V, and that the presence of F# major does not imply the inclusion of Gb, any more than the presence of C major implies the inclusion of B#. It seems likely, especially in view of the more lenient treatment of minor keys in group 1, that the presence of the wolf on the dominant of C# minor (or the wrong spelling for II) was considered acceptable. This hypothesis is admittedly not as credible as it would be if Gasparini had not figured V with a major third, because some softening of the effects of the wolf would be expected in certain positions of the chord G#-B-D#, especially of the first inversion, by the presence at the relevant pitch of a partial from the B-natural.7

To the extent that RMT is established, Gasparini's table shows that, contrary to most modern opinion, G# was not retuned to Ab for compositions in F minor.7 In addition, the table gives a valuable clue to the tuning used by Domenico Scarlatti. There is almost nothing in the Venice and Parma codices to suggest that Scarlatti retuned for F minor, in which he wrote extensively (in the Parma codex, it occurs more often than any other minor key), but there is some rather pretty evidence    that he retuned for Ab major and several of the keys in group 2.8 One is therefore strongly tempted to conclude that Scarlatti used the same tuning as Gasparini.

Notes

                        1.                 Francesco Gasparini, L'Armonico Pratico al Cimbalo (1708; reissue, New York: Broude Bros., 1967), 83-6.

                        2.                 "Regular" means only that the eleven good fifths are the same size.

                        3.                 Patrizio Barbieri, Acustica, Accordatura e Temperamento nell'Illuminismo Veneto (Rome: Torre d'Orfeo, 1987), 152-8.

                        4.                 Jean-Le Rond d'Alembert, Elemens de Musique Theorique et Pratique (1752; reissue, New York: Broude Bros., 1966), 48-9.

                        5.                 Andreas Werckmeister, Musicalische Temperatur (1691; reissue, Utrecht: Diapason Press, 1983), 78-9.

                        6.                 Luigi Ferdinando Tagliavini, "L'Armonico Pratico al Cimbalo. Lettura Critica," in  Francesco Gasparini (1661-1727)--Atti del primo convegno internazionale (Comune di Camaiore) (Florence: Olschki, 1981), 133-55, at 149-51.

                        7.                 C. Sloane, "A Further Note on Tempered Minor Chords," Journal of Sound and Vibration 170, 2 (1994): 261-2.

                        8.                  Carl Sloane, "The Case for Meantone in Scarlatti," Continuo, 16, 6 (1992): 1516.

Gavin Black

Gavin Black is director of the Princeton Early Keyboard Center in Princeton, New Jersey. He can be reached by e-mail at [email protected].

Intervals, tuning, and temperament, part 2
Last month I wrote about some of the fundamentals underlying the art of keyboard temperament: aspects of the nature of musical sound and of intervals, the overtone series, and the so-called circle of fifths. This month I want to discuss keyboard temperament itself, using last month’s column as a foundation. I will talk about why temperament is necessary, what the major approaches to temperament have been over the centuries, some of what the different systems of temperament set out to accomplish, and about how different temperaments relate to different historical eras. Next month I will also discuss the practicalities of tuning and a few miscellaneous matters related to tuning and temperament.
As I said last month, my main point is to help students become comfortable with tuning and temperament and to develop a real if basic understanding of them, regardless of whether they are planning to do any tuning themselves. Before describing some of the essential details of several tuning systems, I want to review how we discuss tuning and how our thinking about tuning is organized, so that the descriptions of different temperaments will be easy to grasp.
1) For purposes of talking about tuning, octaves are considered exactly equivalent. (This of course is no surprise, but it is worth mentioning.) The practical point of this is that if I say, for example, that “by tuning up by a fifth, six times in a row, I get from C to F#” I do not need to say that I also have to drop the resulting F# down by three octaves to get the simple tritone (rather than the augmented twenty-fifth); that is assumed. To put it another way, simple intervals, say the perfect fifth, and the corresponding compound intervals, say the twelfth or the nineteenth, are treated as being identical to one another.
2) Intervals fall into pairs that are inversions of one another: fifth/fourth; major third/minor sixth; minor third/major sixth; whole tone/minor seventh; semitone/major seventh. For purposes of tuning, the members of these pairs are interchangeable, if we keep direction in mind. For example, tuning up by a fifth is equivalent to tuning down by a fourth. If you are starting at C and want to tune G, it is possible either to tune the G above as a fifth or the G below as a fourth. It is always important to keep track of which of these you are doing or have just done, but they are essentially the same.
3) When, in tuning a keyboard instrument, we tune around the circle of fifths, we do not normally do this:

but rather something like this:

going up by fifths and down by fourths—sometimes up by fourths and down by fifths—in such a way as to tune the middle of the keyboard first, thus creating chords and scales that can be tested.
4) In tuning keyboard instruments we purposely make some intervals impure: that is, not perfectly (theoretically) in tune. When an interval is not pure it is either narrow or wide. An interval is wide when the ratio between the higher note and the lower note is greater than that ratio would be for the pure interval; it is narrow when the ratio is smaller. For example, the ratio between the notes of a pure perfect fifth is 3:2, that is, the frequency of the higher note is 1½ times the frequency of the lower note. In a narrow fifth, that ratio is smaller (perhaps 2.97:2), in a wide fifth it is larger (perhaps 3.05:2). Here’s the important point—one that students do not always realize until they have had it pointed out: making an interval wide does not necessarily mean making some note sharp, and making an interval narrow does not necessarily mean making some note flat. If you are changing the higher note in an interval, then raising that note will indeed make the interval wider and lowering it will make the interval narrower. However, if you are changing the lower note, then raising the note will make the interval narrower and lowering it will make the interval wider.
5) Tuning by fifths (or the equivalent fourths) is the theoretically complete way to conceive of a tuning or temperament system. This is because only fifths and fourths can actually generate all of the notes. That is, if you start from any note and tune around the circle of fifths in either direction, you will only return to your starting note after having passed through all of the other notes. If you start on any given note and go up or down by any other interval, you will get back to your starting note without having passed through all of the other notes.1 For example, if you start on c and tune up by major thirds you will return to c having only tuned e and g#/a♭. There is no way, starting on c and tuning by thirds, to tune the notes c#, d, d#, f, f#, g, a, b♭, or b. Tuning is sometimes done by thirds, but only as an adjunct to tuning by fifths and fourths. Any tuning system can be fully described by how it tunes all of the fifths.
6) As I mentioned last month, tuning two or more in a row of any interval spins off at least one other interval. For example, tuning two fifths in a row spins off a whole tone. (Starting at c and tuning c–g and then g–d spins off the interval c–d). Tuning four fifths in a row spins off a major third. (Starting at c and tuning c–g, g–d, d–a, a–e spins off the interval c–e). The tuning of the primary intervals—pure, wide, or narrow—utterly determines the tuning of the resulting (spun-off) interval. For example, tuning four pure perfect fifths in a row spins off a major third that is wider than the theoretically correct 5:4 ratio: very wide, as a matter of human listening experience. Tuning three pure fourths in a row (c–f, f–b♭, b♭–e♭, for example) spins off a minor third that is narrower than the theoretically correct 6:5.
So, what is temperament and why does it exist? Temperament is the making of choices about which intervals on the keyboard to tune pure and which to tune wide or narrow, and about how wide or narrow to make those latter intervals. Temperament exists, in the first instance, because of the essential problem of keyboard tuning that I mentioned last month: if you start at any given note and tune around the circle of fifths until you arrive back at the starting note, that starting note will be out of tune—sharp, as it happens—if you have tuned all of the fifths pure. The corollary of this is that in order to tune a keyboard instrument in such a way that the unisons and octave are in tune, it is absolutely necessary to tune one or more fifths narrow. This is a practical necessity, not an esthetic choice. However, decisions about how to address this necessity always involve esthetic choices.
There are practical solutions to this practical problem, and the simplest of them constitutes the most basic temperament. If you start at a note and tune eleven fifths, but do not attempt to tune the twelfth fifth (which would be the out-of-tune version of the starting note), then you have created a working keyboard tuning in which one fifth—the interval between the last note that you explicitly tuned and the starting note—is extremely out of tune. If you start with c and tune g, d, a, etc., until you have tuned f, then the interval between f and c (remember that you started with c and have not changed it) will be a very narrow fifth or very wide fourth. The problem with this very practical tuning is an esthetic, rather than a practical, problem: this fifth is so narrow that listeners will not accept it as a valid interval. Then, in turn, there is a practical solution to this esthetic problem: composers simply have to be willing to write music that avoids the use of that interval. This tuning, sometimes called Pythagorean, was certainly used in what we might call the very old days—late middle ages and early Renaissance. As an esthetic matter, it is marked by very wide thirds (called Pythagorean thirds) that are spun off by all of the pure fifths. These thirds, rather than the presence of one unusable fifth, probably are why this tuning fell out of favor early in the keyboard era.
The second-easiest way to address the central practical necessity of keyboard tuning is, probably, to divide the unavoidable out-of-tuneness of the fifths between two fifths, rather than piling it all onto one of them. For example, if in the example immediately above you tune the last interval, namely b♭–f, somewhat narrow rather than pure, then the resulting final interval of f–c will not be as narrow as it came out above. Perhaps it will be acceptable to listeners, perhaps not. Historical experience has suggested that it is right on the line.
In theory, what I just called the “unavoidable out-of-tuneness” (which is what theorists of tuning call the “Diatonic Comma” or “Pythagorean Comma”) can be divided between or among any number of fifths, from one to all twelve, with the remaining fifths being pure. The fewer fifths are made narrow—that is, “tempered”—the narrower each of them has to be; the more fifths are left pure (which is the same thing), the easier the tuning is, since tuning pure fifths is the single easiest component of the art of tuning by ear.2 The more fifths are tempered, the less far from pure each of them has to be; the fewer fifths are left pure, the more difficult the temperament is to carry out by ear.
Temperaments of this sort, that is, ones in which two or more fifths are made narrow and the remaining fifths are tuned pure, and all intervals and chords are usable, make up the category known as “well-tempered tuning.” There exist, in theory, an infinite number of different well-tempered tunings. There are 4083 different possible ways to configure the choice of which fifths to temper, but there are an infinite number of subtly different ways to distribute the amount of out-of-tuneness over any chosen fifths. From the late seventeenth century through the mid to late nineteenth century, the most common tunings were those in which somewhere between four and ten or eleven fifths were tempered, and the rest were left pure. In general, in the earlier part of those years temperaments tended to favor more pure fifths, and later they tended to favor more tempered fifths. The temperament in which all twelve fifths are tempered and the ratio to which they are all tempered is the same (2.9966:2) is known as equal temperament. It became increasingly common in the mid to late nineteenth century, and essentially universal for a while in the twentieth century. It was well known as a theoretical concept long before then, but little used, at least in part because it is extremely difficult to tune by ear.
In well-tempered tunings and in fact any tunings, the choices about which fifths to temper affect the nature of the intervals other than fifths. The most important such interval is the major third. The importance of the placement of tempered fifths has always come largely from the effect of that placement on the thirds. Historically, in the period during which well-tempered tuning was the norm, the fifths around C tended to be tempered so as to make the C–E major third close to pure, in any case almost always the purest major third within the particular tuning. This seems to reflect both a sense that pure major thirds are esthetically desirable or pleasing and a sense that the key of C should be the most pleasing key, or the most restful key, on the keyboard. In general, well-tempered tunings create a keyboard on which different intervals, chords, and harmonies belonging to the same overall class are not in fact exactly the same as one another. There might be, for example, major triads in which the third and the fifth are both pure, alongside major triads in which the fifth is pure but the third a little bit wide, or the fifth pure but the third very wide, or the fifth a little bit narrow and the third a little bit wide. It is quite likely that one of the points of well-tempered tuning was to cause any modulation or roaming from one harmonic place to another on the keyboard to effect an actual change in color—that is, in the real ratios of the harmonies—not just a change in the name of the chord or in its perceived distance from the original tonic.
In equal temperament, all intervals of a given class are in fact identical to one another, and each instance of a chord of a given type—major triad, minor triad, and so on—is identical to every other instance of that chord except for absolute pitch. Next month I will discuss ways in which the esthetic of each of these kinds of temperament fit in with other aspects of the musical culture of their times.
The other system of tuning that was prevalent for a significant part of the history of keyboard music—from at least the mid sixteenth century through the seventeenth century and, in some places well into the eighteenth—is known nowadays as meantone tuning. (This term was not used at the time, and is now applied to a large number of different tunings with similar characteristics.) In a meantone tuning, there are usually several major thirds that are unusably wide and one or more fifths that are also unusable. In fact, the presence of intervals that must be avoided by composers is greater than in Pythagorean tuning. However, this is in aid of being able to create a large number of pure or nearly pure major thirds. This was, perhaps, as a reaction to the earlier Pythagorean tuning with its extremely wide thirds, considered esthetically desirable during this period. The mathematics behind the tuning of thirds tells us that, if two adjacent thirds are both pure, say c–e and e–g#, then the remaining third that is nestled within that octave (see above), in this case a♭–c, will be so wide that no ears will accept it as a valid interval. Therefore only two out of every three major thirds can be pure—that is, eight out of the twelve—and, if they are tuned pure, the remaining major thirds will become unusable. This, of course, in turn means that composers must be willing to avoid those intervals in writing music. It is striking that composers were willing to do so with remarkable consistency for something like two hundred years.
The distribution of usable and unusable thirds in meantone is flexible. For example, while it is possible to tune c–e and e–g# both pure, as mentioned above, it is also possible to tune c–e and a♭–c pure, leaving e–g# to be unusable. In the late Renaissance and early Baroque keyboard repertoire, there are, therefore, pieces that use g# and piece that use a♭, but very few pieces that use both. There are pieces that use d# and pieces that use e♭, but very few pieces that use both. There are many pieces that use b♭ and a few that use a#, but almost none that use both. There are very few keyboard pieces from before the very late seventeenth century that do not observe these restrictions. This is powerful evidence that whatever was accomplished esthetically by observing them must have been considered very important indeed.

 

Gavin Black

Gavin Black is the director of the Princeton Early Keyboard Center www.pekc.org. He can be reached by e-mail at [email protected].

Intervals, tuning, and temperament, part 3
In the first two columns on tuning I did not refer at all to names of temperaments—neither the rather familiar terms such as “Werckmeister,” “Kirnberger,” or “Vallotti,” nor less familiar ones such as “Fogliano-Aron,” “Ramos,” or “Bendeler.” It can be interesting or useful for a student to learn something about these historical temperaments; however, there is a reason that I have avoided framing my discussion of temperament with these established tunings. It is much more useful for students to grasp the principles that underlie any keyboard tuning. It is then possible for the student to both understand any specific tuning system—historical or hypothetical—and to invent his or her own, and also to understand some of the practical and artistic implications of different tuning approaches.

Underlying tuning principles
1) It is impossible for all twelve perfect fifths on a normal keyboard instrument to be tuned absolutely pure. This arises out of the mathematics of the fundamental definition of intervals, and it is an objective fact. If you start at any note and tune twelve perfect fifths pure, then the note that you come back to—which is supposed to be the same as the starting note—will be significantly sharp compared to the starting note.
2) Therefore, at least one perfect fifth must be tuned narrow. Anywhere from one to all twelve perfect fifths can be tuned narrow, as long as the overall amount of narrowness is correct.
3) The need to narrow one or more fifths is an objective need, and doing so is the practical side of keyboard temperament. The choice of which fifths to narrow and (bearing in mind that the overall narrowness must add up to the right amount) how much to narrow them is subjective and is the esthetic side of keyboard temperament.
From these principles it is possible to understand, or indeed to re-invent, any of the historical temperaments, each of which is of necessity simply a way of approaching and solving the issues described above.

Major historical tunings
1) Pythagorean tuning. This is the simplest practical approach, in which eleven fifths in a row are tuned absolutely pure, and the remaining fifth is allowed to be extremely narrow: so narrow that human ears will not accept it as a fifth and it has to be avoided in playing.
2) Well-tempered tuning. In this approach, the narrowness of fifths is spread out over enough fifths that the narrowed fifths sound acceptable to our ears. Practical experience suggests that this means over at least three fifths. The fifths that are not narrowed are left pure. All intervals and thus all chords and all keys are usable.
3) Meantone tuning. Here the tuning of fifths is configured in such a way as to generate pure or relatively pure major thirds. When this kind of tuning was in very widespread use (primarily the 16th and 17th centuries), this was a widely and strongly held esthetic preference. In order to generate a large number of pure major thirds, it is necessary to tune a large number of unusable intervals, both thirds and fifths—actually more than in Pythagorean tuning.
4) Equal temperament. In this temperament, each of the twelve perfect fifths is narrowed by exactly the same amount. In this tuning, alone among all possible keyboard tunings, each specific instance of each type of interval—perfect fifth, major third, and so on—is identical to all other instances of that interval.

Tuning intervals
When two close pitches are sounding at the same time we hear, alongside those notes, a beating or undulating sound that is the difference between the two pitches that are sounding. If a note at 440hz and a note at 442hz are played at the same time, we hear a beating at the speed of twice per second. If the two notes were 263hz and 267hz the beating would be at four times per second. This kind of beating sounds more or less like a (quiet) siren or alarm. It is so much a part of the background of what we hear when we listen to music that most people initially have trouble distinguishing it or hearing it explicitly. Normally once someone first hears beats of this kind, it is then easy to be able to hear them and distinguish them.
These beats are a real acoustic phenomenon. They are not psychological, or part of the physiology of hearing: they are present in the air. If you set up a recording in which one stereo channel is playing one pitch and the other is playing a close but different pitch, then if you play those two channels through speakers into the air, they will produce beats that can be heard. However, if you play them through headphones, so that the two notes never interact with one another in the air but each go directly to a separate ear of the listener, then no beats will be created and the listener will hear the two different pitches without beats.
Notes that are being produced by pipes or strings have overtones. When two such notes are played together, the pitches that mingle in the air include the fundamental and the overtones. Any of those component sounds that are very close to one another will produce beats if they are not in fact identical. It is by listening to these beats and comparing them to a template or plan (either no beats or beats of some particular speed) that we carry out the act of tuning.
For example, if we are tuning a note that is a fifth away from an already-tuned note, then the first upper partial of the higher note is meant to be the same pitch as the second upper partial of the lower note. (For a discussion of overtones see this column from July 2009.) If these overtones are in fact identical, then they will not produce any beats; if they are not quite identical they will produce beats. If the goal is to produce a pure perfect fifth, then beats should be absent. If the goal is to produce a narrow perfect fifth, then beats should be present—faster the narrower a fifth we want. In tuning a major third, the same principle applies, except that it is the third upper partial of the higher note and the fourth upper partial of the lower note that coincide.
Listening for beats produced by coinciding overtones is the essential technique for tuning any keyboard instrument by ear. Any tuning can be fully described by a list of beat speeds for each interval to be tuned. For example, in Pythagorean tuning the beat speed for each of the eleven fifths that are tuned explicitly is zero. (The twelfth fifth arises automatically.) Any well-tempered tuning can be described as a combination of fifths that have beat speeds of zero and fifths that have various moderate beat speeds. In equal temperament, all the fifths have beat speeds greater than zero, and they all reflect the same ratio, with higher notes having proportionately higher beat speeds. In most meantone systems, major thirds have no beats or very slow beat speeds, while those fifths that are tuned directly have beat speeds that are similar to those of well-tempered fifths.
These beats have a crucial effect on the esthetic impact of different tuning systems. For example, in Pythagorean tuning, while all of the perfect fifths are pure (beatless), all of the major thirds are very wide and beat quite fast. This gives those thirds, and any triads, a noisy and restless feeling. A triad with pure fifths and pure thirds—a beatless triad—is a very different phenomenon for a listener, even though it looks exactly the same in music notation. Other sorts of triads are different still: those with a pure major third and a narrow fifth, for example, or with all of the component intervals departing slightly from pure.

Temperaments throughout history
General tendencies in the beat structure of different temperaments may explain some things about the history of those temperaments, why they were used at different times, or at least how they correlate with other things that were going on musically at the time when they were current.

Pythagorean tuning
For example, Pythagorean tuning was in common use in the late Middle Ages. This was a time when the perfect fifth was still considered a much more consonant or stable interval than the major or minor third. Thus it made sense to use a tuning in which fifths were pure and thirds were wide enough—buzzy enough—to be almost inherently dissonant.
(But it is interesting to speculate about the direction of causality: did Pythagorean organ tuning suggest the avoidance of thirds as consonant intervals, or did a theory-based avoidance of those intervals suggest that a tuning with very wide thirds was acceptable?)

Meantone tuning
The rise of meantone tuning in the late fifteenth century corresponded with the rise of music in which the major third played an increasingly large role as a consonant interval and as a defining interval of both modal and tonal harmony. A major triad with a Pythagorean third does not quite sound like a resting place or point of arrival, but a major triad with a pure third does. During this same period, the harpsichord and virginal also arose, supplementing the clavichord and the organ. These new instruments had a brighter sound with a more explosive attack than earlier instruments. This kind of sound tends to make wide thirds sound very prominent. This may have been a further impetus to the development of new tuning systems in those years.
Meantone tuning, since it includes many unusable intervals, places serious restrictions on composers and players. Modulation within a piece is limited. In general, a given piece can only use one of the two notes represented by a raised (black) key, and must rigorously avoid the other. Many transpositions create impossible tuning problems. Many keys must, as a practical matter, be avoided altogether in order to avoid tremendous amounts of re-tuning.
Some keyboard instruments built during the meantone era had split sharps for certain notes, that is, two separate keys in, for example, the space between d and e, sharing that space front and back, one of them playing the d#, the other playing the e♭. Composers do not seem to have relied on it more than once in a while to write pieces in which they went beyond the harmonic bounds natural to meantone tuning. These split keys were probably intended to reduce or eliminate the need to re-tune between pieces, rather than to expand the harmonic language of the repertoire.
Meantone was no easier to tune than what came before it, or than other tuning systems that were known theoretically at the time but little used, since by limiting transposition it placed significant harmonic limitations on composers and improvisers, and thus made accompaniment more difficult. Yet it remained in use for a very long time. It seems certain that whatever it was accomplishing esthetically must have seemed very important, even crucial. Many listeners even now feel that the sonority of a harpsichord is most beautiful in meantone.

Well temperaments
In the late seventeenth century, composers and theorists began to suggest new temperaments that overcame the harmonic restrictions of meantone. These were the well-tempered tunings, in which every fifth and every third is usable as an harmonic interval. In order to achieve this flexibility, these tunings do away with most or, in some cases, all of the pure major thirds. This change can be seen as a shift from an instrument-centered esthetic—in which the beauty of the sound of the pure thirds was considered more important than perhaps anything else—to a composer-centered esthetic and philosophy, in which limitations on theoretical compositional possibilities were considered less and less acceptable. There were strong defenders of the older tunings well into the eighteenth century. It is interesting that in one well-known dispute about the merits of meantone as opposed to well-tempered tuning, the advocate of the former was an instrument builder (Gottfried Silbermann) and the advocate of the latter was a composer (J. S. Bach).
The crucial esthetic characteristic of well-tempered tunings is that different keys have different harmonic structures. That is, the placement of relatively pure and relatively impure intervals and triads with respect to the functional harmonies of the key (tonic, dominant, etc.) is different from one key to another. (An interesting experiment about this is possible in modern times. If a piece is recorded on a well-tempered instrument in two rather different keys, say C major and then E major, and the recordings are adjusted by computer so as to be at the same pitch level as one another, then they will still sound different and be easily distinguishable from each other.) Their differences are almost certainly the source of ideas about the different inherent characters of different keys. Lists of the supposed emotional or affective characteristics of different keys arose in the very late seventeenth century, at about the same time that well-tempered tuning took hold.

Equal temperament
In equal temperament, which became common in the mid- to late-nineteenth century, every interval with a given name and every triad or other chord of a particular type is the same as every other interval, triad, or chord of that type. Part of the appeal of this tuning in the nineteenth century was, probably, its theoretical consistency and symmetry. Many people have found the concept of equal temperament intellectually satisfying: it does not have what might be thought of as arbitrary differences between things that, theoretically at least, ought to be the same. Equal temperament took hold in the same era of organ history that included logarithmic pipe scalings—another theoretically satisfying, mathematically inspired idea. During this same time, designers of wind instruments were working to make those instruments sound the same—or as close as humanly possible—up and down the compass. This is another manifestation of a taste for avoiding seemingly arbitrary or random difference.
On an equal-tempered keyboard, the computer experiment described above would result in two indistinguishable performances: it is not possible to tell keys apart except by absolute pitch. The rise and dissemination of equal temperament also coincided with a general worldwide increase in travel. In a world in which equal temperament and a particular pitch standard (say a′=440hz) will be found anywhere and everywhere, a flutist, for example, can travel from Europe to America or Japan or anywhere and expect to be able to play with local musicians.
It is also likely that the general acceptance of equal temperament helped lead to twelve-tone and other atonal music by promoting the idea (and the actual listening experience) that all keys and all twelve semitones were the same.
In equal temperament, no interval is pure, and no interval is more than a little bit out of tune. This is a tuning that, just as a matter of taste or habit, appeals strongly to some people and does not appeal to others. I have known musicians with no training (or for that matter interest) in historical temperaments who could not stand to listen to equal temperament because they found equal-tempered thirds grating; I have known others who can accept the intervals of equal temperament as normal but who cannot tolerate the occasional more out of tune intervals of well-tempered tuning.
At the Princeton Early Keyboard Center website there are links to several resources describing and comparing historical temperaments and discussing further some of what I have written about here.

 

Taylor & Boody Organbuilders, Staunton, Virginia

Goshen College, Goshen, Indiana

About the organ.

Designing an organ for Rieth Hall at Goshen College was a
pleasure. The opportunity to place the organ in the traditional location, high
in the rear gallery, was ideal both visually and aurally. The form and
proportions of the hall, with its austere yet warm and inviting interior,
called the organbuilder to respond with similar clarity and restraint. The
ample height of the room suggested a plain, vertical configuration of the
instrument, on which natural light from the clerestory windows would fall
gently. Everything about the hall spoke of its solid construction and honesty
of materials, qualities that we strive to reflect in our organs. Likewise the
acoustical properties of the hall, so warm and reverberant and at the same time
intimate and clear, allowed the organ’s tone to develop freely without
being forced. The result is an endearing musical instrument that is
aesthetically inseparable from the space in which it stands.

Initial inspiration for the Goshen case came from the organ
built by David Tannenberg in 1774 for Trinity Lutheran Church in Lancaster,
Pennsylvania. While only the case and façade pipes of that lovely
instrument have survived, they constitute the finest example we have in our
country of south German case architecture from the 18th century.
Tannenberg’s use of the double impost, with its Oberwerk division
gracefully placed as a reflection of the Hauptwerk below, was typical of organs
in his native Saxony and Thuringia. Other exterior influences from that time
and place include the two swags that bracket the center tower, and the broad
lower case that supports the full width of the impost and omits the spandrels
common to earlier styles. Apart from its simple springboard moldings, the
Goshen case is relatively flat and plain by comparison with its historical
counterparts. Its only bold three-dimensional element is the polygonal center
tower. The small pointed towers in Tannenberg’s design are here merely
implied by the V-shaped arrangement of foot lengths in the tenor fields. The
use of six auxiliary panels to raise the smaller pipe feet above the impost
moldings adds interest to the design. The considerable height of the lower case
was determined by the need for a passageway over the 2-foot concrete riser
behind the organ. This height gave space between the console and impost for the
eventual inclusion of a small Brustwerk with several stops for continuo
accompaniment. Cabinets for music storage are built into the back on both sides
of the lower case.

Another aspect of the design reminiscent of 18th-century
south German traditions is the position of the windchests in relation to the
action. The two windchests of the Hauptwerk are spaced apart from the center of
the case by the width of the keyboards. This leaves room for trackers of the
Oberwerk to reach their rollerboard without blocking access to the Hauptwerk
action and its pallets. It also provides optimum space for 8’ bass pipes
at the sides and leaves room for tuning the tenor pipes of the Hauptwerk with
only minimal obstruction by the Oberwerk rollerboard. The windchests for the
Pedal are located behind the case at the level of the impost, a placement that
Tannenberg could also have used.

Both the playing action and stop action are mechanical. The
manual keys are hinged at the tail and suspended from their trackers. There are
no thumper rails to hold the keys down, so they are free to overshoot slightly
when released, as is the case in traditional suspended actions. Trackers,
squares and rollers are all made of wood. There is no felt in the action. Keys
are guided by pins at the sides. Together these details combine to give a
feeling of buoyancy and liveliness reminiscent of antique instruments. The aim
is not so much to provide a light action as to arrive at one having the mass
and friction appropriate to the size and character of the organ. Such an action
may need occasional minor adjustment of key levels with changes in humidity,
but this is a small price to pay for the advantages gained over more sterile
modern alternatives. 

Wind is supplied by two single-fold wedge bellows (3’ x
6’) fed by a blower located in a small room below the organ. Natural
fluctuations of the wind pressure in response to the playing contribute to the
lively, singing quality of the organ’s sound. A wind stabilizer can be
engaged when unusually heavy demands on the wind system call for damping of
these fluctuations. The organ’s single tremulant is made in the old-fashioned
beater form. On seeing a tremulant puffing away in one of our organs, a
Japanese friend remarked that the organ was laughing! It is useful to think of
an organ’s wind as its breath and the bellows as lungs, for the
instrument’s appeal is closely tied to our perception of its lifelike
qualities. 

The tonal character of an organ is rarely revealed by its
stoplist. This is particularly true in an instrument of only twenty-four stops.
Once the builder accepts the constraints of a given style and the essential
registers have been chosen, there is usually little room or money left to
include stops that would make a modest design appear unique on paper.
Fortunately for the art, the musicality of the organ is not bound by its
stoplist; rather, it is determined by a host of other complex factors. These
can be partially defined in the technical data of pipe scaling and
construction, general design parameters, materials and the like, but in reality
much more rests on the elusive criteria of experience, skill and taste of the
builder. Taken together this means that each new organ, albeit small, presents
fresh opportunities for artistic expression. It is important that all the pipes
speak promptly, be they reeds or flues, except in the case of strings, which
gain charm from their halting speech. It is less important that the pipes
produce precisely the same vowel sounds from note to note, for here variety
adds refreshing character and interest to the organ.

At Goshen we chose to voice the 8’ Principal to be
somewhat brighter and richer in overtones than has been our wont. This was
achieved by giving the pipes lower cutups than was customary in German and
Dutch organs of the 17th century and before. The five distinctly different
8’ flue stops on the manuals deserve special mention. Although all
followed scaling patterns we have used frequently in the past, when voiced they
proved to be unusually satisfying, particularly in combination with each other.
Whenever the 16’ Bordun is used with them a magical new dimension is added
to the sound. If, for example, one draws the Bordun with the Viol da Gamba, the
effect is that of a quiet 16’ Principal. Used with the Spillpfeife the
Bordun reverts to its role as a flute. In an organ of this size it is crucial
that every stop work as well as possible with every other. Following south
German practice, both 8’ and 4’ flutes on the Hauptwerk are made in
the same form. This duplication of flutes within the same family was not the
custom in the north, where lower pitched flutes were usually stopped and those
above them progressively more open. The Oberwerk configuration at Goshen with
its two stopped 8’ registers and partially open 4’ Rohrflöte is
typical of the northern tradition. We look forward to the day that the 16’
Violonbass with its cello-like speech can be added to the Pedal.
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> 

The distinctive musical effect of the Goshen organ is
strongly colored by the use of the recently released Bach-Lehman temperament
described in the accompanying article. Because the completion of the organ in
February coincided with the publication in Early Music of Bradley
Lehman’s treatise on J. S. Bach’s temperament, we chose to tune the
organ according to his plan. Here was the ideal opportunity to try the
temperament on an organ built in Germanic style and at the same time to honor
Dr. Lehman as a distinguished Goshen alumnus for his work in this field. The
experiment has been a fascinating one. It has provided a place to hear
Bach’s organ music as we have not heard it before. We are honored to have
played a part in translating the dry mathematical numbers of this temperament
into the vibrant sound of the organ. 

With few exceptions the many parts of the organ were
constructed from raw materials in our Virginia workshop. Through the skills of
each craftsman the design moved from an idea to paper and then through raw wood
and metal into a large and impressive object. Note by note the tonal picture
has been filled in by voicing and tuning until in the end we experience a new
instrument with an identity all its own. We hope that it will give pleasure to
those who play and hear it far into the future.

--George Taylor

The organ project at Goshen College

“Dienlich, Ordentlich, Schicklich, Dauerlich”

In 1999 we were asked by the organ consultant for Goshen
College, Roseann Penner Kaufman, to make a proposal for the new Goshen College
Music Center. As with any new project, I went to Goshen full of excitement at
the promise of participating in what was to be a spectacular project. My
enthusiasm was short-lived when I saw the design for the recital hall. It was a
standard fan-shaped, sloped-floor, small college recital hall, with theatre
seats and carpet in the aisles. The space for the organ was planned in a niche
at the back of the stage. The design would have been fine for small chamber
recitals, but it was not a proper home for an organ. The prospects for the
organ looked bleak. We would not have felt productive or inspired. We always
say that the room is more than half the organ. I took a deep breath and told
the Goshen committee what I thought of the plan. The committee listened and
asked us to offer suggestions on how the recital hall might be designed to work
best with the musical programs envisioned for this space.

I returned to Staunton eager to develop a plan. One of the
first things I did was to research the Mennonite Quarterly Review for articles
describing historical Anabaptist worship spaces. I hoped that the essence of
these rooms would lead me to an aesthetic that would tie the new hall to the
old tradition, which would, in turn, also be good for music, especially the
organ. My research acquainted me with four German words used to express the
qualities of the historical spaces: dienlich, ordentlich, schicklich and
dauerlich--serviceable, orderly, fitting and lasting. I also found prints
of the interiors of some of these churches. Rectangular in shape with open
truss timber roof framing, clear glass windows, galleries on several sides,
rough stone floors, moveable chairs, unadorned, honest and powerful, these
spaces had all the qualities that I was looking for. They also had enduring
musical-acoustical qualities and so many are used today for concerts.

The simple sketch that I made went first to the Goshen organ
committee who, led by Doyle Preheim and Chris Thogersen, embraced the plan.
Then the concept went to Rick Talaske and his team of acousticians. They
transformed the plan into practical geometry and surface treatments to make the
space an acoustical success. Mathes Brierre Architects took the acoustical plan
and translated it into a visual design that evokes the warehouse or
brewery-turned-church concept of the early Dutch Mennonite spaces. Schmidt
Associates worked through the technical details with Casteel Construction to
conceive the simple pre-cast concrete panels and graceful curved steel arches
that make the hall appealing in its architecture, superior in acoustical
performance and straightforward and durable in construction. There was creative
and sensitive work done by a Goshen group concerned with decor and furnishings.
The result is successful beyond our expectations. The collaboration of all the
partners made the project exceed the ability of any one of us.

Once the hall was underway, we scheduled a meeting at St.
Thomas Fifth Avenue in New York with a group from Goshen and Calvin and Janet
High from Lancaster, Pennsylvania. We had a great day in New York showing
everyone our organ in the gallery of St. Thomas. The Highs’ enthusiasm
for the St. Thomas organ and the Goshen Music Center paved the way for their
generous gift that underwrote the cost of the organ.

We realized that the floor area of Rieth Hall was small in
relation to the height. We saw that if there could be the addition of one more
bay to the length there would be significant improvement in the proportions of
the space and at least 50 more seats could be added. Again, the Goshen design
group supported our suggestion. At a time in the project when the building
committee was attempting to control costs and squeeze performance out of every
dime, they found the funds for this most important late addition.
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> 

I predicted at the time we were creating the designs for
Rieth Hall, that the unique qualities of this space would have something to say
to the Goshen students about music and worship. This prediction has been
realized. First, there is genuine enthusiasm for a cappella singing in Rieth
Hall, encouraging this wonderful Mennonite tradition. Second, there has been a
spontaneous seizing of the space by the students for their own student-directed
Sunday worship. In this age of searching for the right path in worship and
liturgy, of debating the influence and appropriateness of mass media and
popular music for worship, we have built something at Goshen College that
reaches across the span of time to those Mennonite roots. Led by the seemingly
old-fashioned qualities of dienlich, ordentlich, schicklich and dauerlich, we
have made a  music space and organ
that inspire and excite us to make music and to celebrate and serve our God and
Creator.

Wood and the Goshen organ

The traditional pipe organ is a wooden machine. Early on in
our careers as organ builders we realized that getting control over our
materials in both an aesthetic and technical sense was essential to our success
as organ makers. Our first path was to make friends with our neighborhood
sawmillers. One of these was an octogenarian whose experience reached back to
horse logging and steam power. He taught us the value of long, slow, air-drying
of lumber. He also knew the old traditions of sawing, how to take the tension
out of a log, how to saw through the middle of the log and keep the boards in
order so that the cabinetmaker could match the grain. He remembered the methods
of quarter sawing that impart the most dimensional stability to the boards and
in oak bring out the beautiful fleck of the medullary rays. We have built our
own sawmill based on a portable band saw. For quarter sawing, we have built a
double-ended chain saw that can split logs up to 60 inches in diameter. The
half logs (or quarters in extremely large timber) are then aligned on our band
saw and sawn in a radial fashion into boards. This lumber is then air-dried for
a number of years. At the end, we put the wood in our dry kiln and gently warm
it up to stabilize the moisture content at 8% to 10%.

Oak is the traditional wood of Northern European organ
building so it was natural for us to choose white oak for the Goshen organ. We
have long admired the Dutch and German organs dating back to the 16th century.
The earliest organs show only the natural patina of age and no finish; the
concept of finishing wood as in varnishing or oiling came well into the 18th
century. We followed this earlier practice for the Goshen organ. The oak has
been hand-planed to a smooth polish, much smoother than can ordinarily be
produced with sanding. The hand-planed wood will resist dirt. We feel there are
also musical benefits from using wood in its natural state. The case and
carvings together with all the interior parts transmit sound energy and reflect
and focus the sound of the pipes. Also, the open pores and surface
imperfections of the natural wood have an effect on the sound reflection.

Another aspect of wood use in historic organs is how
efficiently the old builders utilized their wood. Before the age of machinery,
cutting, transporting and converting timber to sawn, dried lumber ready for use
was costly. The best wood was always used for the keyboards, playing action,
wind chests and pipes. The next selection went to the most visible parts of the
case, especially the front of the organ. The rest was used for carvings, heavy
structural members, walkways, bellows framework and back panels. Some of this
wood shows knots, cracks and other defects that might offend our modern sense
of perfection. However, in addition to demonstrating good wood utilization, the
varying density and differences in surface texture of these so-called defects
may indeed benefit the music. How we perceive the sound of an organ is a very
complex and subtle equation. This is one of the wonderful aspects of the real
pipe organ that differentiates it from the sterile sound of the electronic
substitute. We feel it is good stewardship to apply the hierarchy of selection
as practiced by the old masters. We try to use all the wood, through careful
selection, with thoughtful conservation of a vanishing resource.

--John Boody

Acoustic design of Rieth Recital Hall at Goshen College

In 1998, the design team of design architect Mathes Group
(now Mathes Brierre Architects), architect of record Schmidt Associates and
acoustician The Talaske Group (now Talaske) began preliminary work on a new
music education and performance building for Goshen College’s campus.
This project was the College’s greatest building investment to date and
they were determined to do things right . . . with a very modest budget. The
Recital Hall (now Rieth Recital Hall) was slated to house a new tracker organ
of exceptional quality. As acousticians, we offered some general planning
recommendations--not the least of which was a 50-foot ceiling
height--and recommended that the organ builder be hired as soon as
possible.

Enter John Boody of Taylor & Boody, organ builders from
Virginia. John energized the subsequent meetings with some profound advice that
proved to set the final direction for the space. He moved our thinking from a
“fixed” seating configuration to a flexible arrangement based on a
flat floor where seats can face either end of the room. This unique concept
facilitated the accommodation of a conventional “recital hall” or
assembly arrangement with musicians or presenters on a small stage. The cleverness
of the concept is the seats can be turned to face the opposite direction in the
room, offering a classic organ recital arrangement. Furthermore, John
recommended that the proportions of the room would be better served if
lengthened by adding another bay of structure. These fundamental planning ideas
changed the direction of the design in perpetuity.

We embraced these new directions yes">  and identified the many other room acoustics design features
that would support the client’s needs. The 50-foot ceiling height remained,
and we worked with the architects and construction manager to render the room
as a sound-reflective concrete enclosure, embellished with wood. The goal was
to maintain the warmth of sound created by the organ. Within the “theatre
planning” process, we guided and exploited naturally occurring
opportunities for introducing sound diffusing shaping to reflect low- and
mid-pitched sound in all directions--by introducing one side balcony and a
rear balcony, recesses from circulation paths and recesses created by
deeply-set windows. We recommended deliberate articulation of the walls to
diffuse mid- and high-pitched sound. Wood surfaces were detailed to minimize
absorption of low-pitched sound. Retractable velour curtains and banners were
recommended in abundance and specified by Bob Davis, theatre consultant.
Architecturally, curtain and banner pockets were created so the sound-absorbing
materials could be retracted completely on demand. These features make possible
a broad “swing” of the sound of the room from very reverberant for
choral and organ performance to articulate for assembly events or amplified
music performance. Fundamental to the acoustic design was the need for silence.
This was accomplished by structural discontinuities in the building (acoustic
isolation joints) and the proper placement and design of heating and air
conditioning systems.

Within their mission statement, Goshen College states:
“Musical expression is a human manifestation of the divine impulse and,
as such, serves as a window into the individual soul, a bridge between human
beings and a means of corporate religious experience.” In light of the
students adopting the Rieth Recital Hall for their weekly convocations and the
many other uses, we are pleased to say the happy story continues!

--Rick Talaske

Bach temperament

This organ is the first since the 18th century to use Johann
Sebastian Bach’s tuning, as notated by him in 1722 on the title page of
the Well-Tempered Clavier. This tuning method is a 2004 discovery by Bradley
Lehman. The article about this discovery is published in the February and May
2005 issues of Early Music (Oxford University Press), and further details are
at <www.larips.com&gt;.

The layout, dividing the Pythagorean comma, is:

F-C-G-D-A-E = 1/6 comma narrow 5ths;

E-B-F#-C# = pure 5ths;

C#-G#-D#-A# = 1/12 comma narrow 5ths;

A#-F = a residual wide 1/12 comma 5th.

In this tuning, every major scale and minor scale sounds
different from every other, due to the subtle differences of size among the
tones and semitones. This allows music to project a different mood or character
in each melodic and harmonic context, with a pleasing range of expressive
variety as it goes along. It builds drama into musical modulations.
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> 

The result sounds almost like equal temperament, and it similarly
allows all keys to be used without problem, but it has much more personality
and color. In scales and triads it sounds plain and gentle around C major (most
like regular 1/6 comma temperament), mellower and warmer in the flat keys such
as A-flat major (most like equal temperament), and especially bright and
exciting in the sharp keys around E major (like Pythagorean tuning, with pure
fifths). Everything is smoothly blended from these three competing systems,
emerging with an emphasis on melodic suavity.

The following chart shows the relative size of each major
third, resulting from each series of the intervening four fifths. This system
of analysis is from the 1770s, published in the theoretical work of G. A. Sorge
who was a former colleague of Bach’s. The intervals having higher numbers
sound spicier, more restless. In this measurement, a value of 11 would indicate
a major third that is one syntonic comma too sharp (a “Pythagorean major
third,” having been generated by four pure fifths).
style="mso-spacerun: yes">  A pure major third would be represented
here as 0.

Bb-D    6
style='mso-tab-count:1'>             D-F#
    7
style='mso-tab-count:1'>             F#-A#
8

Eb-G    7
style='mso-tab-count:1'>             G-B
      5
style='mso-tab-count:1'>             B-D#
   9

Ab-C    8
style='mso-tab-count:1'>             C-E
       3
style='mso-tab-count:1'>             E-G#
   10

Db-F     9
             F-A
       3
style='mso-tab-count:1'>             A-C#
   9

Equal temperament, as opposed to the variety shown here, has
a constant size of 7 in all twelve of the major thirds.

In functional harmony, the Bach tuning sets up especially
interesting contrasts within minor-key music. The key of A minor has the
plainest tonic juxtaposed with the most restless dominant. F minor, a major
third away, has the opposite relationship: troubled tonic, calm dominant. And
C# minor has the average character between these behaviors, where the tonic and
dominant are both moderately energetic. 

In major-key music, the tonics and dominants have characters
similar to one another. The sizes of major thirds change by only 1, 2, or 3
units from each key to its neighbors, moving by the circle of fifths (through
typical subdominant/tonic/dominant progressions). Any change of Affekt is
therefore gradual and subtle, as if we never really leave the home key
altogether but it feels a little more or less tense as we go along.

In any music that modulates more quickly by bypassing such a
normal circle-of-fifths cycle, the contrasts are momentarily startling. That
is, the music’s dramatic harmonic gestures become immediately noticeable,
where the major thirds have changed size suddenly from one harmony to the next.
This comes up for example in the Fantasia in G Minor (BWV 542), Gelobet seist
du, Jesu Christ (BWV 722), and the fourth Duetto (BWV 805), and especially in
music by the Bach sons.

This system turns out to be an excellent tuning solution to
play all music, both before and after Bach’s. It is moderate enough for
complete enharmonic freedom, but also unequal enough to sound directional and
exciting in the tensions and resolutions of tonal music.

A recording will be ready for release this summer, including
music by Bach, Fischer, Brahms, et al.

--Bradley Lehman

A brief history of the organ in the Mennonite Church

Some people might find it unusual to find such a remarkable
organ in a Mennonite college. Aren’t the Mennonites those folks with the
buggies and suspenders? It is true that some Mennonite congregations still take
literally founder Menno Simons’ caution against the organ as a
“worldly” invention, but most, especially in the last fifty years,
have embraced it as a vital contributor to the musical and worship life of the
community. 

The Mennonite Church has its beginnings in the 16th-century
Protestant Reformation. Because of persecution, most of the early worship
services were held secretly, in homes or out-of-the-way places. Mennonites also
believed that the true church existed in small, simple gatherings; therefore,
it was uncommon for early Mennonites to even set aside a separate building for
worship. 

Two hundred years after the beginning of the movement,
churches in Germany and the Netherlands had grown to the point of meeting in
dedicated buildings, and by the 1760s several in urban areas had installed pipe
organs. It was another two hundred years, however, before organs became common
in the Mennonite conference that supported Goshen College. Even now, the organ
is not necessarily assumed to support congregational singing, but contributes
other service music. Organ study is now offered at all of the Mennonite Church
USA-affiliated colleges, and the new Taylor & Boody organ at Goshen will
certainly have a profound impact on the future of worship and organ study
throughout the denomination.

--Roseann Penner Kaufman

Roseann Penner Kaufman, DMA, is adjunct instructor in organ
at Bethel College, N. Newton, Kansas, a four-year liberal arts college
affiliated with the Mennonite Church USA. She also serves as director of music
for Rainbow Mennonite Church in Kansas City, Kansas. Dr. Kaufman served as the
consultant to Goshen College for their organ project.

Specifications for Opus 41

Hauptwerk

16' Bordun (C-D# wood, rest metal*)

8' Principal (77% tin)

8' Spillpfeife

8' Viol da Gamba (77% tin)

4' Octave

4' Spitzflöte

3' Quinte

3' Nasat

2' Superoctave

IV-V Mixtur

8' Trompet

Oberwerk

8' Gedackt (99% lead)

8' Quintadena

4' Principal (77% tin)

4' Rohrflöte

2' Waldflöte

II Sesquialtera

IV Scharff

8' Dulcian

Pedal

16' Subbass (wood)

(16' Violonbass) space prepared

8' Octave

4' Octave

16' Posaune (C-B wood, rest 99% lead)

8' Trompet (99% lead)

Couplers

Oberwerk / Hauptwerk

Hauptwerk / Pedal

Oberwerk / Pedal

Tremulant to entire organ

Mechanical key and stop action

Compass: manual 56 notes C-g''', pedal 30 notes C-f'

Lehman-Bach temperament

Interior metal pipes of hammered alloys

*All unmarked metal alloys of 28% tin, 72% lead

Case of solid white oak

Windchests of solid oak, pine & poplar

Number of pipes: 1604

Wind pressure: 75mm

Wind stabilizer

The builders

George K. Taylor

John H. Boody

Bruce Shull

Emerson Willard

Christopher A. Bono

Kelley Blanton

Chris A. Peterson

Sarah Grove-Humphries

Robbie Lawson

Jeffrey M. Peterson

Larry J. Damico

Holly Regi

Thomas M. Karaffa

Bob Harris

Katie Masincup

Ryan M. Albashian

Kristin E. Boo

John Collins

John Collins has been playing and researching early keyboard music for over 35 years, with special interests in the English, Italian, and Iberian repertoires. He has contributed many articles and reviews to several American and European journals, including The Diapason, and has been organist at St. George’s, Worthing, West Sussex, England for almost 26 years.

This year we commemorate the 300th anniversary of the death of Bernardo Pasquini. Although much attention has been given in the past few decades to Pasquini’s dramatic and vocal music, of which the scores for twelve operas and seven oratorios in addition to many cantatas and motets are known to survive, his extensive corpus of keyboard music has only comparatively recently received the attention it deserves. Considered one of the major Italian composers for keyboard between Frescobaldi (d. 1643) and Domenico Scarlatti (b. 1685), Bernardo Pasquini, teacher of Francesco Gasparini (author of the influential L’Armonico Pratico al Cimbalo, Venice 1708), left well over 200 pieces for keyboard.

Sources and early editions
The great majority of Pasquini’s works are preserved in four autograph manuscripts, including 121 in the autograph MS of Landsberg 215. A further partial autograph section is included in British Library MS 31501, I–III; to be found in part I are the 14 sonatas for two bassi continui, 14 sonatas for basso solo, and in parts II and III no fewer than 314 short versi, also in figured-bass format. More substantial works in MS 31501, part I, include a long Tastata, a Passagagli with 24 variations, a set of variations on the Follia and, at the end of the section, numerous short arie, more of which are to be found in part II. A few toccatas are also to be found in British Library MS 36661, which almost certainly predates the autographs by some years.
Very few of his works were published during his lifetime; three pieces entitled Sonata, ascribed to N.N. of Roma, were published in 1697 in a collection by Arresti, two of which were included in an English “abridged” edition, and other pieces were included in a collection of toccatas and suites published in 1698 by Roger of Amsterdam, which also appeared in England in 1719 and 1731. Others were included in assorted manuscripts; see bibliography for further details. In the preface to his edition of MS 964 at Braga, Portugal, Gerhard Doderer has speculated that some of the over 30 Italian (mainly Roman) compositions included therein (on folios 218–230 and 253–259) may well have been composed by the school of Pasquini, if not by Pasquini himself; certainly some of his compositions seem to have been known throughout Europe.
Pasquini’s compositions for keyboard cover all the main genres of his time, embracing some seventeen dance suites (although the term suite is not used in the manuscripts) as well as single movements, fourteen variations on both self-composed arias and stock basses, four passacaglias, sonatas including the 28 figured bass pieces mentioned above, over 30 toccatas and tastatas, about a dozen contrapuntal works, and a large number of versets. His numerous pupils in Rome included Casini, Zipoli, and possibly Durante and Domenico Scarlatti, in addition to J. P. Krieger and Georg Muffat, as well as Della Ciaja, who published a set of mercurial four-movement toccatas and retrospective ricercars and versets. It is highly probable that Handel met Pasquini in Rome in the early 1700s.

Modern editions
In addition to the facsimile edition of the Landsberg MS, there are two modern editions of his pieces. An edition by Maurice Brooks Haynes for the Corpus of Early Keyboard Music (American Institute of Musicology) was issued in seven volumes in 1964; this had the advantage of grouping pieces by genres rather than following the somewhat haphazard order in the manuscripts, but contained many printing errors and a somewhat sketchy approach to sources and evaluation. A new seven-volume edition, under the general editorship of Armando Carideo and Edoardo Bellotti, was issued in 2002; the first volume contains 60 versets and a pastorale from a recently discovered manuscript in Bologna, edited by Francesco Cera. The pieces from the Landsberg manuscript are included in volumes 2–5, with the pieces from MS 31501 in volumes 6 and 7. A further volume containing pieces from other sources, including as yet unpublished fugues in three and four voices as well as pieces of uncertain attribution, is in preparation. This edition is far more accurate but unfortunately much harder to obtain; see the bibliography at the end of this article for full details of these editions.
Below I shall summarize Pasquini’s extant keyboard music by genre; despite its shortcomings, I have used the AIM edition, and all numbers and titles cited are from this edition. Because of their extremely limited interest to the average player, I have not included the fascinating figured-bass sonatas for one and for two players, or the figured-bass versos, in this discussion.

Contrapuntal works
Pasquini is known to have made copies of the works of Palestrina and Frescobaldi, the influence of the latter being identifiable in both the toccatas and the contrapuntal works. Only eleven pieces that fall into this category seem to have survived, and two of these are incomplete. Those that survive are variable in quality, but several of them demonstrate the continuation of the variation technique so prevalent in Frescobaldi—they are included in book 1 of the Haynes edition. The first piece, in D minor, is entitled Capriccio by Haynes (although in the manuscript it is entitled Fantasia); its first section closes in the dominant and second section in the tonic. Both sections move mainly in quarter and eighth notes. In the third section the subject is introduced in 16th notes, followed by a triple-time section in 3/2. The piece concludes with a return to C time, the subject in its original time being accompanied by florid 16th-note writing (see Figures 1a–1d).

The second piece, entitled Capriccio, opens with a ricercar-like subject in 4/2, followed by a triple-time section in 3/2 that moves into 6/4, and a closing section of six bars consisting of half-note chords against 16th-note figures derived from the opening subject. The following short binary form piece is headed “Sigue al capriccio antecedente.” The third piece, regrettably incomplete in the MS, is entitled Fantasia and is another slower-moving, backward-looking work in quarter and eighth notes. The fourth piece, a ricercar in 4/2, is also slow-moving, on an archaic subject that proceeds through its 100 bars in half and quarter notes, with further subjects appearing during the piece.
By far the longest piece at some 345 bars is the Ricercare con fuga in più modi. This piece is in many sections, including the subject in diminution to half and quarter notes from bar 69, a return to original values from bar 123, a section in 6/4 from bar 209 to 246, which includes 16th-note writing, a section in C time that closes in bar 265 followed by a further section in 6/4 to bar 311, after which 12/8 takes over to the close of the piece. There is scope for shortening this piece, which makes considerable demands upon the performer.
Of the three pieces entitled Canzone Francese, the first in C major runs to only 32 bars, the second in F opens with the typical canzona rhythm of quarter note followed by two eighth notes and has a second section in 6/4, and the third piece in A minor opens with six repeated eighth-note Es (the repeated note fugal subject was very common in Germany as well as Italy, with examples by Reincken, Pachelbel, Kerll, and Buttstedt, among others) and soon becomes a moto perpetuo in 16th notes, which slows to eighth and quarter notes briefly in bar 56, the 16th notes taking over again in bar 66. A deceleration achieved via a cadence leads to a section barred in 3/4 (although headed 6/8), which starts in bar 106 and runs to bar 157. Of the next section entitled Alio modo la tripla, only seven bars survive, a great pity since this piece is of a high standard (see Figure 2a–2b). The ninth piece, of 24 bars, entitled Fuga, is an example of very loose imitative writing; the subject in the RH has LH passagework beneath it immediately.
Of the two pieces entitled Sonata, the first is also a loosely fugal work with a subject that opens with an ascending run of six 16th notes followed by an eighth note, another eighth note an octave below, and then returning to the note—now a quarter—before falling a tone, where the sequence is repeated a third below the original opening note. The second sonata opens with a short toccata-like flourish over a pedalpoint, followed by quarter-note chords modulating to the dominant; the second section is imitative, the subject rising a fifth in eighth and 16th notes, and has similarities to a Corellian fugue. Both were included under the name of “N. N. di Roma” in a collection of 18 sonatas for organ by various authors printed in Bologna ca. 1697, of which twelve pieces, including no. 10 here, were included in a London reprint by Walsh & Randall ca. 1710.
The two ricercars, nos. 139 and 140 in volume 7 of the Haynes edition, are both in G minor, the first opening with a canzona rhythm (half note followed by two quarter notes, all at the same pitch, in this case D) and proceeding in mainly quarter-note movement with a few eighth-note runs and two RH runs of 16th notes, bar 25 being repeated an octave higher at bar 34. There is tonal ambiguity at the close of the subject, which covers the minor scale descent from E-flat to G via B-natural followed by B-flat, which lends the piece charm. No. 140 is a longer piece at 83 bars that also proceeds mainly in quarter notes, with a further example of tonal ambiguity in the subject (also between B-flat and B-natural). Of interest are the written-out trill in the treble commencing on the upper note in bar 19 and the written-out alto trill in the penultimate bar with its Lombardic rhythm in the first two beats.

Suites, individual dances, and arias/bizzarrias
Pasquini’s seventeen “suites” for keyboard that are included in volume two of the Haynes edition are probably the first such examples in the Italian keyboard literature that contain several dances grouped together in the same key—the term “suite” is not used in the manuscript. They include Alemanda, Corrente and Giga, based, however, not on the examples of Froberger and the French school, but rather on Italian ensemble music. Several movements are untitled, others carry such terms as Bizzarria; but since the movements are grouped by key, they may well have been intended to form unified groups as presented in this volume. These “suites” comprise two to four movements in various combinations. Also included in this volume are several short pieces in binary form, including four entitled Bizzarria and no fewer than twenty-eight entitled Aria, all of which are attractively tuneful. By their nature the dances, bizzarrias, and arias are more suited to stringed keyboard instruments, although performance on a chamber organ would have been quite probable; for this reason a more detailed account has been omitted here.

Variations
These pieces are to be found in volumes three and four of the Brooks Haynes edition. The twenty-two sets of variations include four based on dance movements with just one or two variations, two sets on the Follia, two on the Bergamasca, with a further one on its Saltarello, and four sets entitled Variationi based on aria/dance-like themes that may well have been by Pasquini himself. Further sets are entitled Capricciose a Inventione (perhaps implying an original theme), Partite diverse sopra Alemanda, and Fioritas, with another set being entitled simply Variationi. Four passagaglie complete this genre.
A Bizzarria has just one variation in which the RH has the 16th-note figuration in the first half, the LH in the second; an untitled piece that is almost certainly an Alemanda has two variations in flowing 16th notes; a Corrente mainly in quarter notes has one variation in eighth notes; and a Sarabanda also mainly in quarter notes, some dotted, has one variation in 16th notes in which parts appear and drop out at will.
The set of variations on Fioritas has only six variations, but the manuscript contains the heading 7th, which clearly implies that Pasquini intended to write more. The Variationi Capricciose, on another tuneful theme that may have been original, is in seven partite. The theme is the first, the second in 3/4 is headed “in corrente”, the fourth is a sarabanda, the fifth in 6/4 is in quarter-note motion, and the sixth in C time makes great demands on the player, with an extended trill in the alto in each half as well as occasional simultaneous trills in the tenor. The final variation is in 3/4, with LH 16th notes against a mainly chordal RH in the first half and at the conclusion of the second half.
Of much greater substance are the remaining three sets: the Variationi a Inventione contains eleven partite; again the theme is considered to be the first variation (its first half has mainly chords in the RH over a moving eighth-note bass; the second half sees more 16th-note movement in the RH over quarter-note chords or moving eighth notes). The third set in 6/4 is in quarter-note movement in one part against dotted half-note chords throughout; the fourth, although headed 12/8, is barred in 3/4 and 6/4, this time with 16th-note passagework formed from a sequential figure against chords. The fifth to seventh sets are headed Corrente and are distinctly backward-looking, being similar to Frescobaldi’s Corrente in his two books of Toccate. Broken chord figures feature in the sixth, and insistent eighth-note movement appears in the seventh. In the eighth and ninth sets there is a further reminder of Frescobaldi in the time signatures: in the eighth the RH is in C time against 6/4 in the LH (see Figures 3a and 3b).
In both hands, eighth notes are grouped in duple as well as triple rhythms, and the figure of dotted quarter followed by two 16ths is passed between the hands. In the ninth partita, the RH is in 12/8 against a LH of 8/12, with the insistent pattern of dotted eighth followed by 16th. The tenth partita is headed 3/4 but barred as 6/4, again a corrente in form, with more broken-chord writing, sometimes in contrary motion between the hands. The final partita is headed Gagliarda and is unusually in C time (examples in C time are also to be found in Pasquini’s Spanish contemporary Juan Batista Cabanilles). Further broken chord figures and figures of ascending or descending thirds with the first note held on occur throughout, and neat syncopations in thirds in the RH appear towards the end of the second part.
The theme of the Partite diverse sopra Alemanda moves in quarter notes, but each half is followed by a written-out repeat in eighth notes, with imitation between the parts, broken chords, and contrary motion. The theme is followed by seven partitas, the first of which is in 16th-note movement, with the by-now usual figuration. The second, in binary form, is another rhythmic conundrum, with the RH in C12/6, and the LH in C6/12; this can be played most successfully as 12/8, much of it being in two parts only. The third, fifth, sixth, and seventh partitas are all headed 3/4 but barred in 6/4, the fourth actually being headed 6/4. In the third, flowing eighth notes soon give way to treble and bass quarter notes, with an alto eighth note after a rest, a figure that becomes wearing when used so relentlessly as here. The fourth partita moves in quarter notes, the second half opening with one bar of eighth-note imitation before a figure of rest followed by two quarter notes is passed between the hands.
The fifth partita has broken-chord writing in the RH over a quarter-note bass, with the LH also having broken chords in the repeats; in most of the piece, the top and bottom notes in figures are held on to produce a tonal build-up, but this is relieved in the middle of the piece by only the bass notes being held, which has the effect of acceleration. The sixth partita is based around a five-note eighth-note figure passed between the hands, while other parts have held half notes or dotted half notes; occasionally a third part in quarter notes is used as well. The final partita has continuous, mainly conjunct eighth-note motion against either full chords or just one other voice, concluding with a veritable virtuoso flourish of eighth notes in contrary motion.
The work entitled Variationi occupies some twenty pages in the Haynes edition, and consists of a theme in C time in mainly two-part texture in quarter and eighth notes followed by thirteen partite. The first is mainly RH eighth notes against LH 16th notes, the second is in 3/4 and, although not headed as such, is a corrente with a preponderance of two-part writing. The third partita is headed altro modo and has far more arpeggiated eighth-note motion. The fourth is headed 3/4, but only two bars are in this rhythm, the rest being in 6/8, again with much arpeggiated figuration beginning on the second eighth note. The fifth is in 16th notes, with frequent rhythmic imitation; the sixth is in 3/4 with eighth notes, sometimes in broken-chord format, against quarter notes; the seventh has mainly conjunct eighth notes against quarter notes in the first section, the second section with eighth notes in arpeggiated figures.
The eighth variation is another Frescobaldian corrente, with mainly quarter-note movement in the RH, against either quarter notes, dotted half notes, or half notes in the LH. The ninth has an oscillating 16th-note figure in the LH, with RH eighth notes. The tenth is constructed entirely around an eighth note in the RH followed by two 16ths in the LH, frequently in octaves. The eleventh is another movement with extended trills—in the first section placed in the alto lasting throughout the section, in the second in the tenor for just the first six beats after which imitative passagework against half notes progresses (see Figure 4).
Although the twelfth partita is headed Sarabanda, it has more in common with a corrente as it progresses in quarter-note motion with several instances in the RH of the figure of dotted quarter bearing a t (for trill) followed by two 16th notes and a quarter. The final partita is in 3/4; after the first bar it is in two parts with eighth-note figuration throughout, sometimes in contrary, sometimes in parallel motion, but also with one hand moving quite differently from the other; this virtuosic movement brings the work to a fine close. It may have been intended as a compendium of compositional techniques for students. There is a precedent in Bernardo Storace’s Passo e Mezzi in his Selva of 1664 for including variations headed corrente and gagliarda.
Together with Buxtehude’s roughly contemporary arias, the four sets of variations based on aria/dance-like themes are some of the earliest examples of keyboard variations on original subjects after Frescobaldi’s Aria detta La Frescobalda; they almost certainly pre-date Pachelbel’s set of six arias with variations published in 1699 as Hexachordum Apollinis; they have six, five, eight, and ten variations respectively (although in the latter there seems to be an error in the Haynes edition: what looks like the second half of the binary form theme is headed variation 1; this would mean that there are actually only nine variations). The first three are in the rhythm of a gavotte. All of the themes are in C time, but the first set contains variations in 3/4 and 6/8; the second has two in 6/8 including the final one; the third has two in 6/8 (one headed as 3/4, which may just be a remnant of the tempo theory mentioned by Frescobaldi in his books that related tempi to time signatures); and the final one has variations in 3/4, 6/8, 3/8 and one that is in 3/8 in the manuscript, although barred as 6/8. Again there is much variety of texture including pseudo-polyphony, violin-like figuration in the RH, and sequential figuration, with several variations requiring an advanced technical ability.
The two sets based on La Follia are very different in character. The first has fourteen variations after the initial statement and displays Pasquini’s mastery in transferring the string idiom to the keyboard in a wide variety of rhythms. Noteworthy are the continuous triplet eighth notes in the RH in variations 5 and 9, and the LH in variation 6, the figure of three quarter notes followed by a burst of 16th notes in the RH of variation 7 (see Figure 5), the virtuoso passagework for both hands in variation 10, the highly chromatic RH in the thirteenth, and the written-out trills and eighth-note figures in the final variation.
The second set has only three variations, which move in eighth notes, with thematic imitation prevalent in the first and second, and rhythmic imitation (quarter note or rest followed by two eighths and a quarter) in the final variation. The Bergamasca sets are similarly varied, with eight and twenty-four in the C time sets, and seventeen in the Saltarello, which is in 3/8 as would be expected. Although in the longer works some of the movements do not rise above the formulaic, there are many variations that carry the melodic freshness and tunefulness of an accomplished composer.
The four passagaglias are in B-flat, with twenty variations on the theme, C with seventeen (with probably more either not transmitted or never completed), D minor with twelve (again almost certainly incomplete), and G minor with twenty-four. All stress the second beat and apart from the C major, which is chordal and in 3/2 and is closer to a ciacona, they are melodic and in 3/4 (see Figures 6a and 6b). The writing in the B-flat and G minor pieces becomes increasingly virtuosic as they develop.

Toccatas and Tastatas
In volumes five and six of the Haynes edition, thirty-four pieces are entitled either Toccata (twenty-five) or Tastata (nine), there is one piece entitled Preludio, one Sonata–Elevazione; one Sonata in two sections, the second headed Pensiero; two further toccatas are included in volume 7. The choice of keys is still very conservative, not exceeding two flats, which is used for no. 83 in C minor, and two sharps used for no. 81 in A major. Space does not permit a detailed discussion of this substantial contribution to the repertoire, therefore comments have been limited to generalizations and to those pieces that are of greater interest.
Most of Pasquini’s pieces are in one movement, but at least five (70, 98–101) are in several sections, of which nos. 98–101 are included in the earlier British Library MS 36661. No. 70 is one of the most ambitious, the sections being in C time, 3/4, C time, concluding with a binary-form corrente-like movement with a variation. No. 71 opens with two bars of chords suitable for arpeggiations (indeed, in no. 94 the instruction “arpeggio” is included, relating to the first two chords) before motives are passed from hand to hand over long-held pedal notes; also featured are passages in parallel tenths (see Figure 7).
There are several toccatas that either open with chords or contain chordal passages within the piece; in some the instruction to arpeggiate is included, in others it is implicit (see Figure 7a). Pedals are also required in no. 101 throughout the first section, which is markedly similar to Frescobaldi’s Toccata Quinta from his second book; the second section is imitative, starting in C time followed by a variation in 3/2 before a short closing section in C time in which 16th-note passagework against quarter-note chords is passed from hand to hand, the final four bars again requiring the pedals for the long-held notes.
Several pieces include the old Frescobaldian written-out accelerating trill commencing on the upper note (two 16th notes followed by four 32nds) (see Figure 7b); in others it is implied via the letter t placed over the first note, normally a dotted eighth followed by a 16th one degree below. Although quite a few of Pasquini’s toccatas do contain passages that remind the player of Frescobaldi’s writing, there is not the same degree of nervous discontinuity and far more reliance on sequential writing.
It would seem unlikely that most of the suggestions on playing toccatas contained in Frescobaldi’s prefaces to his two books are applicable to these examples, although there is scope for shortening those pieces that are presented in sections, and some of Pasquini’s pieces do indeed carry the indication to arpeggiate half-note chords. Certainly there does not seem to be any reason to adopt Frescobaldi’s suggestion of dotting 16th notes in those passages in which eighth notes in one hand are set against 16ths in the other. However, his injunctions to treat the beat freely can be applied cautiously here, as can the eminently sensible comments on pausing before beginning passages in 16th notes in both hands and retarding the tempo at cadences. In the longer sequential passages, there can be a judicious slackening and taking up again of the tempo to allow the music to breathe and not degenerate into mechanistic exercises. Almost certainly, all trills should commence on the main note, this being appropriate also for every compositional genre.
One of the most popular and virtuosic pieces is no. 81, the Toccata con lo scherzo del cucco, which is based on the descending minor third. The cuckoo call is heard in eighth notes against 16th-note passagework, punctuated by sections in half notes marked arpeggio or by the nervous rhythms and modulations by chords of the seventh. At bar 47 the RH breaks briefly into triplets (although printed as 32nd notes they are actually 16th notes), and from bar 79 onwards a long-held A, first in the tenor and then in the alto, is marked trillo continuo, which will pose a most severe test to the player to maintain it against the other part to be played by the same hand. This piece is not too dissimilar to Kerll’s own toccata on the same theme (see Figure 7c).
The Elevazione-Adagio (no. 105) is also included in the Arresti publication, where it is entitled Sonata; after a slow introduction the writing continues in 16th-note figuration based effectively on sequences. The second piece entitled Sonata (no. 106) is in two sections: seventeen bars of 16th-note figures passed from hand to hand are followed by a short chordal link marked arpeggio that leads to further sequential passages. The second section, headed Pensiero—itself in two sections—is nothing like the intricate contrapuntal pieces of that name published in 1714 by Giovanni Casini, but opens with imitative passages based on a rhythmic motive, before its second section opens with passages derived from a further rhythmic motive that leads into passages based on the rhythmic motive of the first section and its inversion.
The one piece entitled Preludio, no. 95, is also in two sections, the first alternating long-held chords with 16th-note passagework against chords passed from hand to hand. The second section is again based on passagework passed between the hands, varying between conjunct movement and from bar 64 arpeggiated figures (see Figure 7d).
The two toccatas included in volume seven (nos. 141 and 142) are each in three sections, an opening and closing one in C time enclosing central sections in 12/8 and 3/2 respectively. In no. 141 much is made of sequential figures and trills, both indicated and implied; the 12/8 section is homophonic and leads to a final section in C time, which makes much of seventh chords, before a brief coda based on two 16th notes followed by an eighth note passed from right hand to left hand; a written-out trill in the left hand against this figure is reminiscent of Frescobaldi. In no. 142 the opening consists of four bars of 16th notes covering from treble G to tenor C, before a passage over a held tenor G moves into a section that includes a further example of a chromatic progression on the third of the scale, prefiguring the imitative triple-time section; the closing C time consists of only two bars—in the penultimate bar the LH consists of a written-out trill, with closing notes on tenor B, the opening two beats being a C–B in reversed dotted rhythms.

Versetti, Pastorale and other works
Francesco Cera has recently published a group of pieces that he discovered in a manuscript in Bologna. Included are an Introduzione e Pastorale, and 60 Versetti. The 27-bar Introduzione leads into a Pastorale of almost 90 bars. Both are in triple time and make much use of a dotted rhythm. Long-held notes in soprano, alto, and bass imitate the droning of bagpipes, and particularly noteworthy is the use of the Neapolitan sixth as well as the false relation (see Figure 8).
The Versetti are mainly short imitative pieces, many not exceeding five bars (they are similar to the short versetti in the 1689 collection from Augsburg known as Wegweiser), but five of them (nos. 33, 34, 42, 43, and 45) are miniature toccatas, with 16th notes against held chords. The first four of these are built on passagework against held chords, but there is some imitative writing in no. 45 (see Figures 9a–9c).
The grouping by keys in the manuscripts implies use as a series (see table). The subjects of the versetti range from archaic subjects in longer note values (nos. 1, 2, 9, and 46, for example) to more lively subjects using eighth and 16th notes (such as nos. 4, 6, 8, 13, and 14, etc,). A canzona-like dactylic rhythm of eighth note followed by two 16ths and two eighths is common, as is the figure of two 16th notes followed by two eighths and a quarter. Also notable is the insistent giga-like rhythm of dotted quarter followed by an eighth and quarter in almost every bar of no. 54. The most lively is no. 49, with its subject in 16th notes treated in inversion at the end.
There is one example in 3/8 and three in 6/8 in equal eighth notes, two in 3/2, and 10 in 3/4, with the majority in C or cut C. The part writing is relatively loose but effective. Keys used cover up to A major and C minor, with the old key signatures of one less accidental than present usage retained (i.e., two sharps and flats respectively).
Also included in Haynes’s volume seven are ten short pieces (from four to fifteen bars) without title, which are tentatively entitled Versi by Armando Carideo in volume seven of the Italian edition. Four of these are in 3/4 and have mainly continuous eighth-note motion in one hand against long chords, while the others in C time are close to the miniature toccata style noted in the versetti above. There are ten Accadenze (or cadences), which again are very short, with either toccata-like figures or based on short rhythmic figures. A different Pastorale opens with a repeated multi-section movement in 3/2 leading to a movement in C time full of dactyl rhythms, which includes the traditional drone bass that disappears and reappears at will.

Performance practice
A few general notes on performance practice relating to 17th-century Italian organ music may be helpful in determining answers to some frequently asked questions.
Ornaments: The only ornament sign found in Pasquini’s pieces is the letter t, which occurs on note values down to a 16th note. It is found frequently over the first note of a dotted eighth-16th pair (and by extension should probably be played in this figure even when not specifically indicated) and indicates a trill, probably better commencing on the main note, especially in the more retrospective pieces. It is worth mentioning, however, that Lorenzo Penna does describe the trill beginning on the upper auxiliary in his Li Primi Albori Musicali of 1656, reprinted in 1672, 1684 and 1696. On short notes only three notes (i.e., C-D-C) can be played; on longer values there can be more repercussions, possibly even pausing on the main note before trilling. It is also possible that an ornament equivalent to the mordent or pincé, with the lower auxiliary (i.e., C-B-C), could be used in ascending passages, particularly in pieces in the French style. In two pieces (Variazioni 11 and Toccata con lo scherzo del cuccu) the comment “Trillo continuo” is found. The instruction “Arpeggio” is found in some of the toccatas. Naturally there are possibilities for adding further ornaments when not expressly marked, although care should be taken not to use anachronisms such as the turn.
Fingering: This was still based on the concept of “good” and “bad” fingers for strong and weak beats, which was described in great detail by Diruta in Il Transilvano in 1593 and 1609, when he proposed using 2 and 4 as strong fingers, in direct contrast to other European treatises of the period; but during the 17th century, more theorists (including Penna, and Bismantova in his Compendio musicale of 1677) were following Ban-
chieri’s use in L’organo suonarino of 1605 of 3-4 in the RH for ascending and 3-2 for descending when beginning on strong beats, and beginning off-the-beat passages with 2 or 4 in the RH for ascending and 4 for descending.
For the LH, 3-2 is recommended for ascending when beginning on strong beats, and beginning off-the-beat passages with 2 or 4 on weak beats, and 3-4 for descending when beginning on strong beats, and beginning off-the-beat passages with 2 or 4 on weak beats. Also used were 1-2-3-4, then either repeated or followed by 3-4 for RH ascending and 4-3-2-1 repeated descending, and in the LH 4-3-2-1 for ascending, then either repeated or followed by 2-1 and 1-2-3-4 descending, then either repeated or followed by 3-4 in LH descending.
Articulation: While non-legato was still the main touch, apart from rapid divisions and passagework, the gaps between notes should be noticeably less on the organ than on the harpsichord, as described by Diruta. Not until well into the eighteenth century did a predominantly legato touch become the norm.
Registration: The Italian organ of the seventeenth century generally showed little advance on the Renaissance model, consisting primarily of a Principale chorus on one manual, from 8′ right up to the 33rd, in separate ranks that could be combined to form a Ripieno. Flute ranks were present at 4′, 22⁄3′ and 2′, but very rarely at 8′, and were not recommended for combining with the Ripieno, and reeds were also rare in most of the country, although the trumpet was very common in Rome. In addition, during the seventeenth century a Flemish influence made an impact on native development, including provision of a second manual allowing dialogues and echo effects. The manual compass was extended from a3 to f3. The Principale, and sometimes the Ottava, flute, and reed stops were divided, usually between middle e and f or f and f-sharp.
There is no evidence that Pasquini adhered to Diruta’s system of registration by mode included in the 1609 volume of Il Transilvano, but the legacy of Antegnati in offering registrations based on the type of piece and its function in his 1608 volume were still followed well into the seventeenth century (e.g., for Canzone alla Francese, the Ottava plus Flauto in ottava [4′ Flute], Principale plus either Ottava or Flauto in ottava plus Flauto in duodecima [Twelfth Flute], or even Principale plus Flauto in duodecima were suggested).
There is plenty of scope for varied and contrasting registration in many of Pasquini’s works in sections or multiple movements, but performers on modern organs need to ensure clarity and to avoid heavy reeds and fat Open Diapasons. It should be noted that pedals, if present, consisted in the main until well into the 18th century and later of pulldowns from the short octave bass in the manual, and covered an octave from C to B, with the only black note being a B-flat; some added the tenor C, and occasionally eleven notes were found, including an E-flat and A-flat. Playable in most cases by toes only, their function was primarily for long-held bass notes or to reinforce cadences. Very few instruments had a 16′ Contrabassi.
Tempi—Proportional notation: There is an interesting description of how to play triple-time (including 6/4 but not 12/8) sections in Frescobaldi’s prefaces to his books of toccatas and capricci, which, contrary to other theorists’ work, are NOT based on exact proportional interpretation but on speed by time signatures, ranging from adagio for 3/1 to allegro in 6/4, but there is no evidence from later theorists as to how proportions were treated. A mathematical rhythmic proportion can be applied successfully in Pasquini’s contrapuntal pieces far more readily than in his toccatas.
The great majority of Pasquini’s works can be performed successfully on harpsichord, organ or clavichord, although the suites and dance movements are clearly better suited to the stringed instruments. Many are not overly difficult, and their melodic charm will provide many hours of pleasure to players, from informed amateurs to professionals. In this anniversary year of his death, the best possible commemoration would be for his pieces to take their place in concerts.

 

Examples of Enlivening a Figured Bass on the Harpsichord

by J. Bunker Clark

Nothing is more dull in a performance of Baroque music than a continuo harpsichordist who mechanically plays a chord for every bass note in the score. Or who reverently plays a printed realization, which usually follows the same practice. Only rarely one hears a realization exhibiting some element of spark and imagination.

 

This "essay" consists of ten examples demonstrating various ways of treating a figured bass in a creative manner. The intended instrument is the harpsichord, not the organ, for the harpsichord is capable not only of furnishing chords, melodies, and polyphony, but is also--due to the noisy jacks--a percussive instrument, which quality may as well be exploited from time to time. Sometimes only jack-noise can be heard in an orchestral situation.

The most important advice is a) to be imaginative and do something different than a printed realization, and b) to be sensitive to the performance situation. These examples are intended for an orchestral continuo player, but some of the principles can be applied to chamber groups. (Continuo on the organ demands a different treatment.) All but the last example are from Handel's  Messiah, and include the printed realization available from Kalmus. I originally intended this article to be unencumbered with scholarly apparatus, but consultation with several colleagues prompted an annotated bibliography.

 

Bibliography/Notes

 

Arnold, Franck Thomas. The Art of Accompaniment from a Thorough-Bass, as Practised in the XVIIth & XVIIIth Centuries. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1931; reprint, with introduction by Denis Stevens, in 2 vols., New York: Dover, 1965.  The title to ch. 4, "On Certain Niceties of the Accompaniment," is borrowed from C. P. E. Bach's chapter "Von gewissen Zierlichkeiten des Accompagnements" (Versuch, part 2, 1762, ch. 32; Mitchell trans., pp. 386-403). Arnold's book is the grand-daddy on the subject. Much of it, however, is about how to realize specific figures.

Ashworth, Jack. "How to Improve a Continuo Realization." American Recorder 26, no. 2 (May 1985): 62-65. P. 62: "The first axiom of playing continuo accompaniment from an editorially supplied part is that one must never hesitate to change it" (p. 62). Tips (p. 65): "1. Be sensitive to the frequent necessity of reducing the texture from four to three--or occasionally even to two--parts, depending on the volume of the solo instrument, the range in which it is playing, and the nature of the piece. 2. Do not feel compelled to play a chord on every bass note provided by the composer. In fact, don't even be tempted to. 3. Avoid doubling or going above the soloist's part in the realization. 4. Avoid playing full chords on bass notes taking the weak part of a beat unit. 5. Be sparing with ornamentation. 6. Above all, remain sensitive to the needs of the soloist, and accommodate those needs insofar as you can. Good continuo players must be as supportive as they are unobtrusive."

Bach, Carl Philipp Emanuel. Versuch über die wahre Art das Clavier zu spielen. Berlin, 1759, 1762. Trans. William J. Mitchell as Essay on the True Art of Playing Keyboard Instruments. New York: Norton, 1949. Ch. 6, "Accompaniment," is the most relevant, especially the section "Some Refinements of Accompaniment," pp. 386--403, a "must read" primary-source primer on the subject. There are many cross-references to Arnold's 1931 book in Mitchell's notes. Several valuable quotes: "Of all the instruments that are used in the playing of thorough bass the single-manual harpsichord is the most perplexing with regard to forte and piano.  To make amends for the imperfection of the instrument in this respect the number of parts must be increased or reduced" (p. 368). "It is often necessary to strike chords over short rests in advance of their bass notes, as a means of retaining order and winning variety" (p. 418, in a section "Chords that precede their bass notes"). For recitatives, see pp. 420--25, which includes, for the organ: "In recitatives with sustained accompanying instruments, the organ holds only the bass, the chords being quitted soon after they are struck."

Borgir, Tharald. The Performance of the Basso Continuo in Italian Baroque Music. Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press, 1987.  Ch. 19, "Neapolitan Continuo Practice: The Partimenti," 141--47, is the most important for this purpose. The term "partimenti" represents a bass needing realization in the treble, resulting in a piece that can serve as a keyboard solo. First developed by Gaetano Greco (ca. 1657--ca. 1728), it was further developed by Francesco Durante in a manuscript titled Partimenti, ossia intero studio di numerati, per ben suonare il cembalo. Durante's exercises consist of harmonizing ascending and descending scales (later called regola dell'ottave, rule of the octave). The advanced ones have written-out passages in the treble: scales or other motives in one hand imitating the other. Indeed, the third (and last) group of exercises is of fugues. Ch. 20 includes excerpts of written-out accompaniments, mostly in solo cantatas, by Francesco Gasparini (1695), Benedetto Marcello, Alessandro Scarlatti, and a sonata attributed to Handel for viola da gamba and "cembalo concertato."

Bötticher, Jörg-Andreas. "'Regeln des Generalbasses': Eine Berliner Handschrift des späten 18. Jahrhunderts." Basler Jahrbuch für Historische Musikpraxis 18 (1994): 87--114. This concerns a manuscript by "Herrn Musico Heering," dated 1771, which includes a realized edition of Largo and Vivace movements from a C-major sonata for two flutes by Johann Gottlieb Graun (pp. 111--13), with some examples of a right-hand chord on a beat where the bass part has a short rest. The issue also has these articles: Graham Sadler and Shirley Thompson, "Marc-Antoine Charpentier and the Basse Continue," 9--30; Arnaldo Morelli, "Basso Continuo on the Organ in Seventeenth-Century Italian Music," 31--45; George J. Buelow, "The Italian Influence in Heinichen's Der General-Bass in der Composition (1728)," 47--66; Regula Rapp, "Was der späte General-Baß?," 115--27; and see notes to the last item, below.

Buelow, George J. Thorough-Bass Accompaniment According to Johann David Heinichen. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1966. Rev. ed., Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press, 1986. An excellent guide to continuo playing by a highly respected scholar, based on the most important writer of the early 18th century (1711, 1728) on the subject. Heinichen took advantage of the publication of Gasparini (1708; see below). The most valuable section is ch. 6, "The 'Art' of Accompaniment: Specific Aspects of Style," pp. 175--218. Includes examples of changing right-hand realization in quarters or 8ths to 16th figuration; and even break up 8ths or quarters in the bass (pp. 194--202). But the reverse (pp. 202--03): change 16ths in bass to quarters or 8ths. There is a section (pp. 205--08) on imitating a solo voice in the right hand. Ch. 9 is a practical demonstration of realizing Alessandro Scarlatti cantata Lascia deh lascia al fine di tormentarmi più.

Daube, Johann Friedrich (1756), quoted in The Bach Reader, ed. Hans T. David and Arthur Mendel, rev. ed. (New York: Norton, 1966), 256:

For the complete practical application of thorough bass it is necessary to know three species: (1) the simple or common; (2) the natural, or that which comes closest to the character of a melody or a piece; (3) the intricate or compound.

The excellent Bach possessed this third species in the highest degree; when he played, the upper voice had to shine. By his exceedingly adroit accompaniment he gave it life when it had none. He knew how to imitate it so cleverly, with either the right hand or the left, and how to introduce an unexpected counter-theme against it, so that the listener would have sworn that everything had been conscientiously written out. At the same time, the regular accompaniment was very little curtailed. In general his accompanying was always like a concertante part most conscientiously worked out and added as a companion to the upper voice so that at the appropriate time the upper voice would shine. This right was even given at times to the bass, without slighting the upper voice. Suffice it to say that anyone who missed hearing him missed a great deal.

Daw, Brian A. "Alessandro Scarlatti's Continuo Realization of Da sventura a sventura (1690): An Analysis and Observations Relating to Late Seventeenth-Century Keyboard Practices." Early Keyboard Journal 4 (1985-86): 51--60. Shows (pp. 54--55) how Scarlatti anticipates or imitates motives in the solo voice; also keyboard textures a 3--7 (not necessarily the usual 4 parts), and distributing realization in both hands. Leaves out the 3rd in a cadence when it's sung by the voice. Main point: the continuo complements, not doubles, the voice.

Derr, Ellwood. "Concertante Passages in Keyboard Realizations in Handel: Some Guidelines." The Diapason, September 1985, 9--12. Liberally quotes Heinichen/Buelow. Subjects: arpeggiation; furnishing imitations, as explained by Heinichen, and with example from J. S. Bach; examples from Handel's "O thou tellest" (the descending scale, imitations by Handel). "What eighteenth-century writers have not commented upon is the matter of necessity, as occasions arise, for the treatment of the concerting harpsichord part to complete the musical surface. It is then the task of analysis to ferret out these details. While realizations of certain passages may be undertaken on the basis of examples in treatises, those made on the basis of contextual settings in real pieces by composers of stature are likely to be more successful still, especially in the hands of a capable continuo harpsichordist" (p. 12).

Donington, Robert. The Interpretation of Early Music. Rev. ed. New York: Norton, 1992. The section "Going Beyond the Figures," especially pp. 306--07, 313--15, is valuable, relevant, and includes quotes from 17--18th-century authors.

Dreyfus, Arthur. Bach's Continuo Group: Players and Practices in His Vocal Works. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987. " . . . manuscripts . . . provide no evidence to indicate how keyboard players voiced the chords of the continuo realization. For this reason I have not discussed styles of continuo realization."

Gasparini, Francesco. L'armonico pratico al cimbalo: Regole, osservazione, ed avvertimenti per ben suonare il basso, e accompagnare sopra il cimbalo, spinetta, ed organo. Venice, 1708. Facsimile, New York: Broude Bros., 1967. Trans. Frank S. Stillings, ed. David L. Burrows, as The Practical Harmonist at the Harpsichord. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963. Ch. 10, "Del diminuire, abbellire, or risiorire gli accompagnamenti" (diminution, embellishment, and adornment of the accompaniment) has examples of right-hand counter-melodies; ch. 11, "Del diminuire, ò risiorire il fondamento" (diminution, or adornment of the bass), has examples of breaking up or arpeggiating the continuo line.

Gudger, William D. "Playing Organ Continuo in Handel's Messiah." The American Organist 19, no. 2 (February 1985): 91--92. On use of organ vs. harpsichord, and how the organ was often used only to double bass line and imitative entries of the chorus. Handel normally had two harpsichords for oratorios--the first played by himself until the late 1730s, when he had a claviorganum (combination organ/harpsichord).

J. S. Bach's Precepts and Principles for Playing the Thorough-Bass or Accompanying in Four Parts. Trans. Pamela L. Poulin. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994. Dated 1738, much is adapted from Friederich Erhardt Niedt, Musicalische Handleitung oder Gründlicher Unterricht (Musical guide or fundamental instruction; Hamburg, 1700/10). How to realize the figures; nothing more creative.

Keller, Hermann. Thoroughbass Method: With Excerpts from the Theoretical Works of Praetorius, Niedt, Telemann, Mattheson, Heinichen, J. S. & C. P. E. Bach, Quantz, and Padre Mattei, and Numerous Examples from the Literature of the 17th and 18th Centuries. Trans. and ed. Carl Parrish. New York: Norton, 1965. From Mattheson, Grosse Generalbaß-Schule (Hamburg, 1731): break up right-hand chords like a pleasing toccata (p. 47). From Heinichen, Der Generalbass in der Composition (Dresden, 1728): instead of "poor kind of accompaniment" or "very plainly accompanied," "either 1) divide the accompaniment between both hands . . . or 2) undertake the full-voiced accompaniment with the left hand alone and thereby enable to the right hand with more ease to invent a separate song or melody to the bass, as far as our ideas, taste, and talent will allow" (p. 48).

Ledbetter, David, ed. Continuo Playing According to Handel: His Figured Bass Exercises. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990. Dated from 1724 and mid-30s, when he was teacher to daughters of George II, especially Princess Anne. Root, 6 chord, 6/4 chords, 6/5 chords, 2 chords, &c.; exercises in fugue, with models. Nothing especially creative.

Rogers, Patrick J. Continuo Realization in Handel's Vocal Music. Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press, 1989. The first part deals with figuring in the sources; it's the second part, "Realization Problems," that is of more use: unison textures (play realized or unrealized?), and problems of realization in recitatives. Ch. 8, "Short Rests in the Bass," deals with whether to play a chord over a bass rest, and supports doing so from examples. Theorists of the time also describe the practice--for example, see quote from C. P. E. Bach, above. Mattheson's Grosse General-Baß Schule (Hamburg, 1731): ". . . it must be observed that the right hand must necessarily sound first when a sixteenth rest occurs . . . because the empty space offends the ear, which wishes most of all that everything be orderly and continuous, complete, and not broken up. Striking first with the right hand can be used with such rests throughout in accompanying, except for a few instances where the composer's intentions must be regarded" (quoted p. 148). Cites Telemann's Singe-, Spiel- und Generalbass-Übungen (Hamburg, 1733--34)--of 48 short songs, figured rests are used in six. Ch. 9, on pedal points, concludes, backed up by Heinichen, Telemann, and C. P. E. Bach, that figured pedal points generally should be harmonized, but unfigured ones not. Includes (pp. 186--87) detailed figuring of the Messiah's Pifa, meas. 1--11.

Rogers, Patrick J. "A Neglected Source of Ornamentation and Continuo Realization in a Handel Aria." Early Music 18, no. 1 (February 1990): 83--89. 1st: 2-part arrangement Ms. (ca. 1725) at the Fitzwilliam Museum of "Molto voglio" from Rinaldo, is included in Chrysander's 2nd ed. (1894) of the opera. 2nd: "Sventurato, godi o core abbandonato" from Floridante. 3rd: "Cara sposa" from Radamisto. These arrangements: 1) frequently contain at least part of the aria text; 2) usually are not literal transcriptions, and segments are recomposed and improved; 3) they are effective idiomatic keyboard pieces; 4) either are simple 2-part versions, which may relate to Handel's teaching duties, or more elaborate arrangements in 3 or more parts; 5) some have extensive ornamentation of the original vocal line. "Cara sposa" is a continuo aria, with complete text between staves. Rogers concludes that it's really a keyboard piece, perhaps freely based on pre-existing vocal ornamentation--best example of such ornamentation--and includes a complete edition in the article.

Thieme, C. A. Treatise, "Some Most Necessary Rules of Thorough Bass by J. S. B." [1725], once owned by Johann Peter Kellner, trans. in Bach Reader, 390--98. Basically how to realize chords from the figures.

Towe, Teri Noel. "Messiah: Reduplication without Redundancy: Editions and Recordings Past and Present." The American Organist 19, no. 2 (February 1985): 74--90. Occasional references to continuo playing in recordings.

Williams, Peter. Figured Bass Accompaniment. 2 vols. Edinburgh University Press, 1970. The best modern book on the subject, with many quotes and examples from the treatises, and vol. 2 has many unrealized examples, with interspersed suggestions for completing them. "When the bass rests on the beat, play the chord in the right hand" (p. 31, from Bologna Ms., ca. 1730; C. P. E. Bach, ch. 37; Manfredini 1775, 59). "Not all quick repeated bass notes have to be played; they may be omitted or broken" (Türk 1822, 293).

Williams, Peter. "Johann Sebastian Bach and the Basso Continuo." Basler Jahrbuch für Historische Musikpraxis 18 (1994): 67--86. Includes (pp. 77--78) a realization by Heinrich Nikolaus Gerber (Bach's pupil) of Sonata no. 6 from Tomaso Giovanni Albinoni, Trattenimenti armonici per camera, op. 6 (Amsterdam, ca. 1712)--the realization (ca. 1724--25), according to Gerber, "durchcorrigirt von Sebastian Bach." Williams: ". . . at least a few ties between the upper parts are beginning to suggest an articulated part-writing." Also cites Bach's written-out accompaniment for the Largo of the Flute Sonata in B minor, BWV 1030, from the autograph score. "There is some evidence in Germany that players were sometimes encouraged to work towards a more 'künstlerisches' accompaniment than can easily be produced from a merely 'schulmeisterlich' harmonization in four parts" (p. 81). Bibliography, pp. 85--86.