0

This little booklet originally started out as a simple guide to alternative programming for the Korg MT
1200 tuner. Back in the mid 1980s, I had designed and produced my own tempering tone generator
electronic device, programmed with over 30 different temperaments and capable of almost infinite pitch
level variation. I made several hundred of them, selling them mostly via-via over the whole world to a
variety of amateur and professional early music performers, including William Christie and Nicholas
McGegan. But when the MT 1200 appeared, I decided to give it up and just publish a small pamphlet with
the data needed to program the Korgs memory.
Since those days, however, the situation has only worsened instead of improving. This current pamphlet
has been expanded by adding a short discussion of the dramatic shortcomings of the modern historically
informed scene. I have also tried to address a number of issues about electronic tuners, temperament, sound,
tuning procedures, etc, which I have repeatedly encountered during the many thousands of tunings of
harpsichords, fortepianos, and organs I have done over the years for concerts and recording sessions.
This is very much a work in progress, and I welcome all comments and questions. I will try to work all
such input into the text and information for subsequent versions. The latest version will be downloadable in
PDF format at my website:
http://www.PolettiPiano.com
Comments and questions should be sent to:
paul@PolettiPiano.com

This version was updated on 19 April 2003.

Whats it all about, anyway?!

Despite the vast number of explanations of tuning and temperament which have been written, a surprising
number of musicians still do not fully understand the topic. This may be do to the complicated and
confusing approaches taken, as well as the fact that the history of temperament is far too often described
as a struggle to find a system which allows us to play in all 12 major and minor keys. Were this true, the
story would be far simpler than it actually is; equal temperament satisfies this requirement perfectly, and
is has been known for over 2000 years. The real story of temperament comes from a completely different
aspect: the desire to have pure major thirds.
The natural physics of vibrating objects are incompatible with our western system of harmony. This would
not be a problem if all of our instruments were capable of flexible intonation, like unfretted strings, and to a
certain extent, most winds. The problem only manifests itself when we try to use instruments of fixed
intonation, that is, instruments upon which the musician cannot fine tune the pitch at the moment a tone
is produced. The trouble does not come from adventurous harmonic progressions through multiple keys;
even something as simple as constructing the most important triads in a single key is impossible if pure
(just) intonation is the desired goal.
This trouble is caused by the fact that 4 pure fifths are not congruent with a pure major third. If we tune
the notes C - G - D - A - E so that all of the fifths (or the inversions, the fourths) are perfectly pure, the
resultant third of C - E is much too wide. The history of tempering is about trying to find a solution to this
problem. Different solutions were preferred at different times due to additional requirements. For those
who wish to know more about the various solutions, I recommend Mark Lindleys excellent article in
Grooves Dictionary of Music and Musicians.1 If this article does not completely satisfy the students
hunger for knowledge, the bibliography contained therein will lead him or her to other sources which
provide an inexhaustible wealth of information. The student of the subject should always keep in mind
that no matter how complicated the theory behind any given system becomes, the basic motivation for the
practicing musician has always been to try to keep the largest possible number of thirds sounding as good
as possible.2
Temperaments Old and New
Perhaps no other aspect of the performance of Western European music has generated so much discourse as
that of how to distribute the twelve notes available on fixed-intonation instruments. Even after
eliminating the purely speculative works of mathematicians and theoreticians, there remains a large
number of historical texts which all purport to provide the best and most beautiful-sounding tuning and
tempering solutions. As is fitting, the revival of the performance of early music on the instruments of the
period has brought with it the return of the idea that systems other than Equal Temperament are the most
historically appropriate for tuning harpsichords, clavichords, organs, and fortepianos.
Unfortunately, despite the best of intentions, the Historically Informed Performance (HIP) movement
has failed miserably at accurately recreating this aspect of the timbres of ancient music. The vast historic
palette of possibilities has been reduced to a mere handful of stock temperaments which are imposed upon
great bodies of literature with little or no thought to their appropriateness. These systems have often
been chosen simply because they are easy to understand and implement. Unfortunately, their current use is
completely out of proportion to their original historical importance. The end result is an authentic sonic
structure which is just as false as that created by the late-19th to mid-20th century blanket application of
Equal Temperament. This pamphlet is intended to help correct this situation.
Much of the damage done to the modern idea of historical temperaments has been the fault of electronic
tuning devices - despite their advantages for certain applications. Not only have they allowed keyboard
performers to stop listening and experimenting as they tune their instruments - exactly as the keyboard
players from centuries past were required to do - but the selection of temperaments which are
preprogrammed in the memories of these devices is extremely limited and poorly chosen, a situation
which only propagates the gross oversimplification of the topic. Perhaps the most popular tuning device,
1 For those who read German, Lindleys article Stimmung und Temperatur in J. Geschichte der Musiktheorie (Band 6, 1987, pages 111-324)
can rightly be viewed as The Mother of all Temperament Articles - highly recommended!
2 Even the famous Wolf fifth of meantone is not so much a problem as are the larger number of bad major and minor thirds. The idea
that different keys should have different colors which come from a variety of interval sizes, an idea often mentioned as a historical
justification for unequal temperaments, is only applicable to the well temperaments which were common in the 18th century.
Variety of interval size in fact originates from the use of such temperaments (at least in regards to keyboard instrument - winds are
another story altogether), and is not the reason why such temperments were adopted. Key differentiation exists neither in meantone the default standard for Renaissance and early Baroque - nor in Equal.

the Korg MT1200 wastes several memory positions on the tuning systems (i.e not temperaments, since
nothing is tempered) of Pythagorean and Just Intonation, systems which anyone with only the most basic
listening skills can tune much more accurately and rapidly by ear than with a machine. Beyond those (and
Equal), only the ubiquitous old warhorses of 1/4 Meantone, Vallotti, Werckmeister III, and Kirnberger
are present. This pamphlet provides the information needed for setting the Korgs user-definable memory
position in a variety of historically-important temperaments, as well as a graphic means for deciding
which systems are best suited for which music.3
The Poverty of HIP Practice contrasted to the Richness of Our Well-Temperament Heritage
The great shifts in musical/compositional practice which occurred over the 17th and 18th centuries went
hand in hand with the modification and eventual abandonment of meantone temperaments. All meantone
systems, regardless of their degree of purity, sacrifice the ability to play in all 12 keys for the sake of the
beauty of major thirds.4 As the harmonic universe expanded, meantone temperaments became more and
more compromised, a sort of tempering the temperament, until a new methodology gradually took hold.
Later called well-temperaments, these systems are all characterized by an emphasis on making all
thirds tolerable while keeping those of the diatonic (i.e. F, C, G, D etc) keys closer to pure than their
distant neighbors down in the south-west corner of the circle of fifths (F#, G#/Ab, C#/Db, etc.).
Along the way, a number of such tempered temperaments were devised, including some described by
musicians no less famous than Couperin and Rameau. These meantone modifications have largely been
ignored by modern performers, despite a number of articles in the modern literature which either reprint
ancient tuning instructions or give newly-devised recipes. This is a great loss to much of the music
performed today, especially that of the early Baroque French composers, whose music sounds both
particularly beautiful and piquant in these temperaments. Far worse, however, is the truly scandalous
oversimplification of the topic of well-temperaments. As with the Korg tuner (more so because of the
Korg), many harpsichordist only know of Werckmeister, Kirnberger, and Vallotti. Furthermore, there is
an overriding presupposition that Vallotti is late, and the first two, with their simple structure and
predominance of harsh Pythagorean thirds, are ubiquitously applied to German Baroque music prior to
that of the mature Bach. A more sophisticated assessment of the historical record demonstrates just how
inappropriate this practice is.
Lets take a look at the most popular big two, Werckmeister and Kirnberger. The temperament which
modern musicians call Werckmeister III was originally proposed as an an organ temperament.
Nowadays, we assume that keyboard music is keyboard music, and a temperament which was good for an
organ was equally good for a harpsichord or a clavichord. However, in the 17th and 18th centuries, this
was not the case. Werckmeister (1645-1706), Neidhardt (1685-1739), and Sorge (1703-78), the three great
masters of German Baroque temperament theory, all pointed out that circumstances such as the social
ambience, the presence or absence of transposing instruments, the use of Cammerton versus Chorton, or the
chromaticism of the music could have a bearing upon the exact nuance of temperament to be preferred.5
Neidhardt went so far as to recommend different temperaments for village, town, city, and court.
Werckmeister was not only a noted performer, composer, and theorist, but was equally famous for his
expertise on the technical aspects of organ building. He was the official organ inspector for Thuringia, and
so highly respected for the quality of his work that the famous builder Arp Schnitger wrote a dedicatory
poem for Werckmeister's 1698 Orgelprobe. Werckmeister was so concerned with the acoustical and
3 Since the first version of this paper was written, the Korg MT1200 has been discontinued. However, many musicians still own them
and use them. The new replacement model, the OT-12, unfortunately represents a large step backwards for the HIP musician, since
the user-progamable memory positions have been eliminated. Hopefully, an equally low-cost and flexible (in both pitch level and
temperament) device will again become available in the near future. With the increasing miniaturization of computers and PDAs,
perhaps the best solution will soon become a simple tone generation temperament program for a general purpose digital device . . .
perhaps even a pocket telephone.
4 Meantone temperaments are called meantone precisely because of the consistent use of only one size fifth which is small enough to
produce a good third . Any good third is formed by the sum of four adjacent fifths, all of equal size, meaning that the two whole steps
which also make up the third are also of the same size (the whole tone being the sum of two fifths). In other words, the major second is
precisely in the middle of the third, i.e. the geometric mean of the major third defines the whole tone. In the series of fifths C-G-D-AE, the note D is exactly in the middle, regardless of whether or not you see it as a stack of fifths or as a major third (C-D-E).
Unfortunately, such fifths are much too small to close the circle of fifths. Technically speaking, Equal Temperament is also a
meantone system, though not in the usual sense of the word.
5 Neidhardt recommended different temperaments for use in a village (Dorf), a small city (kleine Stadt), a large city (groe Stadt ) and at
court ( Hof), presumably in keeping with the expected requirements in harmonic adventurousness, transposing instruments, etc. which
would characterize each setting. His preference changed somewhat between his two publications in 1724 and 1732, surprisingly
shifting subtly toward a more conservative overall approach in the 1732 book. In other words, he seems to have moved a step
backward away from Equal toward a view favoring greater key difference and better natural key major thirds at the cost of worse
fifths. In any event, it is most instructive to compare Neidhardts four temperaments to see how subtle variations in the distribution of
tempered fifths can change the distribution and degree of purity of the major and minor thirds. The quality radar graphs are particular
useful for this.

mechanical peculiarities of the instrument that he recommend against the common practice of drawing
multiple unison stops in the registration of a chorus, since the narrow windways of the slider chest often
provided insufficient wind to keep the wind-hungry 8 ranks perfectly in tune with one another. Thus we
can safely assume that if Werckmeister III was recommended as a temperament for the organ, it was
probably tailored to match a complicated set of considerations unique to that instrument and its literature.
Interestingly enough, in 1697, Werckmeister himself described one such consideration, and surprisingly, it
was purely extra-musical: if one wished to convert an organ tuned in 1/4 (Syntonic) comma Meantone to a
temperament which would allow the use of all keys, his 1/4 (Pythagorean) comma organ temperament
(which we now call Werckmeister III) required a minimum of retuning. He stated that several pipes of
each octave could be left essentially untouched, and therefore he estimated that such a conversion would
require no more than about an hour of work for each rank of pipes.6 From our far viewpoint, we think only
in terms of how the music would have sounded, and we assume the Werckmeister devised his temperament
based solely upon harmonic aesthetics. But for a church organist of the time, the practicality of the
situation would have been just as important, if not more so. A normal church organ would have had 20 to 30
ranks; even with Werckmeisters money-saving temperament, retempering these instruments would
have required several days to a week of work for two men (the organ tuner and the key holder). A large
organ, such as the one Schnitger built for the Nikolaikirche in Hamburg in 1682-7 (unfortunately
destroyed by fire in 1842), with 4 manuals and pedal, could have had over 100 ranks! Changing the
temperament on such an instrument would have taken at least several weeks of daily tuning work. Imagine
the reception the poor organist would have gotten from a good Protestant (i.e penny-pinching) church
council when he proposed the outlay of the money needed for such a reworking (in addition to the cost of
the regular maintenance such an instrument must have required), merely to eliminate the vague (for the
council members) restrictions of limited modulation. A well-temperament which minimized this time
and expense may have been the deciding factor in whether or not such a conversion was even undertaken at
all.
Proof that Werckmeister would have used a completely different type of temperament for harpsichords,
especially when used in a chamber music setting, is given by his brief description of a harpsichord
(Clavier) tempering scheme in his 1698 treatise on realizing figured bass. Werckmeister's description is
somewhat imprecise, but there can be little doubt that it describes yet another meantone modification.
He probably started from a 1/5 or 1/6th Syntonic comma Meantone, but then deviated from the basic logic
by adjusting G#, D#, and Bb toward their enharmonic equivalents, allowing them to be tolerable if not
perfect when used for both harmonic functions. This is essentially the same sort of bending of the basic
meantone logic found in the temperaments of Rameau, Couperin, and Schlick, and is probably much more
representative of common practice among harpsichordists in the late-17th and early-18th centuries than
is a primitive economy-class 1/4 Pythagorean comma well-temperament like Werckmeister III.7
Although this description was perhaps the first published unequal temperament description of the entire
modern original instrument movement (being summarized in 1931 by F. T. Arnold), much like its French
counterparts, it has been completely ignored by modern keyboard players.8
The modern embracement of Kirnbergers temperaments is even worse. A late-18th century (1783) theorist
and composer/performer of mediocre talent, he is known to have been conservative, pedantic, and so poor
at organizing his thoughts that he had to engage editors to rework his texts. Despite his direct connection
to Bach, his temperaments are anachronistic throw-backs. They might have been believable had he lived
100 years earlier, but compared to the systems of Neidhardt and Sorge, they are simplistic and
amateurish. Marpurg detested them, referring to them as praised by some but used by no one.
Kirnbergers 1/2 comma tuning, sometimes encountered in modern writings on temperament, is so primitive
and severe that Lindleys assessment is perfectly succinct: inept. The only advantage such temperaments
have to recommend themselves is that they are incredibly easy to set by ear, requiring only the most
elementary listening skills. Perhaps precisely for this reason, then as now these temperaments may have
been popular among amateurs. Professional musicians, however, were (and should also be) capable of more
sophistication.
Like Lindley, I recommend Werckmeister III only for music which has a direct historical connection to
6 Until well into the 19th century, metal organ pipes were cone-tuned, that is, the end of the pipe was either splayed open or pinched
closed by literally pounding on their tops with a metal cone. The pitch of such pipes can only be changed by small amounts. Larger
alterations, such as moving a Meantone G# up to a well-tempered G#/Ab (a change of about 23 cents!) would require the organ tuner
to actually cut the end off of the pipe to make it shorter. Other pipes which needed to be dropped significantly in pitch would need to
have an extension collar soldered onto their tops. This difficulty may be the main reason why English church organs remained tuned in
Meantone until 1850 or so.
7 In France, meantone modifications were referred to as temperament ordinaire, i.e. the normal temperament.
8 See the appendix for Arnolds description, as well as the assumptions and decisions underlying my interpretation.

it: some early Baroque German organ music. For Baroque harpsichord and chamber music too adventurous
harmonically for a modified-meantone, a much more historically-accurate choice would be one of the
many sophisticated well-temperaments of Neidhardt and Sorge. Neidhardt, born in the same year as J. S.
Bach, was an organist, composer, and temperament theorist. He published his first work on temperament
in 1706, and by the time of his death, had become widely-recognized as a master of subtle welltemperaments. Bachs one-time pupil Lorenz Mizler is purported to have said that Neidhardt was a
better theorist of tuning than Werckmeister. Sorge, like Werckmeister before him, was a Thuringian
organist, composer, theorist, and expert on organ mechanics. His writings on harmony, improvisation, and
the Affects of the Keys all formed an important part of the general movement away from Baroque
aesthetics toward Classical, and his temperaments are examples of the same movement. Continuing on the
path set by Neidhardt, they are ever-finer approaches to Equal, making the distant keys even more
tolerable without abandoning the relative purity of diatonic keys and the overall variation of key color
so highly valued by musicians of the time.
The temperaments of both Neidhardt and Sorge are considerably more advanced and subtle than that of
Vallotti, maestro at S. Antonio in Padua from 1730 to 1779. His 1/6th Pythagorean comma temperament
was described in 1754 by his colleague Tartini, but we have no idea how long Vallotti had already been
using it. This temperament has become the modern musicians default stepping-stone between the
simplistic well-temperaments of Werckmeister and Kirnberger and the dreaded modern Equal
Temperament. Even though the two musicians had nothing to do with one another, structurally Vallottis
temperament could be seen as the point of departure for Neidhardt, the theme upon which his more
advanced variations are based. As such, it remains a valid choice for any music well-suited to it from
about 1700 on.9 I have nothing against this temperament and use it often myself; my only objection is its
completely inauthentic over-usage as the only temperament for a majority of late Baroque and Classical
music.
Temperaments for Melody Instruments
I often hear string or wind players talking about practicing in Meantone or Werckmeister or whatever.
They usually sit in front of their Korgs and playing scales or short melody fragments, staring at the
needle, and trying to learn to intone every note exactly as it is in the keyboard temperament. This is
absolute nonsense.
Temperaments exist for fixed intonation instruments only. They are compromises, band-aid fixes which
more or less cover up the incapabilities of these imperfect instruments . . . instruments without flexible
intonation. No violinist or oboist should try to slavishly reproduce the finest shadings of these
patchwork solutions.
Tempered instruments, when used in ensembles, both reflect and (to a certain extent) determine the
standard for what kind of third is considered good, and thereby what sort of half-step is normal. For
instance, a harpsichord or organ tuned in Meantone creates a sonic universe in which the sound of pure
thirds is the overriding ambience. In so doing, it also determines that leading tone half-steps should be
wide. This does NOT mean, however, that the melody instrument should exactly reproduce the quality of
every third or every whole or half step as found on the harpsichord. For instance, if the solo part has a D#
while the keyboard is tuned with an Eb, the soloist may choose how to intone the note depending on the
harmonic function and the overall musical effect. If the obvious intent is a simple D#, pure to the B, as in
the V chord in e minor, than the soloist should play it as a pure third, i.e intone it quite low. The
harpsichordist should then leave the incorrect keyboard third out of the continuo realization. If,
however, the obvious intended effect is some sort of grating harmony, or to create a dramatic musical
moment, then the soloist can play it rather high, mimicking the high Eb of the harpsichord tempering
(however, in this case the composer probably would have written it as an Eb).
Many musicians may have trouble with this concept. Actually, though, this same type of flexible
intonation is regularly taught to players of modern instruments, but according to late-19th century
aesthetics. Then the overriding idea was that notes should be intoned according to the direction they want
to resolve; leading tones should be pushed upward and falling tones downward, relative to their fixed
Equal Tempered positions determined by the piano. Ancient theories of intonation held to exactly the
opposite: leading tones should be quite low of their resolution note, falling tones quite high. Actually, this
earlier concept maximizes the psychological effect of tension/resolution, since it more dramatically
9 The overall musical effect of Vallottis temperament is not significantly different from Werckmeisters last known thoughts on the
subject, published one year after he died (1707). He apologized for not providing monochord diagrams for Equal Temperament,
blaming it on an incompetent engraver, but he stated his approval of the system, though admitted to a willingness for leaving the
diatonic thirds somewhat purer than the less used ones.

illustrates the contrast of the independence of the two separate tones which are nonetheless
interconnected by the bonds of harmonic motion. These two ideas about what is musical are the result of
two diametrically opposed aesthetics; the one focuses on the differences between related elements within
a system, the other blurs any difference and makes them seem to melt into a one uniform whole. No wonder
that the use of Equal Temperament goes hand-in-hand with the latter.
All melody instrument players should learn flexible intonation. They should gain both an understanding
of and feeling for the huge variety of possibilities. Modern musicians have the difficulty of needing to be
able to play in many different intonation flavors, often within a single concert. Ancient musicians
generally had it easier, having to learn only one general idea of interval size with perhaps some slight
bending in either direction. Thus the task of playing in tune is much more challenging for the modern
original instrument specialist than it was for an ancient performer. However, modern musicians should
not make the mistake of thinking this challenge can be made easier by adopting the simplistic approach
that the keyboard temperament determines the placement of each and every note. The keyboard only sets
the stage upon which the soloist is more or less free to play his or her predominant musical role. Keyboard
players also need to free themselves from the idea that they lay down the law, and should learn to get
out the way when the soloist can and wants to intone notes in a purer or more musically effective manner
than is possible on the inflexible keyboard. Of course, this can lead to much disagreement and discussion but this is only a proper part of the process of musical discovery. The one argument which should NEVER
be accepted is that a certain note should be intoned in a certain way merely because that's the way it is in
the temperament.
Electronic Tuners - a Blessing or a Curse?
There can be no argument against the assertion that the ideal situation for any historic keyboard player is
to learn to do everything by ear, exactly as the ancient musicians did. Only then will one truly learn the
secrets of the labyrinthian passageways through the subtleties of the various temperament systems and
become aware of the relative advantages of each system which were so hotly debated by musicians of the
past. Only then will one truly become a master of this aspect the medium: the harmonic timbre of the
instrument. Only then will one acquire a sense for matching temperament to music which approximates an
historic level of sensitivity.
However, modern life moves at a faster pace than ancient times, and the time needed for such exploration
(the quiet time) is not always available. Furthermore, modern performing circumstances force ahistoric
demands upon us. For example, in the 18th century, nobody cared if you modified-meantone this week in a
manner that was slightly different from how you did it last week. But today, when recording sessions last
several days, it is assumed that a take from any given day can be used with one of any other day. This
means the instrument must be tuned precisely the same, both in temperament and pitch, for the entire time.
Such unnatural and inhuman consistency is best achieved with the help of a tuning device.
The other advantage of a tuning machine is the speed with which one can accomplish a tuning. Time
allotted for tuning the keyboard just before a concert is always too short. Furthermore, noisy distraction is
the rule rather than the exception. It is always faster and easier to match 12 unisons to the sound of an
electronic box than it is to set any temperament, even one as simple as meantone. This is because it is easier
to accurately match unisons by ear than it is to temper fifths and thirds, especially in the absence of
complete silence. For this reason, I recommend the use of such devices for concert tuning work. Remember,
the point is to get the instrument in perfect temperament and tune FOR THE AUDIENCE. Any personal
emotional attachment to tuning by ear you may have is of secondary importance. If you CAN consistently
and rapidly set a good temperament by ear (and I mean an historically appropriate temperament - not
some low-budget model like Werckmeister III or the amateurish Kirnberger), even under adverse
conditions, then do so. If you cant, however, get a box. Dont inflict the results of your difficulty to perform
a challenging task under pressing conditions upon the audience. Save the pleasure of tempering by ear (and
it can be a real pleasure - almost a meditative experience) for the unhurried quietness of home, where it
doesnt matter if it takes you 30 minutes or even an hour to set a good temperament.
General Warning about Electronic Tuners
For the matching of two harmonically-related pitches, either unisons or pure intervals, the human ear is a
much more precise instrument than any electronic device can ever be. This is because the ear can easily
single out precisely those individual overtones which create the beating effect which we call out of
tune, rejecting all other extraneous sonic information, such as other overtones, variations in volume,
envelope decay, action noise, etc. Electronic machines cannot do this, and they must always subject the
6

sound to all kinds of filtering and electronic or digital tricks to make it appear as though they can
hear. This trickery is more or less successful, but never completely so.
Of the two methods of visually representing out of tuneness, the Korg MT1200 has the worst: an
indicator needle meter showing sharp or flat. All needle indicators are by nature imprecise, because
the accuracy of the display depends the angle of viewing. Even worse is the fact that extreme electronic
processing is needed to convert the sounds picked up by the microphone into the voltages which make the
needle move left and right. Such a system, called a frequency-to-voltage converter, is notoriously
inaccurate, even in its modern digital form. It is extremely sensitive to rapid changes in volume level and
wave shape (i.e overtone content) - both of which are characteristic of natural sounds, especially those of
plucked and struck keyboard instruments. Even in the best of conditions - for example, a pipe organ (steady
volume, pitch, and wave shape) in a quite room - the needle of a Korg meter wavers and jumps, and
generally tends to indicate slightly flat of the real frequency level. These meters are only for the crudest
of measurements: do not use them for setting temperaments, tuning instruments, or verifying the pitch level
of any instrument. A mistaken reading is the rule rather than the exception.10
The other type of tuning machines uses strobe meters, which either have spinning discs (such as the
wonderful old Sanderson Strobo-Tuners - perhaps the best and most accurate visual tuning device ever
invented) or rows or circles of flashing LED lights. Ostensibly, they show a visual form of the beating
which our ears hear. However, they are again mere electronic devices which are by nature easily confused
by changes in volume level and wave form. While strobes are generally much more accurate and reliable
than indicator needle meters, they also must filter and process the signal from the microphone, and in
doing so they introduce many of the same problems of display jitter and false high/low indications which
plague metered devices.
Nature gave each and every one of us a wonderful and incredibly precise device for this sort of comparison:
our ears. We can very easily hear at levels of precision many times better than a Korg or any other device
is capable of. Furthermore, we have the wonderful advantage that our ears are connected to our brains. For
example, in deep bass registers, the excessive inharmonicity of the relatively short and fat strings
produces an overtone content which makes it impossible to tune octaves which are completely beat-free. If
you stop one overtone from beating, inevitably another will only start beating. Under such conditions, a
meter will only dance and jitter; by contrast, your ears and brain can work together to decide which
combination of slowly-beating overtones is the least bothersome.11
Learn to use you ears. To check the pitch level of a harpsichord, for example, turn the meter OFF and turn
the sound ON, and then use the calibration mode to raise or lower the pitch of the Korg until the sound it
makes stops beating with the sound the harpsichord makes. Learn to hear the slow rolling change in
timbre which is the sound of an almost perfect unison. If you can hear this, you are already far beyond
what any meter can ever do.
The data and graphics
The data supplied here is primarily intended for the programming of the Korg MT1200 tuner. The first
column gives cents deviation from equal, arranged chromatically from C upwards, exactly as one would
enter it in the Korg. The second column gives the same data, but to a resolution of 1/10th cent. This is

10 The new OT-12 supposedly offers the added accuracy of two red fine tuning indicator lights, one for sharp and one for flat. The
idea is that only when both lamps are glowing is the note precisely tuned; if one or the other lamp flickers - even intermittently - the
tone is slightly sharp or flat. Unfortunately, the accuracy of the system offers no improvement over the old MT-1200. Recently I tested
an OT-12 under a variety of circumstances, using a pipe organ, a harpsichord, and electronic tones generated by a Korg MT-1200. Even
under the most ideal of situations, an electronic signal in an absolutely quite environment (the Korg MT-1200 was placed about 10 cm
in front of the OT-12), the readings were unreliable. With the OT-12 set at A = 415 Hz, the indicator lights accepted an input between
414.3 and 415.1 as precisely tuned. The needle jumped and wavered, and generally indicated anywhere from 2 to 5 cents sharper
than the actual fundamental frequency of the input musical tone.
Actually, I cant think of any good use for any Korg meter, except perhaps the rough adjustments during the building or voicing of
wind instruments or organ pipes. Even when chipping to pitch - the rough first tunings of harpsichords and pianos - I use the sound
of my Korg, matching the pitches coarsely by ear. Nothing is more distressing than to see professional wind players sitting in front of
their Korgs, working on intonation by watching the meter. Unfortunately, it is a sight I have seen all too often. Good intonation is an
acquired skill for the ears and the mind, NOT for the eyes. You cant learn to draw by listening to the sound of the pencil scratching on the
paper, nor can you learn to hear by watching a dancing needle. The audience does not listen with their eyes - why should musicians?
11 This is another general drawback to electronic tuning devices; they almost inevitably react to the fundamental frequency of the note
being tuned, filtering out the other harmonics, while our ears do just the opposite, that is, ignore the fundamental at pay much more
attention to the harmonics. This explains why instruments tuned with even the best of electronic visual indicators will often sound
out-of-tune to the ear; the machine has tuned the fundamental, while we listen to the harmonics.

intended for other tuning devices (should they exist) which allow a finer adjustment.12 The information
regarding the size of the fifths is intended for those who wish to tune these temperaments by ear. The
ratios provide all one needs to work out the frequencies at various pitch levels, from which one can
calculate beat rates. Many of these temperaments are described in the literature, and one can often find
preexisting recipes for setting them by ear. Note that I use the word Schisma to describe any fifth
which has a size which results from the consideration of the qualities of other intervals (for example,
tempering the fifths C#-G# and Ab-Eb by making a tolerable multi-functional G#/Ab).

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

The first graphic shows the deviation in cents from Just Intonation (i.e. pure intervals) for the minor (blue)
and major (red) thirds and perfect fifth (yellow) of each triad. The reference lines are intended to provide
general guides as to degree of tempering, and indicate the following: dotted red/blue lines are Equal
Tempered major/minor thirds, solid red/blue lines are Pythagorean thirds, solid yellow line is 1/4
Syntonic comma fifth. While the degree of unpleasantness or harshness of a tempered third is highly
subjective, and also highly dependent upon cultural programming, a general rule of thumb is that
Pythagorean and beyond are bad thirds, between Pythagorean and Equal the thirds are usable but not
very nice, and between Equal and Pure lies a broad zone of succesively better good thirds.

12 Increments of 1 cent are slightly too coarse for absolute purity of all intervals, and in fact, some of the supposedly pure major thirds
in the preprogrammed Korg temperaments beat very slowly (several seconds per beat). This minor error will not be noticed in musical
settings, though. The values given here differ slightly from those found in the Korg instruction booklet, probably due to rounding errors
in the Korg calculations. The data given here is the result of calculation of a set of frequencies using interval ratios to an accuracy of 13
decimal places; cents deviation is derived therefrom. For example, a pure fifth is taken as a ratio of 1:1.5000000000000, and the cents
value of 701.955 is derived from the resultant frequencies after calculation of the entire temperament, and finally rounded up to 702
cents.

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

The circular graphic is what I call a quality radar. It shows the overall severity of a temperament by
indicating the out-of-tuneness of the thirds and fifths. Whether the interval is too wide or too narrow is
immaterial; the graphs merely show how bad each interval is.13 The center of the graphic represents a
pure interval. The dotted green line represents an average of Equal Tempered major (14 cents wider than
pure) and minor thirds (16 cents narrower than pure), and the solid purple line is again an average of
Pythagorean major and minor thirds. The yellow squares showing the qualities of the fifths are not
plotted to the same scale as the thirds (in terms of cents), but rather expanded so that the same reference
lines act as general guides to the degree of tempering in terms of subjective perception. For fifths, the green
dotted line represents a 1/6th Pythagorean comma tempering - an example of a very good sounding fifth and the solid purple line represents a 1/4 Syntonic tempering - a fifth which is approaching the border of
acceptability (though slightly flatter fifths are found in some severe meantone tunings). The interval
color coding is the same as in the graph above. The more circular and centered the traces for the thirds, the
closer to Equal and the less differentiation in key quality. The more oval or irregularly-shaped and the
more eccentric, the more severe and the greater the key differentiation. Note that in the meantones and
their derivatives, certain intervals are literally off the map. The quality radar also shows the effect
upon thirds caused by the tempering of fifths. Start on any note and examine the tempering of the fifths
upon that note and the next three (going clockwise); the quality of the major third on the starting note is
the cumulative result of the observed tempering. The same process can be seen for minor thirds by going two
notes counter-clockwise around the circle.
Note that the temperaments are ordered according to increasing severity compared to equal. I specifically
wish to caution the reader that this should in no way be taken as any indication of the chronology or
historical appropriateness for the use of any given temperament for any specific piece of music. I strongly
encourage musicians to free themselves from the current fads of the historically [mis]informed
performance movement, and to experiment with all of the temperaments given here . . . excepting the old
workhorses, of course, which are shown here merely for comparison.

13 Whether or not an interval is larger or smaller than pure is only important in melodic contexts. The ear cannot differentiate between
a wide major third which beats 5 times a second and a narrow major third which beats 5 times a second - as long as the notes are
sounded simultaneously.

A few Pointers on Tuning

Almost all harpsichords and fortepianos have the highest tension levels in the tenor regions. Therefore,
any changes made here will have the greatest affect upon the flexible wooden structure, and will cause
the other registers of the instrument to go out of tune.14 Therefore, it is always best to begin by setting the
temperament in the tenor octave (tenor c to middle c) first, then tuning down into the bass (medium tension)
by octaves, and finally upward into the treble (lowest tension) by octaves. Harpsichords with two 8
choirs should have both choirs tuned in each register before moving on to the next - i.e. first tenor front and
back, then bass front and back, and finally treble front and back. Not only does this approach minimalize
the adverse affects of tension shifts upon the case structure, but it is also much easier to hear the higher
overtones in the tenor register. No wonder that most (if not all) historical tempering instructions tell the
student to set the temperament in the tenor octave.
About Reference Notes
The use of the note a 1 as a pitch reference is a mid-19th century invention, largely dependent upon the
adoption of Equal Temperament, and does not agree with historical tuning/tempering practice. In ancient
times, C, F, G, or D were used as pitch references. Most extant tempering instructions begin by setting C
with a tuning fork, though Gall (1805) begins with F. Many meantone modification recipes as well as
almost all well-temperament recipes begin by setting the major third C-E either pure or slightly wide of
pure, and then tempering the four fifths between. Modern players of wind instruments have become fixated
upon the level of a1, and then tend to scream and yell if the harpsichord or organ is not precisely at 415 or
430 or 428 or some such. Try to encourage them to learn to think more historically, and to use C, D, or F as
the note which defines the pitch level of their instruments.15 These notes are often closer to the home
keys of the instruments anyway, and as such, are more often stable and less flexible notes. String players
can of course easily shift to the slightly higher or lower pitch levels (when measured from an A reference)
created by the setting of different temperaments from a fixed C. They should learn to do so without
difficulty or complaint, just as their ancient forerunners did.
Unfortunately, the Korg MT1200 (as well as almost all modern tuning devices) only indicates the pitch of
a 1. However, you can convert all temperaments to a fixed pitch for C merely by subtracting the deviation
value for the note C from the values for all 12 notes of that temperament, and then programing the
temperament with the new values. Leaving the pitch reference set for 415 will produce a consistent C of
246.8 Hz, the pitch of an Equal Tempered C at a1 = 415 Hz. Be forewarned, however, that in such a case,
even though the calibration mode may read 415, the actual pitch of the note A will be lower or higher,
depending upon the deviation value programmed (but only when the user programmed temperament is
selected - all other temperaments will still produce an A of 415). For instance, if the normal deviation
value for C is +6 cents, the adjusted value will be 0, and the adjusted value for A will be -6 (since A is
normally 0). This means that the actual pitch for A produced by the Korg will be 413.6 Hz. Somebody is
certain to come along with another Korg and check your A, and then tell you that something is wrong with
your machine.
Alternatively, the best way - and the most musical way - of tuning a keyboard at a pitch level best suited
for a given wind instrument is as follows: have your wind player play a steady C (or F, or Bb - whatever is
the least flexible note on the instrument), set the Korg on the same note, turn the sound ON (meter OFF!),
and then, using the calibration mode, tune the Korg (by ear) to the instrument. Dont forget to first program
and select the temperament you are going to use, of course. Also remember that the clear and set
buttons can be used to change pitch by 10ths of a Hertz. Once the Korg is set to the proper pitch level, you
can then proceed to use it as a pitch source to set the 12 tones of the temperament (again, matching by ear,
not with the meter) of the keyboard instrument.

14 The substitution of modern framework designs and materials which characterized the beginnings of the historic harpsichord
revival has mostly much gone out of fashion, and most instruments made today can be expected to more or less accurately reproduce
the flexibility of the original instrument (though builders will argue over the fine points of this issue). The fortepiano revival is still not
as far advanced, however - even some very highly respected makers still persist in substituting their own improved framing systems
in place of the original internal design used by the ancient builder. Therefore, not all fortepiano copies, even of the same model (i.e.
instruments which are supposedly copies of a Walter, or a Stein), will exhibit the same sort of case movement during tuning. The
tuner must learn the peculiarities of each individual instrument in this respect.
15 Eric Hoeprich, for example, has often told me that he doesnt care so much about the exact temperament or pitch level of a1, as long
as the Bb is at the same level as an equal-tempered Bb at a pitch level of a1=428.5 Hz. This is because Bb is the home key of his original
clarinet, and as such, it is the least flexible note on the horn. He could just as well use the note F, being closer to the center of most
keyboard tempering schemes and also a home key note on the instrument.

10

Tuning Ensembles
Recently it seems to have become popular for keyboard players to give chords, either as block harmonies
or arpeggios, instead of single notes when players of strings or winds are tuning their instruments to the
keyboard. This practice is extremely unwise and only increases the difficulty of the task the
instrumentalist is trying to perform.
When we compare the sounds of two instruments playing the same note - a unison - we are listening for the
beats which tell us whether or not the two pitches are exactly the same. When the two instruments are out
of tune with one another, the beats we hear are primarily those caused by the first several overtones,
NOT by the fundamental frequency (the note we identify as being played). For example, if the cellist is
trying to tune a C string, he or she is listening for beats primarily at the 3rd harmonic (at the note g) and
the 5th harmonic (at the note e1). Whether or not the musician is consciously aware of the process is of no
importance; by definition, in tune means that the sound of these harmonics will be steady and unmoving.
Subconsciously or not, the musician adjusts the instrument until these beats disappear.
When the keyboard player plays chords instead of single notes, the sonic structure becomes a complicated
mini-cacaphony of conflicting beats caused by the temperament. In exactly the same manner that it is
impossible to tell if a beating interval is too wide or too narrow, it is impossible to tell if the beats are
coming from the mismatched unison between the two instruments or from the impure thirds and fifths of
the keyboard. Only by playing single tones can the keyboard player eliminate these imperfections and
give the other instrumentalist the pure untempered (i.e uncompromised) sound needed to match a good
unison. Playing chords robs the instrumentalist of the most effective tool for judging utterly perfect unisons:
the beating of harmonics. If the string or wind player is only given the choice of placing the tone of his
instrument so that it produces the least offensive mixture with various chords, his pitch will be vaguely
in tune with everything but perfectly in tune with nothing.
So if you are a string or wind player, dont be afraid to speak the next time your keyboard player starts
rolling chords up and down the instrument while you are trying to tune. Ask for the note you are tuning,
that and nothing else.
A related topic is that question often posed by string players: should the fifths on string instruments be
tuned pure or should they be the tempered fifths of the keyboard? The answer is obvious: take the
tempered fifths from the keyboard. If you dont, your open strings will always be out of tune with the
keyboard, a disastrous situation for continuo bass instruments. In temperaments where the fifths are very
small, like in Meantone, this also means you will have to shift positions quite noticeably to get fingered
notes in tune with the keyboard.
Talking about sound: Hertz (Hz) and Cents
Even a cursory investigation into the topic of temperament will quickly bring the student into contact with
various ways of describing tones and intervals. Those who do not have a scientific background sometimes
confuse them, not only using one or another for a purpose for which it is not suited, but in the worst cases
sometimes even mixing them indiscriminately, confusing cents with Hertz as though they were simply
different names for the same thing.
Hertz is the same as frequency, i.e. the number of back and forth vibrations per second made by the the
vibrating part of the instrument (a string, a column of air, vocal chords, etc.). This is an absolute
measurement, and is relative only to the passage of time. Hertz can only be used to describe one pitch
alone. Never use Hertz to describe the size of any interval, be it a musical interval (i.e major third, fifth,
etc.) or a temperament theory interval (i.e Pythagorean or Syntonic commas, lima, deisis, etc.).
Cents is a method of describing the distance between two frequencies. It is a proportional or relative
system, and as such cannot be used to describe one tone alone. The proportional relationship of 1:2 (the
octave) is divided into 12 proportionally-equal steps, and each step is then further divided into 100
proportionally-equal sub-steps, called cents. One cent is a proportion of 1:1.00057778951, meaning that if
you start with any given frequency and multiply it by 1.00057778951 for 1200 times, you will end up with a
frequency exactly twice the starting frequency.
Any interval is always the same number of cents regardless of how high or low it is on the keyboard. But
this is not so with Hertz. To illustrate the futility of trying to use Hertz to describe intervals, consider a
pure major third. Starting at bass C, which at modern Baroque pitch (i.e. a1 = 415 Hz) is about 62 Hz, the
11

E above which makes a pure third to it is 77.5 Hz, or a difference of 15.5 Hz. At middle c (c1), which is 247
Hz, the e1 above it is pure when it is 308.75 Hz, a difference of 61.75 Hz. At the top of a harpsichord
keyboard, c 3, which is 988 Hz, a pure e3 is 1235 Hz, or a difference of 247 Hz. So what is a pure major third;
15.5 Hz, 61.75 Hz, or 1235 Hz? The answer is None of the above, because Hertz cannot be used to describe
an interval. Even saying a difference of X Hz is incorrect, because Hz is a unit of position (within the
aural spectrum of frequency), not a unit of distance.
By contrast, a pure major third is always 386 cents. Take any pair of frequencies listed above and run them
through the cents formula, and the answer will always be 386. Likewise, a pure fifth is always 702 cents,
no matter which two frequencies define it.
Be very careful not to confuse these two, or you will end up sounding very stupid indeed. It is rather like
saying, I was born in the village of 50 kilometers, or The village where I was born is Paris from Berlin.
Additionally, one often encounters intervals represented as fractions, especially in ancient treatises. A
fifth may be given as 3/2, for example, or a pure major third as 5/4. These fractions are nothing more than
the proportions between any two frequencies which define such an interval. They are also (conveniently)
the numbers of the harmonics of a single tone which define the interval in question.16 For example, the
5th harmonic of the note C is an E, two octaves and a (pure) major third above the fundamental. The 4th
harmonic is a C two octaves above the fundamental. These the two together define a pure major third,
giving the ratio of 5:4. These fractions can also be converted to there decimal equivalents, i.e. 3/2 = 1.5 and
5/4 = 1.25. These are the numbers by which one must multiply a frequency by to make the interval in
question.
In ancient times, intervals (even very small intervals) were defined as proportions or fractions because
there was no other convenient way to do so. Logarithms, the mathematical tool needed to calculate cents,
have been around since the 17th century, but without calculators (either electronic or mechanical), there
was no easy way to use them. Even if there had been, the result had no practical application; knowing
that a pure fifth was 701.955 cents is utterly useless, unless you have an electronic machine that can be
programmed in cents from which you can get the two sounds. Fractions and proportions, however, can be
used to set the string lengths on a monochord, which is precisely how all temperament experimentation
was done.
Notice how fractions and proportions are a much more natural way of talking about intervals. A pure fifth
is the simple proportion of 3:2, or the simple fraction of 3/2. In cents, it is 701.955. A major third is even
worse. With the simple proportion of 5:4, its value in cents is 386.313713864835! This is because cents are an
artificial abstract construction, based on a logarithmic division of the octave, whereas proportions
represent the simply multiple-vibrational modes of a real string (or wind column, or vocal chord, or reed,
etc).
One might rightly ask, why do we even bother with cents? A very good question! I advise students of
temperament to first master proportional thinking. You will never really understand the whole topic
unless you return to the natural phenomena which underlie it all, preferably by actually doing monochord
experiments. Only after you have a firm grasp of the fundamentals should you adopt the modern artificial
and mathematically abstract means of talking about things.
Oh, by the way - the answer to the above question (why use cents?) is that cents can be added and
subtracted, while proportions must be multiplied and divided.
Fractions are also sometimes used to describe divisions of the Pythagorean and Syntonic commas. Be
careful not to confuse these with the fractions used to describe frequency ratios. If you see a chain of fifths
with fractions like 1/6 or 1/5 between them, it means these fifths are tempered by that fraction of
whichever comma is being compensated. Ancient theorists actually converted these comma fractions in the
real string length proportions for the tempered intervals, coming up with ridiculous values like 442:295,
which is a pretty good (though not absolutely perfect) representation of a fifth tempered by 1/12th
Pythagorean comma. Believe it or not, they actually marked their monochords in such precise divisions
16 Be careful not to confuse harmonics with overtones. While they refer to the same things, the numbering system is different.
Overtones are the tones over the fundamental, excluding the fundamental, while harmonics are all of the overtones including
the fundamental. Therefore, the 1st overtone (the 1st tone over the fundamental) is the 2nd harmonic, the 2nd overtone the 3rd
harmonic, etc. You will often hear people say things like, A pure fifth is found between the 2nd and 3rd overtones. Actually, the 2nd
and 3rd overtones have ratio of 3:4, and define a pure fourth - not a fifth. This may seem like hair splitting, but when you realize that it
is the numbers of the harmonics and not the overtones which define the ratio of pure intervals, you will see why it is important to be
careful in how you describe things.

12

and then tried to place the bridge at these lengths. Real musicians simply juggled and adjusted things as
they moved around the circle of fifths while setting the temperament.
For those who might wish to calculate the cents between two frequencies, or to calculate a frequency a
given number of cents away from another, or convert proportions into cents and vice versa, youll either
need a computer spreadsheet or a calculator with log and 10x keys. The formulas are as follows:
Given two frequencies a and b:
cents = log(a/b)/log(2) x 1200
Starting with a fraction or proportion, simply substitute the fraction for a/b.
Given cents and frequency a:

frequency b = frequency a x 10(cents/1200 x log2)

The proportion for any value in cents is equal to the 10x expression in the above formula.
Rules of Thumb for Tuning and Tempering by Ear
When stacking fifths of the same size (i.e the same degree of tempering), remember that the higher fifth
will beat 1 1/2 times faster than the lower. For example, if you want the series c-g-d1 to have fifths
tempered by the same amount, and if c-g beats 2 times a second, temper g-d1 (by adjusting d1) until it beats 3
times a second (2 x 1 1/2). The same is true with stacked thirds of the same size, excepting the ratio is
1:1.25. In other words, if c-e beats 2 times a second, e-g# will beat 2 1/2 times a second (2 x 1 1/4). Hearing
the difference is easy if you double the time during which you count beats; the first third would beat 4
times in 2 seconds, the second 5 times in 2 seconds.
When transposing tempered intervals by an octave up or down, the beat rate will be doubled or halved
respectively. For example, if c-e beats twice a second, c1-e 1 will beat 4 times a second, and C-E once a
second. These relationships can be combined; for example, the above series of c-g-d1 all tempered by the
same amount could also be set as c-g (2 bps), take g down an octave (pure) to G, set G-D to beat at 1.5bps (2 /
2 x 1.5).
A couple Handy Tricks
How to tune a Baroque middle c from an a1= 440 fork:
Tune b-flat1 to the fork, then tune f 1<b-flat1 pure, and finally tune c1<f 1 pure. The resultant pitch is
almost exactly an equal-tempered middle c at a1 = 415.
How to tune a Classical middle c from a modern a1= 440 fork:
Tune a1 to the fork, then tune tenor a as a pure octave down (a<a1) . Tune upward a series of pure (no beats)
major thirds a>c# 1>f 1. Tune one string of the middle c choir as a pure fourth below the f, then tune the
other string slightly flat so that it beats twice a second. This second string will have the frequency of an
equal-tempered middle c (255.7 Hz) at a1= 430.

And finally . . .
Dont be afraid to experiment, but try to keep your experimentation grounded in historical reality.
Beethoven in Meantone may sound striking, but its got nothing to do with historical practice. English
organ music from the first half of the 19th century, on the other hand, should be played in Meantone
(again demonstrating that organ temperaments and other keyboard instrument temperaments for any given
time/place do not necessarily agree). At the other end of the spectrum, people often make the mistake of
thinking that if a composer writes a quiet or peaceful piece in a distant key (Ab major, G# minor), it should
sound good, and they try to devise a temperament which moves the good major or minor thirds to these
zones (especially with Classical and Romantic music). However, there is no historical evidence that this
was ever done; to the contrary, composers who wrote in these keys were either thinking in Equal
Temperament, or they specifically wanted the contrast between peacefully-moving music and the unrest
created by the harsh thirds. Also, dont fall into the trap of automatically rejecting Equal Temperament
for early music - it HAS been around since Day One, and it may be a valid choice even for some early music,
even Renaissance music - under certain circumstances. Read, explore, and keep an open mind. Have fun!

13

Devising Tempering Recipes for Tempering by Ear

All of the information given here can be used to devise recipes for setting temperaments by ear, although
people who have little experience with sophisticated well-temperaments often voice their doubts about
the practicality of such schemes. Arent they almost impossible to tune by ear?, they ask, pointing to
the complicated logic. The answer is No, they are not. You simply have to learn to think like the
Baroque musicians did. Here is but one example, Neidhardts circulating temperament for either a
village (1724) or a small city (1732).
The logic and dispersion of comma division is as follows:
C 1/6 G 1/6 D 1/6 A 1/6 E 1/12 B 1/12 F# 0 C# 0 G# 1/12 Eb 1/12 Bb 0 F 0 C
(All fractions are Pythagorean comma, 0 = pure fifth)
The circle below shows both the logic and tempering methodology combined. Despite the fact that this is
technically a well-temperament, the methodology used to set it is firmly grounded in the modifiedmeantone methods of Couperin, Rameau, Schlick, and Werckmeister, demonstrating the seamless
transition from meantone to well-tempered thinking which took place around the beginning of the 18th
century. The setting of the temperament is divided into three phases:
Phase I - the initial major third C-E is determined, and these two notes are then used as anchor points
(fixed references) for tempering the four fifths which lie between them by the same amount. This is
exactly how one begins setting Meantone, except here the third is slightly wider than pure (just as it is in
1/5th or 1/6th comma Meantone).
Phase II - the enharmonic G#/Ab is tempered by placing it so that it creates two tempered major thirds of
equal size (C > Ab/G# < E), both of which are significantly wider than the first major third. This divides
the remaining eight fifths into two groups of four. These three notes (C, Ab/G#, and E) are then used as
anchor points for Phase III.
Phase III - the space inside each of these two major thirds is divided using identical logic: two pure fifths
sitting atop two equally-tempered (and Equal Temperament - 1/12th comma) fifths. In each case, we start
with the top note of the encompassing major third, and go downward tuning two pure fifths - for example,
tune F down from C, tune Bb down from F. The final note, Eb, is then placed so that it creates two fifths
tempered by the same amount (i.e. Bb > Eb = Eb < Ab), exactly in the same way that the position of Ab/G#
was determined. The process is repeated for the four fifths which fill in the third G#-E.

Logic and tuning methodology

Dashed lines indicate tempered intervals, solid lines indicate pure intervals.

In the recipe given below, notes to be tuned are in red type. Between the note being tuned and the note being
used as an anchor point an arrow shows the relationship; e<c, for example, means tune the e from the c
(the c is the anchor). Arrows in both directions means use both notes as anchors, thus e>g#<c means tune g#
from both e and c, comparing the qualities of both thirds. Double ended arrows > < means going back and
forth through the series between two anchors at either end of the series. The recipe is as follows:
14

At a 415, starting from c1 set to a fork, all octaves are to be tuned pure:
Phase I
1. Tune tenor c<c1
2. Tune e<c, slightly wide (sharp) of pure, beating slightly faster than 2 beats/second.
3. Tune c>g> <d1> <d> <a<e (without changing the c or the e). Temper the 4 fifths between c and e
equally (i.e. make them all the same size), remembering that fifths which sit higher on the keyboard
beat faster than lower fifths of the same size.
Phase II
4. Tune e>g#<c1 so that the major third g#>c sounds ever so slightly rougher than e<g# (the actual beat
rates are about 10 and 8 beats/second respectively - the thirds are the same size, but the higher third
naturally beats faster).
Phase III
5. Tune c#<g# pure
6. Tune c# 1<c#, then tune f#<c# as a pure fifth. Tune the octave f#1<f#.
7. Tune e>b<f# so that both fifths are equally tempered, remembering that the higher fifth beats slightly
faster.
8. Use exactly the same pattern to fill in the gap from c down to g#, i.e., tune f<c pure, tune f 1<f, tune bflat<f 1 pure, drop the g# anchor down an octave to G# (G#<g#), and then tune e-flat by making equallytempered fifths above and below it (G#>e-flat<b-flat).
Once you learn this temperament, it is an incredibly easy to both set and remember. It is a good starting
place for gaining an insight into the both the theory and the practical methodology (which often
generated the theory in the first place) of the old masters. The listening skills required are no more
complex than tuning pure fifths and doing exactly the same sort of get it in the middle juggling one needs
for tempering the first four meantone fifths. Once you've done it a few times its as fast and easy as
anything else . . . and a million times easier than Equal Temperament.

15

Equal Temperament (Neidhardt 1724 Court)

C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

deviation
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

cents
700
700
700
700
700
700
700
700
700
700
700
700

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.498307
1.498307
1.498307
1.498307
1.498307
1.498307
1.498307
1.498307
1.498307
1.498307
1.498307
1.498307

type
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

16

Sorge 1758
deviation
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

6
2
2
4
0
4
2
4
4
0
4
2

cents
C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

5.9
2.0
2.0
3.9
0.0
3.9
2.0
3.9
3.9
0.0
3.9
2.0

ratio
698
698
698
700
702
700
700
702
700
700
700
702

type
1.496616
1.496616
1.496616
1.498307
1.500000
1.498307
1.498307
1.500000
1.498307
1.498307
1.498307
1.500000

1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/12 P.
Pure
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
Pure
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
Pure

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

17

Sorge 1744a
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

4
2
0
6
0
6
2
2
4
0
6
2

deviation
3.9
2.0
0.0
5.9
0.0
5.9
2.0
2.0
3.9
0.0
5.9
2.0

cents
698
698
700
700
702
700
700
702
702
700
700
698

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.496616
1.496616
1.498307
1.498307
1.500000
1.498307
1.498307
1.500000
1.500000
1.498307
1.498307
1.496616

type
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
Pure
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
Pure
Pure
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
1/6 P.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

18

Sorge 1744b
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B
B

6
0
2
4
2
4
0
4
2
0
4
0
2

deviation
5.9
0.0
2.0
3.9
2.0
3.9
0.0
3.9
2.0
0.0
3.9
0.0
2.0

cents
698
698
698
702
698
700
700
702
702
700
700
702
698

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F
F

ratio
1.496616
1.496616
1.496616
1.500000
1.496616
1.498307
1.498307
1.500000
1.500000
1.498307
1.498307
1.500000
1.496616

type
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
Pure
1/6 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
Pure
Pure
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
Pure
1/6 P.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

19

Neidhardt 1724 Big City

C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

6
2
2
4
0
4
2
2
2
0
4
2

deviation
5.9
2.0
2.0
3.9
0.0
3.9
2.0
2.0
2.0
0.0
3.9
2.0

cents
696
700
698
700
702
700
700
700
702
700
700
702

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.494927
1.498307
1.496616
1.498307
1.500000
1.498307
1.498307
1.498307
1.500000
1.498307
1.498307
1.500000

type
1/4 P.
1/12 P.
1/6 P.
1/12 P.
Pure
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
Pure
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
Pure

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

20

Neidhardt 1724 Small City, 1732 Big City

C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

6
2
2
4
0
6
2
4
2
0
6
2

deviation
5.9
2.0
2.0
3.9
0.0
5.9
2.0
3.9
2.0
0.0
5.9
2.0

cents
698
698
698
700
702
700
700
700
702
702
700
700

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.496616
1.496616
1.496616
1.498307
1.500000
1.498307
1.498307
1.498307
1.500000
1.500000
1.498307
1.498307

type
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/12 P.
Pure
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
Pure
Pure
1/12 P.
1/12 P.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

21

Neidhardt 1724 Village, 1732 Small City

C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

6
0
2
2
-2
4
-2
4
2
0
2
-2

deviation
5.9
0.0
2.0
2.0
-2.0
3.9
-2.0
3.9
2.0
0.0
2.0
-2.0

cents
698
698
698
698
700
700
702
702
700
700
702
702

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.496616
1.496616
1.496616
1.496616
1.498307
1.498307
1.500000
1.500000
1.498307
1.498307
1.500000
1.500000

type
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
Pure
Pure
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
Pure
Pure

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

22

Neidhardt 1732 Village

C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

6
0
4
2
-4
4
-2
6
0
0
4
-2

deviation
5.9
0.0
3.9
2.0
-3.9
3.9
-2.0
5.9
0.0
0.0
3.9
-2.0

cents
700
698
696
696
702
700
702
700
702
702
700
702

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.498307
1.496616
1.494927
1.494927
1.500000
1.498307
1.500000
1.498307
1.500000
1.500000
1.498307
1.500000

type
1/12 P.
1/6 P.
1/4 P.
1/4 P.
Pure
1/12 P.
Pure
1/12 P.
Pure
Pure
1/12 P.
Pure

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

23

Young 1
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

6
0
2
4
-2
6
-2
4
2
0
6
-2

deviation
5.9
0.0
2.0
3.9
-2.0
5.9
-2.0
3.9
2.0
0.0
5.9
-2.0

cents
698
698
698
698
700
700
702
702
702
702
700
700

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.496616
1.496616
1.496616
1.496616
1.498307
1.498307
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.498307
1.498307

type
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/12 P.
1/12 P.
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
1/12 P.
1/12 P.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

24

Vallotti
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

6
0
2
4
-2
8
-2
4
2
0
6
-4

deviation
5.9
0.0
2.0
3.9
-2.0
7.8
-2.0
3.9
2.0
0.0
5.9
-3.9

cents
698
698
698
698
698
702
702
702
702
702
702
698

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.496616
1.496616
1.496616
1.496616
1.496616
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.496616

type
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
1/6 P.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

25

Young 2
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

6
-4
2
0
-2
4
-6
4
-2
0
2
-4

deviation
5.9
-3.9
2.0
0.0
-2.0
3.9
-5.9
3.9
-2.0
0.0
2.0
-3.9

cents
698
698
698
698
698
698
702
702
702
702
702
702

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.496616
1.496616
1.496616
1.496616
1.496616
1.496616
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000

type
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

26

Barnes "Bach"
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

6
0
2
4
-2
8
-2
4
2
0
6
0

deviation
5.9
0.0
2.0
3.9
-2.0
7.8
-2.0
3.9
2.0
0.0
5.9
0.0

cents
698
698
698
698
702
698
702
702
702
702
702
698

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.496616
1.496616
1.496616
1.496616
1.500000
1.496616
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.496616

type
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
Pure
1/6 P.
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
1/6 P.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

27

Kellner "Bach"
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

8
-2
3
2
-3
6
-4
5
0
0
4
-1

deviation
8.2
-1.6
2.7
2.3
-2.7
6.3
-3.5
5.5
0.4
0.0
4.3
-0.8

cents
697
697
697
697
702
697
702
702
702
702
702
702

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.495940
1.495940
1.495940
1.495940
1.500000
1.495940
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000

type
1/5 P.
1/5 P.
1/5 P.
1/5 P.
Pure
1/5 P.
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

28

Werckmeister Organ Temperament (Werckmeister III)

C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

12
2
4
6
2
10
0
8
4
0
8
4

deviation
11.7
2.0
3.9
5.9
2.0
9.8
0.0
7.8
3.9
0.0
7.8
3.9

cents
696
696
696
702
702
696
702
702
702
702
702
702

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.494927
1.494927
1.494927
1.500000
1.500000
1.494927
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000

type
1/4 P.
1/4 P.
1/4 P.
Pure
Pure
1/4 P.
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

29

Kirnberger III
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

10
0
3
4
-3
8
0
7
2
0
6
-1

deviation
10.3
0.5
3.4
4.4
-3.4
8.3
0.5
6.8
2.4
0.0
6.4
-1.5

cents
697
697
697
697
702
702
700
702
702
702
702
702

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.500000
1.500000
1.498307
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000

type
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
Pure
Pure
1/12 P.
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

30

Stanhope
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

8
0
5
3
-5
7
-1
10
2
0
5
-3

deviation
8.5
0.2
5.2
3.1
-5.2
6.5
-1.3
10.4
1.6
0.0
4.6
-3.3

cents
702
695
695
695
702
702
701
701
701
701
702
702

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.500000
1.493802
1.493802
1.493802
1.500000
1.500000
1.499584
1.499584
1.499584
1.499555
1.500000
1.500000

type
Pure
1/3 S.
1/3 S.
1/3 S.
Pure
Pure
Sch.
Sch.
Sch.
Sch.
Pure
Pure

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

31

Werckmeister Clavier Temperament 1/6th Syntonic

C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

5
-7
2
1
-2
7
-5
3
-3
0
5
-3

deviation
4.9
-6.5
1.6
0.6
-1.6
6.5
-4.9
3.3
-3.5
0.0
4.6
-3.3

cents
698
698
698
698
698
698
698
703
704
704
702
698

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.496898
1.496898
1.496898
1.496898
1.496898
1.496898
1.496898
1.500944
1.501801
1.501776
1.500000
1.496898

type
1/6 S.
1/6 S.
1/6 S.
1/6 S.
1/6 S.
1/6 S.
1/6 S.
Sch.
Sch.
Sch.
Pure
1/6 S.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

32

Werckmeister Clavier Temperament 1/5th Syntonic

C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

7
-9
2
0
-2
9
-7
5
-6
0
7
-5

deviation
6.9
-9.2
2.3
0.4
-2.3
9.2
-6.9
4.6
-6.2
0.0
7.2
-4.6

cents
698
698
698
698
698
698
698
703
707
707
702
698

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.496318
1.496318
1.496318
1.496318
1.496318
1.496318
1.496318
1.500918
1.504055
1.504206
1.500000
1.496318

type
1/5 S.
1/5 S.
1/5 S.
1/5 S.
1/5 S.
1/5 S.
1/5 S.
Sch.
Sch.
Sch.
Pure
1/5 S.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

33

Ordinaire
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

8
-6
3
0
-3
10
-8
5
-4
0
5
-5

deviation
7.7
-5.7
2.6
0.0
-2.6
10.3
-7.7
5.1
-3.8
0.0
5.1
-5.1

cents
697
697
697
697
697
697
702
702
704
705
705
697

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.496089
1.496089
1.496089
1.496089
1.496089
1.496089
1.500000
1.500000
1.501585
1.502753
1.502753
1.496089

type
1/5 P.
1/5 P.
1/5 P.
1/5 P.
1/5 P.
1/5 P.
Pure
Pure
Sch.
Sch.
Sch.
1/5 P.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

34

Schlick modified-meantone
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

6
-6
2
10
-2
8
-5
4
6
0
9
-4

deviation
5.9
-6.0
2.0
9.8
-2.0
7.8
-4.9
3.9
6.1
0.0
8.8
-3.9

cents
698
698
698
698
698
699
699
712
704
699
699
698

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.496616
1.496613
1.496619
1.496616
1.496616
1.497442
1.497398
1.508772
1.501535
1.497445
1.497441
1.496617

type
1/6 P.
1/5 S.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 P.
1/6 S.
1/6 S.
wolf
Sch.
1/6 S.
1/6 S.
1/6 P.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

35

Rameau modified-meantone
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

10
-3
3
8
-3
14
-5
7
-1
0
17
-7

deviation
10.3
-2.9
3.4
8.1
-3.4
13.7
-4.9
6.8
-1.0
0.0
17.1
-6.8

cents
697
697
697
697
697
702
702
702
709
709
697
697

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.506154
1.506154
1.495348
1.495349

type
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
Pure
Pure
Pure
1/2 wolf
1/2 wolf
1/4 S.
1/4 S.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

36

Couperin modified-meantone
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

10
-14
3
0
-3
14
-10
7
-17
0
7
-7

deviation
10.3
-13.7
3.4
-0.2
-3.4
13.7
-10.3
6.8
-17.1
0.0
6.6
-6.8

cents
697
697
697
697
697
697
697
697
717
707
707
697

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.513020
1.504209
1.504439
1.495349

type
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
wolf
Sch.
Sch.
1/4 S.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

37

Newcastle
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

16
-7
5
24
2
21
-1
10
-5
0
19
4

deviation
15.6
-6.5
5.2
24.1
2.0
20.9
-1.3
10.4
-4.6
0.0
18.9
3.9

cents
695
695
695
702
702
695
695
702
729
695
702
695

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.493801
1.493801
1.493802
1.500000
1.500000
1.493801
1.493802
1.500000
1.523331
1.493801
1.500000
1.493801

type
1/3 S.
1/3 S.
1/3 S.
Pure
Pure
1/3 S.
1/3 S.
Pure
wolf
1/3 S.
Pure
1/3 S.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

38

1/6 Meantone
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

5
-7
2
10
-2
7
-5
3
-8
0
8
-3

deviation
4.9
-6.5
1.6
9.8
-1.6
6.5
-4.9
3.3
-8.1
0.0
8.1
-3.3

cents
698
698
698
698
698
698
698
698
718
698
698
698

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.496898
1.496898
1.496898
1.496898
1.496898
1.496898
1.496898
1.496898
1.513899
1.496898
1.496898
1.496898

type
1/6 S.
1/6 S.
1/6 S.
1/6 S.
1/6 S.
1/6 S.
1/6 S.
1/6 S.
wolf
1/6 S.
1/6 S.
1/6 S.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

39

1/5 meantone
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

7
-9
2
14
-2
9
-7
5
-12
0
12
-5

deviation
7.0
-9.4
2.3
14.1
-2.3
9.4
-7.0
4.7
-11.7
0.0
11.7
-4.7

cents
698
698
698
698
698
698
698
698
726
698
698
698

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.496278
1.496278
1.496278
1.496278
1.496278
1.496278
1.496278
1.496278
1.520811
1.496278
1.496278
1.496278

type
1/5 S.
1/5 S.
1/5 S.
1/5 S.
1/5 S.
1/5 S.
1/5 S.
1/5 S.
wolf
1/5 S.
1/5 S.
1/5 S.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

40

1/4 meantone
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

10
-14
3
21
-3
14
-10
7
-17
0
17
-7

deviation
10.3
-13.7
3.4
20.5
-3.4
13.7
-10.3
6.8
-17.1
0.0
17.1
-6.8

cents
697
697
697
697
697
697
697
697
738
697
697
697

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349
1.531237
1.495349
1.495349
1.495349

type
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
wolf
1/4 S.
1/4 S.
1/4 S.

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

41

Pythagorean Tuning
C
C#
D
Eb
E
F
F#
G
G#
A
Bb
B

-6
8
-2
-12
2
-8
6
-4
10
0
-10
4

deviation
-5.9
7.8
-2.0
-11.7
2.0
-7.8
5.9
-3.9
9.8
0.0
-9.8
3.9

cents
702
702
702
702
702
702
702
702
678
702
702
702

C
G
D
A
E
B
F#
C#
G#
Eb
Bb
F

ratio
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000
1.479811
1.500000
1.500000
1.500000

type
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pure
Pyth. Comma
Pure
Pure
Pure

50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
C

F#

C#

G#

Eb

Bb

C
F

Bb

Eb

G#

C#

B
F#

42

Appendix
Werckmeisters Harpsichord Temperament
Werckmeisters harpsichord temperament instruction appeared in his 1698 book Die nothwendigsten
Anmerckungen und Regeln wie der Bassus continuous oder General-Bass wohl knne tractiret werden, und
ein jeder, so nur wenig Wissenschaft von der Music und Clavier hat, denselben vor sich erlernen knne, and
was summarized by F. T. Arnold is his The Art of Accompaniment from a Thorough-bass as practised in the
XVIIth & XVIIIth Centuries (1931). Arnolds description is as such:
The temperament which he advocates, as explained in an Appendix: Kurzer Unterricht und
Zugabe, wie man ein Clavier stimmen und wohl temperiren konne (Short Instruction and
Supplement, as to how a Clavier may be tuned and tempered), is a form of unequal temperament
in which all the major Thirds are slightly sharp (especially g# and d#), while most of the
Fifths are slightly flat. The exceptions are best described in Werckmeister's own words: with
this c sharp the Fifth, g sharp, can be tuned almost true [i.e. infinitesimally flat]; the test for
the g sharp is e; this Third is usually a little too much on the sharp side (diese Tertia pfleget
wohl ein wenig scharf zu fallen), but if one contemplates using the #g in the place of flat-a, as f
- flat-a - C, it cannot be helped. With the #g the Fifth #d is tuned. The #d may be just a little
sharp in relation to the #g, in order that it may be tolerably consonant as major Third to b and
as major Third to g [i.e. when used as flat-e]. With this # d the Octave # d is again tuned true;
with this # d the Fifth flat-b may be tuned, which may also be slightly sharp, in order that
the [#] d may be tolerable as its appropriate Third.
With flat-b the Fifth f may be tuned, again slightly sharp, or quite true, according to how the
f sounds in relation to the e, as the last Terminus, or, again, to the last test-note a, as a major
Third f-a.
The major Thirds are to be used throughout as tests: if their sharpness is excessive the Fifths
must be flattened.
Werckmeister's tuning scheme (given in accordance with his own minute instructions) is as
follows; the round black notes represent the standard notes, and the white notes those which
are tuned to them, while the diamond-shaped black notes are the tests.

Like many ancient tempering instructions, these are open to interpretation, a situation complicated by
Arnolds second-hand description. However, if we can take Arnold literally - that the majority of the
thirds are to be slightly sharp and the fifths slightly flat - it would seem that Werckmeister is implying
a basic meantone scheme with a Syntonic comma fraction larger than 1/4. This supposition is further
strengthened by Werckmeisters tuning scheme, which begins like any normal meantone scheme; temper
the four fifths between C and E and then check the quality of the major third. He proceeds in a similar
manner, tempering each fifth successively and checking it by the quality of the thirds. The deviation from
the size of a normal good third, however sharp that may be, begins when tuning the note G# from the C#
which has already been set and checked against the A.
I do not agree with Arnolds bracketed conclusion that Werckmeisters words mean that the fifth C#-G#
should be slightly narrower than pure. Almost pure does not imply direction, only closeness to purity. It
might seem logical to start from an assumption of a slightly narrow tempered fifth, since all fifths have
been narrow up to this point, and then to widen it until it is almost pure. But the problem is that a
narrow fifth does not produce a G# which meets Werckmeisters specified criteria. If the fifth C#-G# is
left slightly narrow of pure, it inevitably creates thirds on the sharp side of the circle which are slightly
purer or less bright than those on the flat side. This is exactly the opposite of almost all other
temperament schemes of the time, both of the modified-meantone sort and well-temperaments. It also
contradicts the traditional affects of the keys, sharp keys being more lively and stimulating than
flat keys. Making this fifth small also inevitably makes E-G# only a little bit sharper than its good
neighbors (D-F# and G-B), and does not improve the bad third Ab-C or the bad minor triad F-Ab-C by very
43

much. Only if this fifth is made wider than pure do the intervals come more in line with Werckmeisters
description. Thus I have chosen to make the fifth slightly larger than pure, but only slightly so, that it is
almost pure. At the time Arnold was writing, there was almost no awareness of tempering schemes other
than Equal. Therefore he would not have been aware of the general trends indicated by other systems, and
this lack of familiarity with the historical evidence would have allowed him to make the wrong
conclusion as to the meaning of Werkmeisters instruction.
The main point of vagueness, however, is Werckmeisters complete failure to describe the nature of the
last fifth which closes the circle: F-C. He does, however, say the F must make a good third with the A,
and the tuning scheme shows the F major triad as the final check. Since F major was generally considered
to be a key of repose and calm, I assume that its major third should not be any wider than that of C major.
This is indeed the case in all the other meantone modifications, as well as in a large number of the welltemperaments. Thus I have made F-C the same size as the other normal fifths, which also makes F-A
the same size as the other good thirds.
My interpretation is by no means cast in stone. I encourage keyboard players to experiment with solutions
to the puzzle of Werckmeisters descriptions, but only after acquiring both familiarity with the logic of
the other meantone variations and the sounds of their harmonies. Many subtle variations are indeed
possible, though the final outcome will always be more or less the same: a temperament distinctly
different from the ubiquitous Werckmeister III of the modern historically [mis]informed performance
movement.

44