Temperament: The Idea That Solved Music's Greatest Riddle

Stuart Isacoff's examination of the evolution of this facet of music was, to my surprise, a really "good read." Musical temperament is a somewhat esoteric subject, so I didn't expect it to be presented in such clear, literate prose. Isacoff obviously did an immense amount of research, but his book is not ponderous. It manages to reflect his obvious fascination with this topic, and to combine historical information with some original ideas. It was thus distressing to read Bradley Lehman's recent review on this website. His accusation that Temperament contains "unscholarly sloppiness" seems itself to be both unscholarly and sloppy. Lehman is inaccurate in saying that Isacoff took his Willaert text from Lindley and then distorted it. Actually, both Lindley and Isacoff relied on Edward Lowinsky for this material. The difference is that Isacoff presented Lowinsky's complete argument, and Lindley didn't. Mr. Lehman is therefore actually criticizing the renowned musicologist Edward Lowinsky. Isacoff gives credit to the Lowinsky source in his bibliography, which contains some 300 items. Oddly, Mr. Lehman claims this is too short. Why? Temperament isn't either a textbook or an esoteric treatise. It's a popularization aimed at the general public, more like the "Science Times" than like "Scientific American." That's why it's so readable. The rest of Mr. Lehman's entry contains several careless statements. For example, he suggests that Isacoff should have consulted Rita Steblin's dissertation, which demonstrates that there was no general agreement about the nature of key color. Yet that is exactly the position Isacoff takes. Most objectionable is Mr. Lehman's allusion to Nazism. He skirts the edges of libel by implying that Isacoff's description of equal temperament as "the final solution" to tonal music is in some unfathomable way akin to "the way somebody else's `final solution' eliminated human beings." That is a shameful insinuation, and it is not only illogical, it is irresponsible. For the record, Temperament has been used by such prestigious centers of learning as Harvard, MIT and Brown.

I thoroughly enjoyed this book and, for the first time in my life, feel that I actually understand the issues around temperament. I would recommend this book to a lot of people but not everyone, as the number of negative reviews illustrates. The negative reviews for this book seem to fall into four categories-if you are in one of those groups then you may want to buy a different book: 1) The lunatic fringe: Examples here are: The review that castigates the book for abusing non-Western music (It's hard to see the point of this complaint since the intent of the book is to discuss the role of temperament in Western music--no real mention is made of any other kind of music); The review by the person who read only a 2 or 3 page excerpt of the book (apparently ignorance is no impediment to opinion); The person who hadn't read the book yet but would post a review when they had (see previous); The reviewer who felt that the book was all about sex (I missed that). And so on. 2) People who were unhappy about the lack of technical detail. While I am obviously disparaging the previous group, these reviewers have a valid complaint. These readers were looking for (as examples): actual scores; more math with more explicit discussion of the exact size of the differentials between similarly named tones; more technical terms (e.g. "hertz"). I have a good grounding in math, read a lot of technical material, but would probably best be described as a "music lover". I'm just not in these reviewers league. Since I don't read music, for instance, a score would be useless to me. For the audience that I represent, the level of technical detail worked very well and is appropriate for a "general interest" book. The author's description of the music met my needs and the prescence of a score wouldn't have helped. I didn't miss the technical details that these other readers were looking for. 3) Reviewers who felt a lot of the book was irrelevant and fluff. Also a valid comment as much of the book isn't directly about temperament (as an example, these reviewers would probably point to chapter 7, which is an overview of the birth of the Renaissance). However, the author's intent is not to discuss temperament but to discuss how the battles over temperament reflected much of what else was going on politically and culturally at the time. He wants to claim that the discussions of temperament reflected other battles and that the arguments over temperament were enabled only by other changes going on in the world. If that larger discussion doesn't interest you, this is the wrong book for you in the same way that the lack of technical detail made the book an unhappy experience for the previous group of readers. Again, I enjoy the kind of writing that tries to draw connections between relatively obscure technical matters and larger social interests. However, it does mean that this isn't a book that is just about temperament. 4) People who wished the author had gone into more d

This book did even more than what I hoped it would do.First of all, it grabbed my attention. I didn't even know there was problem with our musical scale, let alone a controversy that lasted hundreds of years and involved the greatest scientific, religious, and musical minds of the day!Then the book explained the subject in an interesting way. So interestingly, in fact, that I found myself wishing for even more of the technical details (imagine that!).I'm not at all convinced (as I was led to believe by other reviewers before I actually read the book) that Mr. Isacoff holds equal temperament to be the only solution and all other temperaments to be inferior. I think he is a realist who sees (and presents) pros and cons in all attempts to solve the fascinating temperament riddle.

Unlike the previous reviewer, I was thoroughly engaged by this book. The author takes the reader on a fascinating time-machine journey, from Pythagoras to Descartes to Newton. The point of the book is not so much to argue for a particular way of tuning as it is to point out the radical change in thought that music made in parallel to other areas, whether political or scientific, e.g., the tuning of the piano and its relation to the String Theory in physics. I was puzzled by the previous reviewer's inability to appreciate the anecdotal asides: da Vinci strumming his self-made fiddle; the arguments Galileo and his father had with the music establishment of their time; Giardano Bruno being burned alive at the stake as a heretic. And all of this is told with what I take to be a wry sense of humor. Distractions? That's what makes this book so damn interesting! This book is a romp in a way that you can't anticipate when picking up non-fiction. Absolutely enjoyable and intriguing. I loved it.

Stuart Isacoff has taken an esoteric subject that could be unbearably dry and he has crafted a fascinating and highly readable account of the history and importance of musical temperament. Musicians, musical instrument builders and technicians will be naturally drawn to the subject and they will find this work scholarly, witty and concise. Others with no apparent interest in temperament will discover a book that both enlightens and entertains. Pick it up, glance at virtually any page and you will be drawn into it; thus is reflected the skill of a gifted writer. Add to that the understanding of a gifted musician and you have the ingredients of a work that is in every respect a joy to read and to own. I recommend "Temperament" enthusiastically.