{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.033783783783783786, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0074002574002574005, 'mean_word_length': 4.57168458781362, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Introduction to Early Medieval Notation (review)

Pier Francesco Tosi, and even the flutist and theoretician Johann Joachim Quantz recognized two distinct semitones: major and minor, or chromatic and diatonic. For example, the interval of G to G-sharp was a minor or chromatic semitone, while G to A-flat was a major or diatonic semitone. This provides evidence that sharp notes were performed a little lower, while flat notes were performed a little higher by these musicians. Perhaps the most revealing point in the book was that ET was not widely adopted until relatively recently, the early twentieth century. Piano and organ tuners in midnineteenth century England believed they were tuning in ET, but the work of Helm holtz and A. J. Ellis showed otherwise. Owen Jorgensen set 1917 as the beginning date for the broad adoption of ET because of the publication of William White’s Modern Piano Tuning and Allied Arts (New York: E. L. Bill, 1917), which used contemporary scientific methods such as beat counting and comparative intervals to produce truly universal ET. Duffin contends that we stick with ET not because it sounds better, but because of its convenience. Musicians who grew up with ET simply are not aware that other systems exist. His case for using other systems, such as the sixth-comma meantone, is summed up when he says, “Bach agrees. Mozart agrees. The finest piano tuners of the nineteenth century agree. One of the greatest violin virtuosos of the nineteenth century [ Joseph Joachim] agrees. Who are we to argue with this unanimity?” (p. 150). He makes a final plea for what he calls “harmonic intonation” (p. 152). “String players [should] narrow their open strings a little more than they narrow them for ET. Then, aim to play the major thirds fairly narrow and the minor thirds a little wide. One of the best ways to accomplish this while playing a melodic line is to raise the flatted notes slightly (!) and lower the sharped notes slightly (!). I know that seems counterintuitive, but it will result in a flexible system like the one described by theorists for non-keyboard instruments in the eighteenth century” (p. 151). With any book of this sort, actually hearing the differences between the various tunings and temperaments would be extremely valuable. The book does not come with an accompanying compact disc, but Duffin has audio examples available on his “letter to readers” Web site (needing QuickTime and ActiveX controls) linked from: http://music.cwru.edu/duffin/ (accessed 21 November 2007). Also, a glossary of terms would have been helpful in studying the text. Duffin’s book takes a dull and complex topic and makes it understandable and interesting. It is truly fun to read and tells an important story. It will function well as a supplemental text for many music theory or music history courses. Thus, it is important to have in every music library. Will any of our current classical musicians change their concept of intonation based on this book? Probably not. But at least there is a rational acoustical explanation as to why fiddlers play “out of tune.”