INTONATION SOLUTIONS FOR A CAPPELLA CHORAL REPERTOIRE:

PYTHAGOREAN TUNING (3-LIMIT), JUST INTONATION (5-LIMIT),

AND EQUAL TEMPERAMENT CONCEPTS AND APPLICATIONS
IN THE CHORAL REHEARSAL

Creative Project Report

Presented to

The Faculty of the School of Music & Dance

San José State University

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

Master of Arts

by

Brian Dehn

August 2019
 © 2019

Brian Dehn

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

 The Designated Project Committee Approves the Project Titled

INTONATION SOLUTIONS FOR A CAPPELLA CHORAL REPERTOIRE:

PYTHAGOREAN TUNING (3-LIMIT), JUST INTONATION (5-LIMIT),
AND EQUAL TEMPERAMENT CONCEPTS AND APPLICATIONS
IN THE CHORAL REHEARSAL

by

Brian Dehn

APPROVED FOR THE SCHOOL OF MUSIC & DANCE

SAN JOSÉ STATE UNIVERSITY

August 2019

Kara Ireland D’Ambrosio, DMA School of Music & Dance

Jeffrey Benson, Ph.D. School of Music & Dance

Fred Cohen, DMA School of Music & Dance

 ABSTRACT

INTONATION SOLUTIONS FOR A CAPPELLA CHORAL REPERTOIRE

by Brian Dehn

Choral intonation is an important issue for choirs; however, intonation decisions are

sometimes left to the tuning system imposed by the piano—equal temperament. This

project will offer alternatives that show how to effectively and more stylistically perform

a cappella repertoire of the Western European choral canon by presenting a system of

rehearsal and score study strategies that consider historical tuning systems. In particular,

two historical tuning ideals, Pythagorean tuning and just intonation, will be examined in

detail and compared with the modern standard, equal temperament. A general

mathematical and harmonic analysis of all three will be provided along with online video

presentations that will guide the selection of appropriate tuning choices for a cappella

choral repertoire.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am deeply appreciative of the guidance I received from San Jose State

University, specifically Dr. Kara Ireland D’Ambrosio, Dr. Diana Hollinger, Dr. Jeffrey

Benson and Dr. Fred Cohen. Exploring a subject vastly outside of my comfort zone, and

the comfort zone of many of my colleagues, made for many special conversations with

these wonderful leaders. Without them, this would not have come to fruition.

Special help and support from Dr. Joseph Schubert wrapping my head around

Pythagorean tuning, just intonation, and equal temperament was inspiring. I thank Steven

Ottomanyi for his “fine-tuning” of my writing style and the finer details of these systems.

Donald Brinegar’s guidance on those tuning systems overall, along with conducting

assistance and philosophical insights were inspiration of the highest order. His depth of

knowledge and passion for this subject is only exceeded by his kind heart and giving

spirit.

They are all testaments to this profession, and I was honored to work with each of

them.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables........................................................................................................ vii

List of Figures....................................................................................................... viii

Chapter 1: Introduction......................................................................................... 1

Chapter 2: Literature Review................................................................................ 6

Pythagorean Tuning....................................................................................... 10
5-limit Just Intonation.................................................................................... 18
The Lattice..................................................................................................... 28
Equal Temperament Revisited....................................................................... 37

Chapter 3: Project Creation and Limitations........................................................ 40

Chapter 4: Reflection............................................................................................ 46

Bibliography......................................................................................................... 50

Appendix 1: Ubi Caritas (Chant)......................................................................... 53

Appendix 2: Te Lucis Ante Terminum................................................................ 54

Appendix 3: Plorate Filii Israel............................................................................ 55

Appendix 4: O Magnum Mysterium.................................................................... 58

Appendix 5: Ubi Caritas (Mealor)........................................................................ 65

vi
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Equal Temperament in cents…………………………………... 9

Table 2. Ratios of the chromatic scale by Pythagorean Fifths………….. 14

Table 3. Comparison of cents in ET and PT……………………………. 15

Table 4. The overtone series……………………………………………. 16

Table 5. PT and JI ratios……………………………………………… 21

Table 6. PT, JI, and ET in cents………………………………………… 22

Table 7. PT, JI, and ET in ratios and cents……………………………... 38

vii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Overtones of C………………………………………………... 12

Figure 2. Guidonian Hand………………………………………………. 18

Figure 3. A Harpsichord, c. 1620, with split keys………………………. 23

Figure 4. Fingerboard diagram………………………………………….. 23

Figure 5. Solfege Example…………………………………..………….. 26

Figure 6. Solfege Example with Hexachordal Mutation………………... 27

Figure 7. The lattice…………………………………………………….. 29

Figure 8. Hexachords with shifts………………………………………... 31

Figure 9. Scales placed on the lattice…………………………………… 33

Figure 10. Chromatic scales placed on the lattice………………………... 34

Figure 11. Chords on the lattice………………………………………. 34 & 35

viii
 CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION

Choral intonation is a concept and skill that directors assess and develop in nearly

every rehearsal. This is particularly applicable when ensembles choose to sing a cappella,

or without accompaniment.

I was intrigued by the assertion from writers such as Mathieu, Brinegar, Duffin,

and specifically Jonathan Walker, that a piece written in the sixteenth century should not

be held to the tuning ideals of the twentieth century. 1 Ross Duffin wrote:

ET thus appears as the sanctioned system by virtue of its simplicity, not because
of its superiority to other systems and not because it’s what professional players
were using…We, in effect, have been heirs of this mid nineteenth-century
pedagogical impulse to spare students the subtleties of professional tuning
practices.” 2

This tells us that while we can deduce from specific writings the systems that were in use,

we cannot listen to exact examples of how they were used. The result is a lost art. The art

of tuning itself is open to many interpretations, some vehemently opposed to each other.

Of the writers explored, each posit that it is more advisable is to use a tuning system that

was in place at the time the repertoire was written.

There is considerable overlap in musical eras in style, harmonic language, and

compositional practices. 3 As the theorist Helmholtz notes, the situation in the realm of

1
Jonathan Walker. “Intonational Injustice: A Defense of Just Intonation in the
Performance of Renaissance Polyphony.” Music Theory Online 2, no. 6 (September
1996), 7.
2
Ross W. Duffin, How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony (and Why You Should
Care) (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2007), 102.
3
Richard Taruskin and Christopher H. Gibbs. The Oxford History of Western Music
College Edition. Second Edition. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013), xxiii.
1
tuning is no different. 4 Any brief overview risks oversimplification of such a complex

topic, however, some limits are necessary. I choose to focus on accessibility and clarity

for the choral conductor.

This project will assist choral conductors in making decisions about three tuning

ideals: Pythagorean tuning, just intonation, and equal temperament. The guide will be

based on a study of the historical and mathematical rationales of each of these three

systems. This project will provide lesson plans, supportive videos, and notated scores that

will assist the conductor in making some different, perhaps more stylistically appropriate,

tuning choices.

For my project, I analyzed five scores and created video five teaching guides for

three specific historical tunings in order to provide choral directors support for the

various tuning needs in their ensembles. While the instrumental world has used some of

these tuning systems, there is a lacuna that has largely kept these practices out of the

choral classroom. As Duffin reminds us, this is an “extremely difficult thing to do”,

resulting in “unequivocal arguments that have spanned the centuries”. 5

The project videos themselves will be centered on the following topics:

Video 1 – Introduction to Pythagorean Tuning, Just Intonation, and Equal Temperament.

Definitions, Applicability and Execution.

Video 2 – Pythagorean Tuning: Ubi Caritas (Chant) and Te Lucis Ante Terminum

4
Hermann Von Helmholtz and Alexander John Ellis, On the Sensations of Tone as a
Physiological Basis for the Theory of Music (New York: Dover Publications, 1954), 90.
5
Duffin, How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmon. 40,46.

2
 (score study, rehearsal walk-through, and exercises)

Video 3 – Pythagorean and Just Intonation: Plorate Filii Israel (Carissimi)

(score study, rehearsal walk-through, and exercises)

Video 4 – Just Intonation: O Magnum Mysterium (Lauridsen) and Ubi Caritas (Mealor)

(score study, rehearsal walk-through, and exercises)

Video 5 – Equal Temperament and Moving Forward

(reflections, implications, and conclusions)

The first video addresses Equal temperament, which is the current norm and first

tuning approach examined in this project. 6 Equal temperament is the tuning of the scale

that has the octave divided into twelve equal semitones. With equal temperament as a

point of reference I developed the first instructional video to introduce and define, for

some readers, the other tuning systems.

I began the next video with the tuning system devised by Pythagoras (when solo

vocal lines, and chant were prevalent) with the concept of the octave, fifth, and fourth

being the primary consonant intervals. All intervals are expressed as ratios with the

lowest prime numbers of three. This is a system of justly tuned intervals we now know as

Pythagorean tuning. 7 In this companion video I also introduced concepts such as the

6
Mark Lindley, 2001 "Equal temperament." Grove Music Online. 20 Jul. 2019.
https://www-oxfordmusiconline-
com.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0001/om
o-9781561592630-e-0000008900.
7
Mark Lindley. 2001 "Pythagorean intonation." Grove Music Online. 20 Jul. 2019.
https://www-oxfordmusiconline-
3
hexachord and the Guidonian Hand as well as their application. While Pythagorean

tuning and the Guidonian Hand were extensively used in the medieval period, they fell

out of use in the centuries that followed.

The third and fourth videos also delved deeper into just intonation, which is a

system in which all intervals are represented by a numerical ratio consisting of low prime

numbers, but up to, and including, five. 8 In the strictest sense, Pythagorean tuning is a

form of just intonation, called 3-limit just intonation. However, this other form of just

intonation, 5-limit just intonation, became applicable when the harmonic language

changed and thirds were considered to be consonant intervals. 9 This tuning system was

applied in the Renaissance and Baroque eras. 10 Even today, string, guitar, and brass

players play and tune within this tuning ideal. 11

The fifth video is meant to summarize the findings and teaching techniques

learned.

I analyzed the scores of five works that are available on the companion website: a

chant (Ubi Caritas) using Pythagorean tuning; a Renaissance motet (Te Lucis Ante

Terminum by Thomas Tallis) also using Pythagorean tuning; a Baroque chorus (Plorate

com.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0001/om
o-9781561592630-e-0000022604.
8
Mark Lindley. 2001 "Just intonation." Grove Music Online. 20 Jul. 2019. https://www-
oxfordmusiconline-
com.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0001/om
o-9781561592630-e-0000014564.
9
Owen Jorgensen, Tuning: Containing the Perfection of Eighteenth-Century
Temperament, the Lost Art of Nineteenth-Century Temperament, and the Science of
Equal Temperament (East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1991), 22.
10
Owen Jorgensen, Tuning, 22.
11
Mark Lindley. 2001 "Just intonation."
4
Filii Israel by Giacomo Carissimi ) utilizing Pythagorean tuning enriched with the

acoustically-pure intervals of just intonation; and two twentieth century a cappella pieces

(O Magnum Mysterium by Morten Lauridsen and Ubi Caritas by Paul Mealor) focusing

on the tuning principles of just intonation. These five score analyses focused on the use of

concepts such as tetrachords and hexachords (which are purely melodic concepts), and an

introduction to the harmonic lattice, which is a two-dimensional model to understand just

intonation. These concepts were once normative; the design is to make them more

accessible to choral directors of all levels. The analyses did not show songs in a “key” or

“mode” (which are compositional techniques), but instead, focused on analysis that

addressed the natural tendencies of music. This project did not address concepts of 7-, 11-

, or 13-limit just intonation, quarter-comma mean tone temperament, or the myriad of

other microtonal systems. Because such extended just intonation systems are not common

in the core Western musical canon, I decided they were outside the scope of this paper.

The project video guides, analyzed scores, and diagrams are available at:

https://www.briandehn.com/intonation-solutions. These resources were created to address

the tuning methods of just intonation, equal temperament, and Pythagorean tuning and to

bring them from the instrumental world into the choral world. They provide choral

directors with professional development to learn more about the fundamentals and

nuances of each system and to ignite active discussion among a wider array of choral

directors.

5
 CHAPTER 2 - LITERATURE REVIEW

While equal temperament was theorized as early as the 1596, 12 “it has taken

[four] hundred years for our modern system of approximation – twelve-tone equal

temperament – to be accepted to the extent it has,” according to music theorist and

performer W.A. Mathieu. 13 It was not until about 1917 that the system we know as equal

temperament was systematically defined. 14 Therefore, the presence of the equal

temperament ideal in the modern choral rehearsal, where repertoire is selected from a

variety of time periods, could be seen as impeding the performance of a cappella music.

The piano, specifically its tuning system, harmonically presents adverse conditions for

singing a cappella repertoire. 15

Singing has been a known aspect of cultures from the earliest times. However, not

until Ancient Greece, around the time of the mathematician Pythagoras, were there essays

or treatises for what was considered in tune. 16 Ironically, concepts of vocal intonation can

be inferred by looking at instruments and the systems used to create them. For example,

flutes created over 9000 years ago have been found in China. 17 The oldest example is a

12
William Allaudin Mathieu, Harmonic Experience: Tonal Harmony from Its Natural
Origins to Its Modern Expression (Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions International, 1997),
249.
13
Mathieu, Harmonic Experience, 137.
14
Donald Brinegar, Pitch Perfect: The Theory and Practice of Choral Intonation (San
Pedro, CA: Pavane Publishing, 2018), vi.
15
Brinegar, Pitch Perfect, vi.
16
Miranda Jensen, “Are You in Tune? A Phenomenological Enquiry into Pythagorean
Tuning in the Creation of New Music,” PhD diss., (University of Melbourne, 2017), 2.
17
James Beament, How We Hear Music: The Relationship between Music and the
Hearing Mechanism (Rochester: New York: Boydell Press, 2001), 148.
6
flute from approximately 43,000 years ago carved from the bone of a young cave bear. 18

While there was no acknowledged system of tuning from this time, we can assume that

the system could be as simple as what was aesthetically pleasing to the instrument maker,

and by extension, the culture.

Just as cultures vary, it stands to reason that so do their tuning ideals. This is made

even more complex when an attempted understanding the compositional era and its

performance practices are taken into consideration. This brings the discourse to a point of

relative consensus. Dependent upon that era and the instrumentation, there are certain

systems of tuning that were in use at a particular time. Donald Brinegar brings this into

focus in his book, Pitch Perfect:

Ponder this: All composers prior to this point in music history did not hear the
system of tuning that we employ today. Not Brahms, not Mozart, not Haydn, or
Handel or Bach, not even Palestrina. If we wish to experience in our ears, and
better yet our beings, the sounds of the earlier masters, we need to be more
informed of their tuning practices and procedures. 19

And while it is also true that there are over 500 tuning systems, Brinegar goes on to say

there are certain systems that fit best into the choral genre specifically. 16 By best, it is

meant to be accessible, historically justified, and mathematically sound.

There seems to be two main differences between all tuning systems: first, there

are the theoretical or mathematical ideals; and, second, though perhaps as important,

aural differences. They look different and sound different. Theorists Zarlino and Mathieu

divide tuning systems first by dividing them into mathematically rational and irrational

18
Philip Ball, The Music Instinct: How Music Works and Why We Can't Do Without It
(New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 18.
19
Brinegar, Pitch Perfect, 12.
7
categories. Merriam-Webster defines rational as “relating to, consisting of, or being one

or more rational numbers”. 20 Anything that cannot be mathematically rational is

therefore mathematically irrational. A music tuning system is found rational if the

pitches used in the system coincide with the overtones (whole number multiple of the

fundamental) thus resulting in a rational mathematical ratio. A tuning system is irrational

if a mathematical formula has been applied to the intervals of any scale. 21 The systems of

just intonation and Pythagorean tuning are mathematically rational (expressed exactly as

a ratio of two natural numbers) and based on overtones and ratios of intervals, acoustical

properties (nature). The system of equal temperament, while pleasing to the eye and

simple in its theory, is a mathematically irrational system (no ratios) in which intervals

are tempered mathematically and made even across an octave. Jonathan Walker, make his

point very clear:

The convenience of a tuning system adopted for keyboard instruments in the late
18th century namely equal temperament is a further handicap, which imposes its
own conceptual tyranny regarding pitch in general, and tuning systems of a
previous age, above all JI, whose every virtue is regarded as a shortcoming within
the framework of equal temperament, and vice versa…We also tend to see equal
temperament as the goal of a centuries-long teleological process whereas we
ought to be asking why one particular tuning system, and not another, was used
for a given repertoire. Need I say that my purpose in this article is not to condemn
equal temperament as the intonational decadence that set in after the glorious
purity of JI? Of course we should reject such views, but we should equally guard
against any notion that the musicians of past centuries were benighted because
they lacked equal temperament, or that they were unwittingly striving towards it
all the time…equal temperament was the subject of various 16th century
experiments, and its mathematics was completely understood by the early 17th
century; composers were not striving towards it—on the contrary, they rejected
it. 22

20
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rational. Accessed July 15, 2019.
21
Brinegar, Pitch Perfect, 14.
22
Walker, “Intonational Injustice”, 7.
8
 Before one is to suspect, using colloquial meanings of rational and irrational, that

equal temperament is an inferior system, much as Walker touches on above, it must be

noted that this is opinion and not always the case. Equal temperament (abbreviated ET)

solved many musical issues as harmonic, modal, and tonal boundaries were pushed by

composers, and audiences, beginning in the late 16th century. 23 The issue is that many use

the piano for repertoire written before the system was codified and widely accepted. It

would, perhaps, be beneficial for a musician to fully grasp nuances of both Pythagorean

tuning and just intonation. This is not just for performance practice purposes (to be

historically informed is a current ideal) but also to improve the ear of the conductor. It is

a hope that a firmer grasp of all three systems will indeed make our understanding of

each not only richer, but result in a musician that is more sensitive, nuanced,

knowledgeable and expressive.

As stated, the concept of ET is now most closely tied to the piano. The idea is that

each step in between an octave is even and equally spaced. The simplicity of ET is seen

in the contexts of cents. See Table 1.

C C#/Db D D#/Eb E F F#/Gb G G#/Ab A A#/Bb B C

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
Table 1. ET in cents.

This is the most common tuning system used in Western music and is the standard

system used for tuning a piano. It is also relatively simple and pleasing to the eye. In ET,

23
Rob Sturman, “A dynamical systems approach to musical tuning,” Dynamical Systems
27, no. 1, (March, 2012), 133.
9
the octave is divided into twelve equal parts each containing 100 cents. The advantages

are, (1) that each interval has one stable value, (2) that enharmonic equivalents have the

same value (i.e. C#=Db), (3) that complete tonal mobility is available with modulation to

remote keys, and (4) that all keys sound equally good (or, as we will see, “bad”). 24

Sisson’s reference to “bad” alludes to the fact that some do not like how this

system sounds. To temper an interval means to sing out-of-tune with nature. 25 To

quantify preference is difficult, so a reversion to the math behind the theory is

appropriately objective. ET begins to get complicated when the theory behind the

formula is viewed. It would be the twelfth root of two (that concept of an octave being

double divided into 12), so we must use 12

2 . This results in a mathematical

inconsistency of about 1.0595 between each half-step. What this shows is that it is

impossible to tune the twelve-note scale so that all intervals can be truly harmonically

pure. They are irrational numbers. They must then be all equally out of tune. This will

become very clear as we discuss other tuning ideals.

PYTHAGOREAN TUNING

The Pythagorean system was developed near 550 B.C. 26 Pythagoras lived in a

time unencumbered by machinery, cars, horns, heavy construction, etc. Even with the

24
Jack Sisson, “Pitch Preference Determination, a Comparative Study of Tuning
Preferences of Musicians from the Major Performing Areas with Reference to just
Intonation, Pythagorean Tuning, and Equal Temperament” (PhD diss., The University of Oklahoma,
1969), 23.
25
Sisson, “Pitch Preference Determination”, 23.
26
Hubert H. Parry, The Evolution of the Art of Music (New York: D. Appleton-Century
Company, 1916), 20.
10
noise produced by human hands, the sounds of nature were predominant, and the physics

of the natural world prevailed. Physics, from ancient Greek, and knowledge of nature

provided us with an understanding of how the universe and all its components behave. 27

Pythagoras was a scientist, philosopher, musician and listener.

Raymond Murray Schafer, a composer and theorist, provides us with an

understanding of wave forms in nature: “insects such as mosquitoes and bees have wing

oscillations that create an audible periodicity between four and over 1,100 beats per

second. Lions are another example, where they are known to roar with their mouth low to

the earth to carry the resonance of sound across distances.” 28 In The Music Instinct, Philip

Ball writes, “The vibrations of air are not undulations in height; they are changes in the

air's density. At the 'peaks' of sound waves, the air is compressed to greater density than it

would be in a soundless space; at the troughs, the air is less dense”. 29 The world sounded

very different 2500 years ago.

Most people know Pythagoras of Samos as a mathematician, but he and other

philosophers posited that “music was not so much as expressive art as a kind of audible

mirror of an ideal world”. 30 How Pythagoras discovered his concept of intervals and his

pure ratio scale is a story with such mythos attached to it one cannot tell if it is fact,

fiction, or simple elaboration. The story involves Pythagoras hearing a hammer beating

on an anvil and realizing that it was the both the weight of the hammer and the length of

27
Jensen, “Are You in Tune?” 12.
28
Raymond Murray Schafer, The Tuning of the World (New York: A.A. Knopf, 1977),
35, 39.
29
Ball, Music Instinct, 35.
30
Mathieu, Harmonic Experience, 247.
11
metal it struck that resulted in changing pitches. The story continues with him

subsequently establishing an experiment using hanging strings with different weights

attached to determine the ratios. 31 Regardless of the accuracy of the stories, it is clear that

his preference for codifying a system of intervals landed him on the concept of ratios and

what was to become the first theory of tuning in the West. 32 When transferred to strings

and using visual acuity, Pythagoras found that the octave was simply a ratio of 2:1. A

string, specifically its vibration frequency, when exactly doubled, produced the octave

below. The perfect fifth, the only other interval deemed consonant at the time 33, was

found to be a ratio of 3:2. He found this by first understanding that the interval of the fifth

was naturally occurring as the third partial of a founding pitch. See Figure 1. Then,

moving the G down an octave (dividing by 2) gave him the value of 3:2 for the fifth

directly above any given note.

Figure 1. The Overtones of C

Using this 3:2 ideal, he logically filled in an entire scale by using the consonant

fifth. We could also call each diatonic step, as it is considered now, a third partial of A

31
Christoph Riedweg, Pythagoras: His Life, Teaching, and Influence (Ithaca, NY:
Cornell University Press, 2005), 28.
32
Riedweg, Pythagoras, 33.
33
Duffin, How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony, 31.
12
third partial (the D is the fifth above the G), and so on. The growth of this system is

shown to a logical limit: perfect fifths build as they make up our current chromatic scale.

This is a very important step; Pythagorean tuning is completely based on intervals of the

5th and naturally occurring overtones. You will also notice that it ends with B# and not C.

C – G – D – A – E – B – F# – C# – G# – D# – A# – E# – B#

We see that the overtone relationship between pitches never quite produces an

entire diatonic scale (C to C). In fact, the above ratio relationships are mathematically

incongruent as an octave (2:1) would technically never be produced if one were to get to

get there by fifths (3:2). Duffin provides us with clear and simple arithmetic. 34

3 x 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 = 129.746
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 = 128.0
1 1 1 1 1 1 1

To compensate for this natural phenomenon Pythagoras created the concept of the

comma or “wolf interval” to cleanly finish the concept of an octave. 35 It, or a fraction

thereof, is simply attached to any pitch raised or lowered to reach a perfect 2:1 octave. It

is codified as being anywhere between 21 and 63 cents but Pythagoras loosely settled on

34
Duffin, How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony, 25.
35
Mathieu, 247.
13
 22 to 24 cents and allowed it to be placed anywhere to shore up the math involved. 36 It is

prudent to recall the concept of the half step and that they are separated by 100 cents, as

understood in the context of equal temperament.

Going back to the fifth based system of Pythagorean tuning, it is helpful to view

the ratios in a diatonic scale beginning on C (1:1), D (9:8), E (81:64), F (4:3), G (3:2), A

(27:16), B (243:128) and the Octave (2:1).. The full chromatic set, by fifth’s, looks like

Table 2.

Note: C G D A E B F# C#* G#* D#* A#* E#* B#*

PT Ratio: 1:1 3:2 9:8 27:16 81:64 243:128 729:512 256:243 128:81 32:27 16:9 4:3 2:1
Table 2. Ratios of the chromatic scale by Pythagorean 5th’s

One will notice some interesting things. Understanding the Pythagorean ideal that

the most consonant intervals are the simplest ratios, we can visually see how the most

complex ratios are what is considered the most harmonically weak intervals. The Tri-

Tone is the most unstable (unable to be simplified) of ratios while the dominant and the

subdominant are the most stable. We also did not use enharmonic spellings above, but

Pythagoras did after the Tri-Tone. The * denotes that, according to W.A. Mathieu, there

is no Pythagorean C#, G#, D#, A#, E#, or B#. Pythagoras uses Db, Ab, Eb, Bb, F and the

octave C, respectively. 37 If we line up our scale chromatically and combine it with the

36
Mathieu, 246-253.
37
Mathieu, 530-531.
14
 concepts of cents (we must round due to lack of reciprocity of systems), we can really see

how different the two, Pythagorean and ET, are when it comes to intervals. See Table 3.

Note: C C# D D# E F F# G G# A A# B B#
PY 0 90 204 294 408 498 612 702 792 906 996 1110 1224
ET 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
Table 3: Comparison, by cents, of ET and PT.

The Pythagorean fifth is very close to the ET fifth. When singing a third, you

must sing eight cents sharper than the piano. When singing an F, you must sing two cents

flat of the piano F. The largest question that arises is when we go from B to B#. On will

notice that the half-step between B and B# is 114 cents and overshoots the octave by the

comma, 24 cents. What this demonstrates is that it makes it theoretically impossible to

come around to the true octave in Pythagorean tuning. What must be fought is the pull to

indeed make sense of the system, as mentioned by Jensen in her dissertation:

This challenge on the need for the scale to neatly close is significant to this
research as I have experienced benefits in the incompleteness of PT caused by the
comma. I cannot attest however that the comma was a planned application of the
PT system by Pythagoras or his disciples. It is likely that due to the nature of the
Pythagoreans music and instrumentation at the time, the idea of the comma was
insignificant. 38

It is stated even more distinctly by Schotsberg:

The Pythagorean comma is not a ‘mistake’ of nature, it is the arrogance of the

Western thinking that has called this a mistake and tried to solve it. The
Pythagorean comma is what makes music ‘cosmic’, it will let the overtones
transcend infinitely. 39

38
Jensen, “Are You in Tune?” 4.
39
Daniel Schotsborg, "Harmonic Frequencies & 432 Hz,” Last modified April 15, 2013,
http://blog.qualiaplus.com/2013/04/harmonic-frequencies-432-hz-research.html
15
As we move to other systems, it is helpful to be reminded of the naturally occurring

overtones. Review Table 4.

Fundamental 1st Harmonic Fundamental Ex: C

1st Overtone 2nd Harmonic Octave Above C
2nd Overtone 3rd Harmonic 5th Above Octave G
3rd Overtone 4th Harmonic 2nd Octave C
4th Overtone 5th Harmonic 3rd Above 2nd Octave E
5th Overtone 6th Harmonic 5th Above 2nd Octave G
6th Overtone 7th Harmonic Minor 7th above 2nd Octave Bb
7th Overtone 8th Harmonic 3rd Octave C
8th Overtone 9th Harmonic Whole tone above 3rd Octave D
Table 4: The overtone series.

To find intervals not included, F and A for example, we must go down, or work

our way mathematically backward to find these intervals. This cements the concept of the

subdominant being named as such due to the F being found by tuning down a fifth from

C.

PT is based on fifths, or the third partials, or overtones. The ratios only need three

as the highest prime number by which all numbers are divisible. Therefore, this system is

called 3-limit, and is considered the first instance of justly tuned intervals, or just

intonation.

It would be appropriate to introduce the concept of the tetrachord at this point.

With the fifth being consonant, the scale up to it was the four notes titled, ut, re, mi, fa,

then we could arrive at sol or start another tetrachord to build to the octave. 40 The third

and sixth were considered dissonant and the seventh was not even considered as part of a

usable scale.37An octave was simply: ut, re, mi, fa, and ut, re, mi, fa. This is imperative

40
Brinegar, Pitch Perfect, 26.
16
when it comes to tuning because one could think of pitches being no more than a fifth

away from the tonal center. The further you move from that tonal center, practical

experience tells us, the harder it is to stay in tune.

We must also take a moment to acknowledge that, according to Jorgensen and his

Tuning compendium, Pythagorean tuning was not documented until 1518 by Heinrich

Screiber. 41 He goes on to say that it is therefore likely that any preference for

temperament in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries was inconsistent in understanding

and certainly application. Even though most melodies were one part (cantus, or Gregorian

Chant, for example) an intervallic system was still not codified until tastes had already

changed. 42

Pythagorean tuning (abbreviated PT) would have proven adequate in the

performance of chants of the Middle Ages since it was a system based on tetrachords,

modes, and basic intervals. Very little music was polyphonic, and when it did exist it was

very simple by today’s standards. Not until thirds and sixths began to be used melodically

and harmonically did musicians begin to express dissatisfaction with the Pythagorean

system of tuning. 43

Compositional techniques of this time period were modal and not tonal, but as

musica ficta picked up favor it was only a matter of time before the tetrachord concept

(UT to FA), used for melodic reading and tuning for centuries, expanded into the

41
Owen Jorgensen, Tuning, 22.
42
Jorgensen, Tuning, 22.
43
Sisson, “Pitch Preference Determination,” 15.
17
hexachord concept (UT to LA). 44 Many of these major developments for reading music

were explored and codified by Guido D’Arezzo. Most notably was his creation of

solfege, or Ut (Do), Re, Mi, Fa Sol, and La. It was also the concept of the Mi-Fa

relationship and his use of the hexachord, in his Guidonian Hand, that allow us to truly

see how much the hexachord was part of the modal/melodic thinking of the time. He

simply mutated hexachords to teach certain melodies.41

See Figure 2.

Figure 2. Guidonian Hand and hexachordal formations. 45

5-LIMIT JUST INTONATION

As PT was only codified in 1518 46, it is interesting to note that 1558 was when 5-

limit just intonation was formalized by Gioseffo Zarlino, the choirmaster of St Mark's

Church in Venice. 47 The 1500’s were obviously then significant for temperament,

44
Brinegar, Pitch Perfect, 26.
45
“Guidonian Hand”, Wikipedia, Accessed January 28, 2018,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guidonian_hand
46
Jensen, “Are You in Tune?” 4.
47
Ball, Music Instinct, 58.
18
because according to Ball, ET was also first published in 1584 by Chu Tsai-Yu, a prince

of the Ming dynasty and Chinese scholar. 48 How these theoretical discussions made their

way to compositional practice was a process that took nearly 400 years. There seems to

be much evidence that many of these systems were being explored at the same time in

very different regions.

The development of strong chromaticism (Gesualdo or Monteverdi are prime

examples) aided in the final collapse of the modal system. 49 This was the end of using

certain tuning methods due to the use of strong use of triads and chords and other pitches

outside of the normal scale. This was particularly true of PT, which was based on a

consonant fifth and a dissonant third relationship. There were simply now too many

complex harmonies occurring and it seems a linear thinking of music was rendered

insufficient for compositional and musical expression.

Matthias Greitter composed a remarkable piece as an experiment in chromaticism,

Tassibus Ambiguis in 1553, which shows a comprehensive understanding of chromatic

relationships by utilizing a circle of fifths relationship beginning on F and ending on F

flat! 50 In the piece, Greitter uses the notation of Cb and Fb and possibly the only notation

of Bbb in any sixteenth century score. 51

48
Ball, 61.
49
Brinegar, Pitch Perfect, 36.
50
Gary Fisher, “The Munich Kapelle of Orlando Di Lasso (1563-1594): a model for
Renaissance choral performance practice,” DMA diss., (Norman: University of
Oklahoma, 1987), 182.
51
Fisher, “The Munich Kapelle,” 182.
19
 Twenty years prior to the appearance of Greitter's chromatic work Italian theorists

were debating the possibility of codifying Cb, Eb, B#, and E# as different pitches. 52 Gary

Fisher states:

…while [Giovanni Maria] Lanfranco’s tuning rules in the Scintille [of 1533] can
be identified with nothing but what we call equal temperament. [The composer
Nicola] Vicentino knew the value of expression through the use of chromatic
inflection and did not hesitate to employ a full range of accidentals in his music
and writings. He felt that the use of chromatics made a “great gain to the
harmony” and that “every kind of enharmonic and chromatic composition can be
sung with the signs and without [them] which will change [their] nature. 53

What developed over the next centuries as just intonation (abbreviated JI) was, in

fact, the same system as PT just more dedicated to simplified ratios and focus on the

concept of a consonant, as opposed to a dissonant, third (the fifth partial). 54 It is accurate

then to consider PT as a form of JI, just with different limits and thus, solutions.

According to David Doty, JI is any tuning system that is built on whole number

ratios. This change to 5-limit JI is simple yet powerful as he states it has a “strongly

implied preference for the simplest ratios.” 55 The philosophical connection then to PT is

quite clear. However, from a mathematical perspective, PT and JI are quite different. As

the limit for JI has now increased to 5 for the prime number needed to simplify the ratios,

the literature addresses JI as 5-lLimit just intonation where PT is considered 3-limit just

intonation. It is also wise to acknowledge that there are 7-limit, 11-limit, 13-limit, and 17-

limit just intonation systems along with a multitude of microtonal concepts. However, the

52
Fisher, 183.
53
Fisher, 183.
54
Duffin, How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony, 31.
55
David B. Doty, The Just Intonation Primer: An Introduction to the Theory and
Practice of Just Intonation, 3rd ed. (San Francisco: The Just Intonation Network, 2002), 1.
20
debate over the decades have centered on equal temperament, 3-limit and 5-limit JI as it

pertains to vocal music. 56

Table 5, below, highlights how the two systems differ regarding simpler ratios for

the third, sixth and seventh intervals. The idea of these intervals having consonant ratios

is credited to the English monk Walter Odington (c. 1300). 57 According to Helmholtz,

“the proper intonation of major thirds” was not in use until the end of the Middle Ages,

(the 1500’s) the Pythagorean 81/64 prevailed until this time”. 58

Interval Pitch Example Pythagorean/ 5-limit

3-limit Just Intonation Ratio Just Intonation Ratio
Unison C 1:1 1:1
Second D 9:8 9:8
Third E 81:64 5:4
Fourth F 4:3 4:3
Fifth G 3:2 3:2
Sixth A 27:16 5:3
Seventh B 243:128 15:8
Octave C 2:1 2:1
Table 5. PT and JI Ratios

While these new 5-limit just intonation ratios are certainly cleaner, the issue with

this tuning becomes clear once intervals are considered. The jump from D to an A (9:8 to

5:3) is 40:27 instead of our fifth interval consonant ratio of 3:2. This is true for nearly all

intervals in JI. Let us take any sequence of notes, for example, C up to G, down to D,

56
Hugh Bailey Johnson, Jr., “An Investigation of the Tuning Preferences of a Selected
Group of Singers with Reference to Just Intonation, Pythagorean Tuning and Equal
Temperament,” Mus. Ed.D. diss., (Bloomington: Indiana University, 1963), 2-5.
57
Doty, Just Intonation Primer, 3.
58
Helmholtz and Ellis, On the Sensations of Tone, 90.
21
then down to A (below C), then back C, the ratio is 81:80. Not the same note, but

sharper! And this occurred in just a simple 5-note phrase. A longer phrase could result in

an even larger discrepancy. With the advent of more complex music, it stands to reason

modal concepts were not as aesthetically pleasing as tonal concepts. On a fundamental

level, musical practice necessitated a rethinking of theoretical understandings. In short, 5-

limit JI was short lived, and the system was forced to change.

To further compare both these tuning systems it is beneficial to use the

measurement of cents. Sisson plotted it out in Table 6: 59

C D E F G A B C
PT 0 204 408 498 702 906 1110 1200*
JI 0 204 386 498 702 884 1088 1200*
ET 0 200 400 500 700 900 1100 1200*
Table 6. PT, JI, and ET in cents.

Recall that the concept of an octave was not this exact (1200 cents) in either system. PI

had the wolf interval and JI has incorrect ratio valuing. Speaking practically, even the

piano’s octave is not purely 2:1 or 1200 cents. As most tuners will tell you, the octaves

are tuned sharp as you go up to add to the brilliance. 60

Comparison of these scales and intervals such as C to E, F to A, or G to B (Major

3rd’s) we see that JI is, compared to the piano, fourteen cents flat, sixteen cents, and

fourteen cents, respectively. Whereas minor thirds (E to G), need to be sixteen cents

sharper than the piano!

59
Sisson, “Pitch Preference Determination,” 9, 17.
60
Lindley. 2001 "Equal temperament." Grove Music Online.
22
 As tastes, composition, and theory developed it was abundantly clear that ratios

were cleaner in JI but frequency was cleaner PT. In the Just Intonation Primer, Doty

highlights that in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries there were examples of

keyboards with more than twelve notes in the octave created, however the exploration of

alternative temperaments, not instruments, became the dominant path of inquiry at this

time. 61 There are also examples of keyboards with both a D# and an Eb key, called split-

sharps. See Figure 3.

Figure 3: A harpsichord, c1620, with split keys. 62

Figure 4: Fingerboard Diagram 63

61
Doty, Just Intonation Primer, 3.
62
“A harpsichord c1620,” The Canon of Me (blog), Tumbler, 2019,
http://blogthoven.tumblr.com/post/82017257729/a-harpsichord-c1620-with-some-split-
keys-to
63
Duffin, How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony, 47.
23
A fingerboard diagram for the violin from the early 18th century clearly demonstrates the

concept of enharmonics being completely different pitches. See Figure 4.

While there are concepts of the 3-limit and 5-limit just intonation systems that

differ, the concept of the hexachord exists in both systems. The system of the hexachord,

and its extension, the 3-limit lattice are proposed useful by theorists such as Euler,

Mathieu and most recently, Donald Brinegar. Let’s analyze this concept. First, here is a

statement by William Belan, a choral conductor:

Early in typical university analytical training one is taught that the high-
Renaissance (and earlier) polyphonic motets are conceived horizontally. We nod
our heads in agreement. We are further told that the composer of these motets
created one line and then methodically added one more line at a time until the
composition was complete. We nod our heads, again in agreement. This
subsequently becomes the assumption for the required course in modal
counterpoint, where the first assumption is set in stone with the unfolding of
species counterpoint; one created line is the foundation for one note-against-note
writing, then two notes-against one note and onward. In essence by the end of this
theory/analysis sequence one has written in the style of Palestrina, Victoria, and
others who set the high Renaissance standard for such writing. Most of us have a
difficult time writing in the style easily. And when we finish nodding our heads
we hear the essence of vertical harmony as well. What about this we ask? And we
are told that they did not listen vertically until later in history. We nod our heads
but a bit less convinced. But in fact, we frequently teach this same information
when we have our own class of students. Except, one piece of the assumption is
missing, one big piece; perhaps what is missing is the most significant piece of
all. The system used to write any polyphonic line is not modal, it is hexachordal.
And, each subsequent line can be, and often is, in opposition to the tonal center of
the other line. In other words, a soprano line of a Victoria motet can begin in the
hexachord on B-flat (BÑ-C-D-EÑ-F-G) while the alto line, with its requisite rules
of species counterpoint, can begin in the hexachord of E-flat (EÑ-F-G-AÑ-BÑ-C).
“So what, you ask? They were only following the rules of species counterpoint.”
If we take a closer look we see that each place of a note in a given hexachord,

24
 simultaneously holds the place of its function (Do-re-mi-fa-sol-la), and as you
will soon see that, to quote Robert Frost, “makes all the difference.” 64

If we take the music alphabet order and repeat the starting letter, we create a

musical scale. For example: A B C D E F G A. This scale (Aeolian) has its origin in

chant and is closely related to the tetrachord. In fact, the modes, Lydian through Locrian, all

of them, are all made of two tetrachords. 65 The A scale is two tetrachords: A B C D and E F

G A, and no matter what letter I used to begin start, each consecutive order of pitches will

give us a scale used in the Western Canon. Here is a summary:

ABCD-EFGA

BCDE-FGAB

CDEF-GABC

DEFG-ABCD

EFGA-BCDE

FGAB-CDEF

GABC-DEFG

If we examine the tetrachords of each of these more closely, we find four kinds: 66

Whole step = 1; Half Step = ½

• Major ex. C D E F (1, 1, ½)
• Minor ex. D E F G (1, ½, 1)
• Augmented ex. F G A B (1, 1, 1)

64
Brinegar, Perfect Pitch, 54.
65
Brinegar, 26.
66
Brinegar, 26.
25
• Diminished ex. E F G A (½, 1, 1)

The tetrachord, and its logical extension, the hexachord, would of course overlap

and “were the major structures behind melodic construction, and was called Gamut or

Gamma Ut. The first tetrachord was G to C (G, A, B, C), Ut, Re, Mi, Fa.” 67 This

compositional concept was the definition of singing chant and indeed all Western music

up to 1600 as it was theoretically explained in the early part of the 18th century by

Rameau in his 1722 Traité de l’harmonie. 68 By using this theory for music reading and

performing, we find that, harmonically and practically, there are drastic effects on

interval relationships, and thus, intonation. For example, take this phrase, Figure 5:

Figure 5. Solfege Example.

Most students in the choral classroom have been instructed to complete the phrase

with the normal full 8-note diatonic scale, as we have above. While this analysis may be

appropriate to 21st century ears, it is important to recall that this full octave scale,

including the syllable “Ti”, was not in use until Giovanni Bautista Doni treatise Nouvelle

introduction de musique in 1640. 69 It is more advisable, when following the hexacordal

mutation system, to perhaps divide the phrase in context of a Hexachord, a 6-note scale

67
Brinegar, 31.
68
Brinegar, 31.
69
Gregory Barnett, “Tonal Organization in Seventeenth-Century Music Theory,” in The
Cambridge History of Western Music Theory, ed. Thomas Christensen (Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 422.
26
and a Tetrachord, a 4-note scale. Find a pivot note (in this case the G makes a logical

choice) and switch the fundamental pitch. The result is as follows, Figure 6:

Figure 6. Solfege Example with Hexacordal Mutation.

What the singers will notice is that the high C (bar 3) is now referenced to the G

in bar 3 as opposed to the C in bar 1. It is now considered a fourth from the new

fundamental, G, which is closer than the first fundamental, C. While it is true that the 2:1

is just as consonant, singers deal often with a melodic line that includes many inherent

distractions, i.e. other pitches (in this case 8 other pitches in between). The likelihood of

intonation issues in a melismatic chant, for example, is high due to more information and

distance from the reference note. One could discuss intonation issues due to other issues,

such as vocal production and technique or the comfort levels of the singers, but these

variables could be addressed in other ways.

This brings us to a major point: how do singers feel while singing in each of these

systems? While there are multiple instances of anecdotal evidence, the goal of any

system, even the definition of being in tune is to have an aurally satisfying experience by

the performers and listeners. On the other hand, even that definition is up for

interpretation. In tune and satisfying, while obviously subjective, will be viewed in

context of what most meets these three systems and their tuning criteria within the

Western choral canon.

27
 How many times has an octave been flat in the choral rehearsal? Simply change

hexachord and one will find the way to home easier because the reference note is closer.

It is true that there has certainly not been a change of key in the above example, but what

could be seen as occurring is a shift of the fundamental pitch, a hexachordal mutation.

This would result in a smaller phrase, perhaps giving us a better grasp of intonation.

With the C in measure three treated as a fourth from G a singer will also, due to JI

ideals, have the sensation that it is higher. With this shift the Mi is no longer treated as a

Ti. This again helps to keep it in tune. Recall that Ti’s did not exist in the hexachordal

system and are sometimes considered one of the pitfalls when it comes to tuning. This

renewed look at a system based on the varied aspects of true acoustics, overtones, pure

ratios, and systems for conceptualizing them are much more musically rewarding.

THE LATTICE

After the concept of the Hexachord is understood, which is a melodic, or PT

concept, it is helpful to explore the system that best fits with chords, a JI ideal. Most

would concede that a C Major chord is made up on the notes C, then E, then G. Knowing

what we now know of naturally occurring overtones, let us introduce this chord in the

system of the lattice that was first theorized and built in the early eighteenth century by

Euler, among others.

28
 We start with the understanding that an interval is a frequency difference from

one tone to another. 70 The truth of Pythagoras and JI (nature) will tell us that not all

intervals, by letter name, are the same. Mathieu’s entire book studies this phenomenon.

Examining the overtones of C, we can observe E as the fifth partial of C. This E will be

flat of E in ET by fourteen cents. But, if we view E as a third partial of A, then it is eight

cents sharp of ET. The major second C to D is +4 cents of ET or could be -18 cents of

ET. Let’s chart this on what is called the lattice, Figure 7. 71

-20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8

G – D – A – E – B – F# –C#
-6 -4 -2 0 +2 +4 +6 +8
Eb – Bb – F – C – G – D – A – E
+10 +12 +14 +16 +18 +20 +22
Gb–Db–Ab–Eb–Bb – F – C

Figure 7. The Lattice.

Our decision as a conductor is to decide which E to use, for example. To

appreciate the intonation difference of our two Es, one a third partial and one a fifth

partial, we need to define where both pitches lay on the lattice. We know the PT E is +8

cents of equal temperament because we arrive at it by going four fifths up from C. The JI

E is found by octave reducing a fifth partial. The ratio (octave reduced) is 80:64, which is

-14 cents flat of ET. We place this E, a third above, in the upper line of the lattice. This

difference between the two E’s (-14 to +8) is 22 cents. This error of 22 cents is found all

70
Mathieu, Harmonic Experience, 74.
71
Helmholtz and Ellis, On the Sensations of Tone, 57-59.

29
over music and is known as another instance of the comma. As mentioned above, there

are many types of commas, but for our purposes, we just need to know that this

difference is dependent on a variety of factors and thus why we must make decisions.

A pattern, which can then be used as a shortcut to remembering how to tune, can be

found in the lattice:

Moving down the lattice (JI) = +14 cents

Moving up the lattice (JI) = -14 cents
Moving right (PT) = +2 cents
Moving left (PT) = -2 cents

At a minimum (if we were to take in all three tuning concepts) we have 3 Bb’s

from which to choose. In the first instance we have the Bb as dictated by ET. We also

have one that is eighteen cents sharper than ET (a third down from two fifths up) or one

that is four cents under (two fifths down) ET. The performer gets to decide! And the D

can be either four cents sharp (two fifths up) or eighteen cents flat (third up and two fifths

down). An issue may arise when the ET D is often referenced in the choral rehearsal from

the piano. This lack of clarity may be part of why choirs go out of tune.

Returning to a melodic focus, it seems appropriate to tune solo vocal lines from

the hexachordal ideal. Thus, for chant and most Renaissance, it is logical to use the 3-

limit PT system as this was in use at the time. For anything with parts, we could use the

same lattice but in its two-dimensional form.

A rehearsal process could include the following; find the generating tone, the Do

of the scale, and use it as a drone, along with a fifth if desired, from which to base each

30
pitch. If the hexachord shifts, shift the drone. 72 Specifically, in tuning a hexachord, all

movement is relatively small. 73

The C Hexachord is seen as follows: C D E F G A

0 +4 +8 -2 + 2 +6

So, with a C and G drone, we use the above to let our ensembles know where to

go. The drone is based on the Mi/Fa relationship. As seen below, in Figure 8, a

hexachord would mutate on the pivot note notated in bold.

E F# G# A B C#
Do Re Mi Fa
G A B C D E
Re Mi Fa Sol La
E F# G# A B C#
Do Re Mi Fa
A B C# D E F#
Do Re Mi Fa Sol
E F# G# A B C#
Do Re Mi Fa Sol La

Figure 8. Hexachord with shifts occurring at the note in bold.

It is necessary to understand that each hexachord has its own tuning identity due

its generating tone. Once the hexachord shifts, the fundamental then changes, the drone

changes, each pitch changes, the color changes. One can easily imagine the tuning

72
Brinegar, Pitch Perfect, 34.
73
Mathieu, Harmonic Experience, 530-531.
31
fireworks that would result. In the above example, there are three different B’s! The E

hexachord has a B that is two cents sharp, but the B in G hexachord is eight cents sharp,

while the B in the A hexachord is four cents sharp. This is in stark contrast to thinking the

same B goes throughout the entire piece. There is a simple pattern based off the criteria

above: 74

Do Re Mi Fa Sol La
0 204 408 498 702 906
or
0 +4 +8 -2 +2 +6

It is helpful to be reminded that hexachords have no leading tone so finding the

hexachordal generating tone is relatively simple. Mathieu and Duffin posit that there is no

grand modal scheme in pre-baroque literature from the beginning of the piece to the end,

one harmonic concept throughout. 75 It seems that part of the appeal of the JI ideal is that

the harmonic language is constantly changing. It is not major or minor or a mode, it is

about hexachords which are simply collections of pitches strategically placed to express

the text or fulfill a liturgical function, and everywhere in between. Brinegar, states it quite

clearly: “When the hexachord mutates, pitches change their functional meaning along

with their intonation (plus or minus in cents). The points of mutations are integral to

maintaining the flow of the motet and the centricity of the primary tetrachord.” 76

74
Brinegar, Pitch Perfect, 72.
75
Duffin, How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony, 70.
76
Brinegar, Pitch Perfect, 92.
32
 To tune any scale in the Pythagorean ideal (3-limit JI), we now understand to

arrange the scale by fifths. To switch to 5-limit JI, move to the full lattice concept and

figure out its shape by organizing the 5ths (horizontal) and 3rds (vertical) in the tightest

formation. Here are a few examples, as extrapolated from Brinegar:

Pythagorean C to C = FCGDAEB

Lattice C to C = E B
F C G DA

As we recall, this results in a different E and B. It is up to the musician to dictate

which to use. Was the piece written melodically and early enough when fifths were the

ideal, or, were thirds seen as consonant? If it was the latter, one can think of the E as a

third up from C and not a fifth up from A; a “justly tuned” third as opposed to a

Pythagorean third. Also, consider the A. Should we move it the third above F? As in any

rehearsal, decisions to be made. Here are some other examples, Figure 9:

FM= D A E BbM = G D A DM = F#- C#

| | | | | | | |
Bb F C G Eb Bb F C G–D–A–E-B

Figure 9. Scales place on the Lattice

Let’s look at the chromatic scale: C Db D Eb E F F#/Gb G Ab Bb B. The Tri-Tone, as is

generally understood, is harmonically very disruptive and weak therefore is used as the

outer limit when arranged by fifths. 3-limit JI, or PT, is thus:

(Gb) Db Ab Eb Bb F C G D A E B (F#)

33
The following is an adapted, from Mathieu, chromatic lattice of the 5-limit JI ideal. See

Figure 10. 77

D – A – E – B – (F#)
| | | | |
Bb – F – C – G – D
| | | | |
(Gb) – Db – Ab – Eb – Bb

Figure 10. Chromatic Scale placed on the Lattice

This lattice, as defined by such theorists and practitioners as Helmholtz, Ellis,

Mathieu, and Brinegar is extremely helpful, insightful and quite profound. Here are some

things we can see with the lattice, Figure 11: 78

Major chords: Minor chords:

D – A – E – B – (F#) D – A – E – B – (F#)
| | | | | | | | | |
Bb – F – C – G – D Bb – F – C – G – D
| | | | | | | | | |
(Gb) – Db – Ab – Eb – Bb (Gb) – Db – Ab – Eb – Bb

Augmented Chords: Diminished Chords:

D – A – E – B – (F#) D – A – E – B – (F#)
| | | | | | | | | |
Bb – F – C – G – D Bb – F – C – G – D
| | | | | | | | | |
(Gb) – Db – Ab – Eb – Bb (Gb) – Db – Ab – Eb – Bb

77
Mathieu, Harmonic Experience, 495.
78
Brinegar, Pitch Perfect, 83-84.
34
 Pentatonic Scales:

D – A – E – B – (F#)
| | | | |
Bb – F – C – G – D
| | | | |
(Gb) – Db – Ab – Eb – Bb

Figure 11. Chords on Lattice

Chords seem to need the two-dimensional system of the 5-limit lattice. The root

of the chord, usually the one generating the pitches, is found by going down and to the

left.

A C-Major chord looks like this: E

|
C–G

As can be understood visually, the chord is based on the C. What the lattice shows

is that one must tune the E from the C and tune the G from the C. This results in tuning

the G two cents sharper and the E as fourteen cents flatter than the piano. The major point

to understand is that the C is the fundamental pitch. Not advisable, in this system, is to

tune the G from the E or the E from the G.

FM7 looks like this: A–E

| |
F–C

35
We are asked not to tune the E to the F. In fact, we must either tune it a fifth up from A or

third up from C. In this limited case, does not matter which one chooses. Regardless,

recall that the E must be 12 cents under the ET E.

Let’s now look at a C9: E

|
C–G–D

This is a simple extension. Find the C, tune the G off the C, then tune the D off

the G. This will result in a D that is four cents sharper than the piano. In this case, it

makes little sense to choose the “other” D as mentioned earlier (eighteen cents flat) as

there is nothing to hold on to, harmonically speaking. This may change with

accompaniment or melodic issues, but in this case, it is clear which to choose.

Let’s look at an am7: A–E

|
C–G

We can choose either the A or the C from which to base our tuning. Again, this may have

melodic or other compositional criteria than can influence our decision. If we choose the

A, the G is sixteen cents sharper than the piano. If we choose the C, it is only two.

Decisions must be made, as in any rehearsal.

Let us now look at FM and choose a different A. We could do two things:

36
 The 5-limit JI A or the 3-limit PT A

A
|
F–C or F–C–G–D-A

We will either use the 5:4 (JI) third, needing to lower by fourteen cents. Or, we could do

the 81:64 (PT) A, necessitating a higher A by eight cents. This is a 22-cent swing (which

is the comma again). In this case, again, there are three As from which to choose.

Because of the strengths (natural tendency) of fifths, it is recommended that one chooses

to stay with one concept, and, unless shown otherwise by the composer, follow the more

natural 3-limit fifth. Therefore, F, C, A, not F, A, C.

As technology progressed, and an overall understanding of temperament, there

were needs for instruments that could solve some of these issues brought on by incorrect

ratios and quickly changing harmonies. ET did not solve for these issues simply because

it was not meant to. The system had to evolve, but what took its place, as evidenced by

the vast discussions tuning theories took after this time period, was not an evolution but a

revolution.

EQUAL TEMPERAMENT REVISTED

After the systems of PT and JI are understood, one can see how ET was attractive.

However, it is the position of many performers and theorists such as Mathieu, Brinegar,

Duffin, Doty, Sisson, Jorgenson and many more, that we miss the sonority of these two

earlier systems and their true consonant intervallic relationships. On the other hand,

37
music history is replete with stories of composers ignoring keys because

JI made them unpleasing to the ear. Scarlatti famously did a program

where he needed his harpsichord tuned four different times in one

concert so he could perform four different sonatas. There was a need and

a desire to have a system that could allow for movement to different

keys within a single work.

Yet as we have come to see, there is no system that allows for

perfect intonation in all styles, genres, and time periods. In my research,

I found that instead of one system that is a catch-all, what we must do is

find the best choice when it comes to the literature we perform. Table 7,

shows the three main systems and how they compare rationally (ratios)

and irrationally (cents). Depending upon the system we choose to use,

we can adjust our pitch accordingly. What we must notice are the holes

in the rational representation (ratios) of the intervals. To put it simply,

these pitches were not used, inconsequential, and thus not codified in

any resource I came upon.

As Mathieu, Brinegar, and Duffin note, the time period of the

repertoire is imperative. It is this opinion, and the conclusion of this

author, that has allowed for some semblance of a system in which the

choral director can follow. If the composition is a solo vocal line, then

PT should be followed. If there are harmonies, and a composition

Table 7: PT, JI, and ET

38
wherein thirds are considered consonant, it stands to reason that JI should be heeded. And

moving forward, due to the lack of adaptability of the piano, the wide range of repertoire

written with a piano should match its tuning system, ET. Now we move on to the project

and applying all this information.

39
 CHAPTER 3 – PROJECT CREATION AND LIMITATIONS

When I began this project, I knew the issue I wanted to address: the importance

for singing in tune. However, I didn’t know exactly how to go about it. I knew this was

particularly important when ensembles choose to sing a cappella, or, without

accompaniment. This goal of this project was to study, in depth, the tuning systems in use

when a piece of music was written and to see if they could be brought into today’s

rehearsal. I wanted to be able to find, define, and explore the mathematically rational

choices for tuning to be used by a choral director. I also wanted to receive conducting

lesson guidance. At the end I wanted to provide supportive videos, and notated scores on

how to apply these new skills.

Months of study have resulted in a firmer grasp of the logic and importance of the

new concepts to me: Pythagorean tuning, just intonation, hexachordal and lattice analysis.

The joy of this project was finding a way to succinctly and clearly represent not only the

aural ideal but also perhaps new skills for the teacher to bring into the classroom. It was

also obvious that my own biases and intellectual limitations would come into play—

perhaps I heard what I wanted to hear. I was not able to codify micro-tonal and other

intonation concepts in relation to choral music. While the discussions exist surrounding

other systems, it was not something within the scope of this project. Also, there were

practical considerations that limited the qualitative data needed to prove these systems

indeed improved intonation. While I was able to gather anecdotal evidence (student

comments, teacher feedback, my own desires and perception of the outcomes, etc.) there

is the possibility that it got better simply because I wanted it to get better. However, the

40
purpose of the paper was not to prove the system effectiveness, but to present the

information in a way that resulted in a perceived improvement by all parties. That, I hope,

was achieved.

The original vision entailed making five videos about 7 minutes each. For the

scripts, and all the videos, I was to simply take the narrative from my paper and present it

with a more conversational approach. The desire was not to be informal, but to be

welcoming. I found the information to be a true paradigm shift and I wanted others to

welcome the change, not elevate it to something that was daunting and not worth

inclusion in a teacher’s arsenal of musical analysis. Writing scripts, learning animation,

and video editing were going to be new skills for me as well. The desired results were to

be five videos that, I believe, bring this groundbreaking view of music into the choral

classroom, which has not been done before I started this project.

Video 1 was designed to be an introduction to the reason for this project – tuning

for choirs is very important. I needed to introduce vocabulary that had not examined, as

far as I was aware, in relation to the choral idiom. In my own daily teaching pedagogy, I

have found it best to meet people where they are in terms of knowledge and vocabulary

and expand from there as opposed to starting off new and joining later with what they

know. Therefore, I found the need to introduce these tuning systems, (Pythagorean tuning

and just intonation) but base them on a system relatively well-known – equal

temperament. The importance of this first video came down to making sure we, as

conductors, see the value in refraining from using a 20th century tuning ideals on pre-20th

century repertoire.

41
 Video 2 was the first dive into new information, specifically, defining

Pythagorean tuning and just intonation. I introduced tetrachords, hexachords, and the

concept of the lattice. By equating nature and naturally occurring harmonics I wanted to

explore harmony as it was understood nearly 2000 years ago – with the main

compositional point being that the fifth was the consonant interval. By keeping a

reference point relatively close by, which is the value of the hexachordal system, singers,

and by extension choirs, can tune much easier. I found that many people thought “finding

the hexachord” to be difficult during general dialogue, so I created the exercises I use in

the class, my video, and this paper.

I brought in a musical piece in for the first time in this second video using a

simple chant. I found this is where people can “hear it” by actually “feeling it” first. I

have found my own ear improving immensely but to be able to sing as little as 8 cents has

been very rewarding. To see why it sounds different is a big step and one I hope to bring

to others. Part of my own biases is apparent when I explain certain concepts, such as

tuning to drones and recollecting classroom presentations. Again, proving the systems

accuracy and effectiveness was not the goal. The goal was to have perceived

improvement. If choirs felt they were more in tune, and the directors felt they were more

in tune, which all came to fruition by understanding these new concepts, then I was

satisfied. While it would be even more effective to be able to measure the actual change

in tuning accuracy, I was not able to do this and thus relied on my own ears and that of

the classroom teacher. This also brought me to my single largest omission in this project

– how to help the ear of the conductor improve. Nothing is a better teacher than time, and

there simply is not the time to train a conductor’s ear to hear eight cents in a matter of
42
five videos. This is something I will address in the next chapter, but Mathieu’s book is

the closest thing I can find on how to address this. It is no wonder it is over 500 pages of

dense material. As I will explain, this project turned into why tuning needs to be done

differently followed by the beginning steps. The final step, how to hear, will need to be

another project completely.

As I continue Video 2, I brought in a motet, Te lucis ante terminum, and

explained how the hexachordal analysis enlivens the piece. The switch from a fifth ideal

to a third ideal was a big step explored in this video. I wanted to show the concept of the

hexachordal mutation and not only how variable it can make a piece, but also showcase

the power of the choices that conductors have.

Video 3 was paced more quickly as all the foundational knowledge is given in the

previous videos. Reviewing the hexachord and the change to a third ideal (5-limit JI) are

points that needed emphasis as this was one of the reasons the lattice was invented.

Historical context is important, and I personally found it very eye opening to know that

C# was not always Db.

After some conversation and reflection, I created the classroom exercise as an

example to make sure the concept of the hexachordal mutation is easier than it looks.

With the hexachord I hoped to not only assist in the ease of singing in tune but also the

concept of ease on the vocal instrument. Easier on the ears, I have found, usually equates

to being easier on the voice. Using myself as an example in the drone exercise was easier,

but my point would have been better served by bringing another singer or some other test

case. While I feel the project goals were achieved, which was how to apply these ideals,

it still would have been a stronger academic process were I to have used another subject.
43
 Video 4 was the most rewarding to the conductor, especially regarding a cappella

20th century repertoire. Most top choral programs have introduced Whitacre and

Lauridsen to their ensembles, but some, perhaps, do not make the chords “shine”. In my

private study with Donald Brinegar this was a major point. He mentioned that both

composers have told him that very few choirs tune their pieces properly and that even

they didn’t know how to do it themselves! They just wrote what was in their head the

best they could, but it was not until a tuning based on the lattice was shared with them

that they felt a system was available to truly reproduce what they heard in their head.

In this video I was able to display the adaptability of the lattice – the various

chords that it can represent, but more so, how we can tune as compared to ET. I also

presented quite a few examples of chords placed on the lattice of both the O Magnum

Mysterium of Lauridsen and Ubi Caritas of Mealor. This shows how to tune them using

this system, and thus how to rehearse them.

Video 5 brought everything full circle as I attempted to make very clear how ET

was needed and how it was beneficial. ET was simpler, but the sonority and history of the

other systems are still valuable. I trust it became clear that all three systems are worthy of

use. It is up to conductors as to which system to use. This was the first time I have seen

these concepts clearly and simply stated.

Conducting lessons were something I was hoping would shed even more light on

these concepts. While conducting lessons are usually focused on gesture and nuance

(patterns and expressions), it was obvious that gesture, when it comes to tuning, is much

more about relationships that I originally understood. There are basic things conductors

can do to help a choir stay in tune, but there is so much more that is dependent on the
44
conductor’s ears in rehearsal and natural gestural language that “copying” another’s

movements is not beneficial and, frankly, something I was warned to not do. This type of

honesty and integrity was deeply appreciated.

As I moved forward to producing the videos, strengths and weaknesses in full

view, I felt confident I provided a service and added something new to my chosen

profession.

45
 CHAPTER 4 - REFLECTION

The purpose of this project was to attempt to find a way to understand the

complex world, and history, of tuning systems and bring that understanding into the

choral rehearsal. What was found was that this was simply the tip of the iceberg, and only

one small way of tuning. There are other systems and other opinions out there. What I

believe I have found is a way to distill the process of three of those tuning systems to a

procedure that can be understood by choral teachers and something that can be grasped

quickly by students of nearly any age level.

This project and paper are in no way complete as not every aspect of the vast

concept of tunings can be explored; however, this is also not the point of the project. I

feel that the videos effectively introduce Pythagorean tuning and just intonation, the

difference between them and the system normally used, equal temperament. The purpose

was also to show, both mathematically and philosophically, why it might be advisable to

not rely on the piano whenever it is not used in the composition. I also learned through

not only conversation with other teachers but actual classroom experimentation, that there

is such a thing as too much information. Letting students hear and feel is sometimes a

better first step than letting them know. Through this project I believe I have learned the

basics of the systems and how to pass on this information. The information here supports

the teachers to both understand why PT or JI is necessary and why it could perhaps assist

them in the classroom. It also attempts to give the instructor information to guide

discussion and answer questions that may come up in the rehearsal.

46
 Throughout this process I have found a deeper appreciation of the researched

concepts and renewed respect for this profession we have chosen. This entire project

came about due to my own weaknesses as a rehearsal technician. I consider myself a

good practitioner of the voice, I build voices, I know repertoire, I am fairly musical, and I

engage well with people. However, I was never happy with my tuning. I was told by

Donald Brinegar, in my private conducting lessons and many discussions on these topics,

while I had good instincts, I was essentially walking around a room with the lights out! I

was lost and trying to figure it out on my own. Being able to dive into the incarnation and

historical context of the three intonation ideals has been extremely enlightening. I feel it

has made me a better musician, a better conductor, and certainly a better teacher. I am

unaware of other research and pedagogical practices bringing these systems specifically

into the choral rehearsal.

This project required much experimenting on my own choirs. I took videos, but

they were of poor quality, so I was not able to utilize them. They did, however, provide

me guidance on how best to present this material for my instructional videos. I also did

not have the proper materials at first. After sharing to my church choir with struggling

using my phone with a rubber band as a teleprompter and it kept falling and I’d have to

re-video the work I received an anonymous gift – someone in the choir paid for a

teleprompter! What an amazing gift and one that resulted in not only an easier process to

record the videos, but a renewed spirit on my part. This was my greatest lesson for this

project – as the teaching system evolves, it is always for, and can sometimes only be

improved by, people and their talents and generosity.

47
 Regarding actual teaching methodology, my first lesson was too long on

introductory material. Basic musical knowledge (rhythm and solfege) is all a choir needs

to get going right away. Also, I noticed that the lattice had a particularly energizing effect

on my groups – they loved the puzzle and the hidden gems inside this system. For many

it made the concepts very clear.

Regarding conducting, I found that my goals of being able to help my choirs sing

more in tune during an actual performance did happen. In the past few months, over some

30+ pieces, I was able to know where pitch issues were going to arise before rehearsal

even started and thus knew what sections to look at to energize (to raise a pitch) or to de-

energize (lower), and which to assist in simply recalling rehearsal issues. The point that

there is no gestural trick from my private instructor was a good one. I do not feel it is

disingenuous to say there is no quick fix when it comes to gestures in relation to fixing

intonation. It must be based on how one moves as a conductor, what one hears as a

musician, and wants to communicate as a person. As was put to me, it’s what makes a

good conductor a great conductor.

Practically speaking, I had no experience writing scripts for this type of project. I

had never used iMovie and I had no experience animating or building intros/outros. I also

did not have a professional website on which to post them. This project not only

deepened my love of the choral art but resulted in quite a few technological, practical,

and professional improvements as well.

In finishing the project, I feel I have a grasp on the next steps. I plan on analyzing

many more scores along with narratives regarding the decision-making process. I would

welcome others to do the same. These could all be included in a database where scores
48
can be freely accessed, posted, downloaded, etc. Whereas conductors can differ on

decisions made, it can also provide a safe place to discuss these differences. The concepts

of tuning are in no way exhausted in this project – in fact, it is a relatively volatile subject

among many musicians and theorists.

There is a need for videos on clarifying the different tuning needs through a

historical lens for conductors, including how to teach a choir to hear with a higher level

of accuracy and hearing a PT third vs. a JI third, for example. For the future, I think there

would be value in doing an action research project of teaching choirs to sing in different

tuning systems and see how they sound at the end of a year. The study I suggest would

use Technology that measures intonation could be used on an individual, or group, to

make accurate measurements.

This paper, the analyzed scores, the videos themselves, and supplemental material

can all be found on the following website, www.briandehn.com/intonation-solutions. I

look forward to progressing as a musician, a conductor, and a teacher in the many years

to come in this beautiful profession and hope I have also inspired other choral directors to

explore historical tuning with their choirs.

49
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ball, Philip. The Music Instinct: How Music Works and Why We Can’t Do Without It.
New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Barnett, Gregory. “Tonal Organization in Seventeenth-Century Music Theory.” In The

Cambridge History of Western Music Theory, edited by Thomas Christensen,
407-55. The Cambridge History of Music. Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press, 2002.

Brinegar, Donald. Pitch Perfect: The Theory and Practice of Choral Intonation. San
Pedro, CA: Pavane Publishing, 2019.

Doty, David B. The Just Intonation Primer: An Introduction to the Theory and Practice
of Just Intonation. 3rd edition. San Francisco: The Just Intonation Network, 2002.

Duffin, Ross W. “Cracking a Centuries-Old Tradition.” Early Music America 20, no. 4
(Winter 2014): 44-48.

Duffin, Ross W. How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony (and Why You Should Care).
New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2007.

Duffin, Ross W. “Just Intonation in Renaissance Theory and Practice.” Music Theory
Online 12, no. 3 (October 2006).
<http://www.mtosmt.org/issues/mto.06.12.3/mto.06.12.3.duffin.html>.

Fisher, Gary. “The Munich Kapelle of Orlando Di Lasso (1563-1594): a model for
Renaissance choral performance practice.” DMA diss. Norman: University of
Oklahoma, 1987.

Helmholtz, Hermann Von, and Alexander John Ellis. On the Sensations of Tone as a
Physiological Basis for the Theory of Music. New York: Dover Publications,
1954.

Jensen, Miranda. “Are You in Tune? A Phenomenological Enquiry into Pythagorean

Tuning in the Creation of New Music.” PhD diss. University of Melbourne, 2017.

Johnson, Hugh Bailey, Jr. “An Investigation of the Tuning Preferences of a Selected
Group of Singers with Reference to Just Intonation, Pythagorean Tuning, and
Equal Temperament.” Mus. Ed.D. diss. Bloomington: Indiana University, 1963.

Jorgensen, Owen. Tuning: Containing the Perfection of Eighteenth-Century

Temperament, the Lost Art of Nineteenth-Century Temperament, and the Science
of Equal Temperament. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1991.

50
Liern, Vicente. “On the Construction, Comparison, and Exchangeability
of Tuning Systems.” Journal of Mathematics and Music 28, no. 3 (July 2015):
197-213.

Marvin, Jameson. “Choral Singing, in Tune.” Choral Journal 32, no. 5 (December 1991):
27-34.

Mathieu, William Allaudin. Harmonic Experience: Tonal Harmony from Its Natural
Origins to Its Modern Expression. Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions International,
1997.

Parry, Hubert H. The Evolution of the Art of Music. New York: D. Appleton-Century
Company, 1916.

Riedweg, Christoph. Pythagoras: His Life, Teaching, and Influence. Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press, 2005.

Schotsborg, Daniel. “Harmonic Frequencies & 432 Hz Research.” Last modified April
15, 2013. http://blog.qualiaplus.com/2013/04/harmonic-frequencies-432-hz-
research.html

Shields, John. “Dissonance Within Discordance: The Influence of Equal Temperament on

the Aesthetic Evaluation of Second Viennese Atonality.” MA Thesis, University of
Oregon, 2015.

Schafer, Raymond Murray. The Tuning of the World. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1977.

Sisson, Jack. “Pitch Preference Determination, a Comparative Study of Tuning

Preferences of Musicians from the Major Performing Areas with Reference to
Just Intonation, Pythagorean Tuning, and Equal Temperament.” PhD diss., The
University of Oklahoma, 1969.

Sturman, Rob. “A Dynamical Systems Approach to Musical Tuning.” Dynamical

Systems 27, no. 1 (March 2012): 131-143.

Sundberg, Johan. The Science of Musical Sounds. San Diego: Academic Press, 1991.

Taruskin, Richard and Christopher H. Gibbs. The Oxford History of Western Music
College Edition. Second Edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013.

The Canon of Me (blog). “A harpsichord c1620.” Tumbler, 2019.

http://blogthoven.tumblr.com/post/82017257729/a-harpsichord-c1620-with-some-
split-keys-to

51
Vogel, C. J. Pythagoras and Early Pythagoreanism: An Interpretation of Neglected
Evidence on the Philosopher Pythagoras. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1966.

Walker, Jonathan. “Intonational Injustice: A Defense of Just Intonation in the

Performance of Renaissance Polyphony.” Music Theory Online 2, no. 6
(September 1996).

Wikipedia. “Guidonian Hand.” Wikipedia. Accessed January 28, 2018.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guidonian_hand

52
APPENDIX 1: Ubi Caritas – Chant

53
APPENDIX 2: Te Lucis Ante Terminum – Tallis

54
APPENDIX 3: Plorate Filii Israel – Carissimi

55
56
57
APPENDIX 4: O Magnum Mysterium – Lauridsen

58
59
60
61
62
63
64
APPENDIX 5: Ubi Caritas – Mealor

65
66
67
68