Pitch in Western Music Since 1500 A Re Examination

Pitch in Western Music since 1500.
A Re-Examination
Author(s): Arthur Mendel
Source: Acta Musicologica, Vol. 50, Fasc. 1/2 (Jan. - Dec., 1978), pp. 1-93+328
Published by: International Musicological Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/932288 .
Accessed: 17/06/2014 21:04
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
International Musicological Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Acta Musicologica.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Pitch in Western Music since 1500
A Re-examination'
ARTHUR MENDEL (PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY)
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
I. A. The Relativity of Early Pitch-Standards .............. . 11

B. The Relative Standards .................... 13
II. The Evidence Concerning Absolute Pitches before 1834 ......... 17

A. Surviving Instruments .................... 18
1. Wind Instruments .....................i18
a. Recorders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
b. Transverse Flutes .. .................. . 20
c. Oboes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
d. Clarinets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
e. Trumpets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .23
f. Cornetti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
g. Trombones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 24
h. Organs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...25
Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
England . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Germany ....................... 30
Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .... 33
.
Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Organ Pitch-Changes .................. 36
i. Organ-Pipe Dimensions .......... ....... 37
1 The author published articles on this subject in The Musical Quarterly in 1948 and 1955 and in Acta
Musicologica in 1949, reviewing pitch-standards from 1511 to the present day, with particular atten-
tion to Schlick, Praetorius, and Bach. These were reprinted, along with A. J. Ellis's classic paper of 1880
for the Society of Arts, and some new material, as Studies in the History of Pitch (Amsterdam, 1968).
Some parts of these articles need correction. (Where the present article disagrees with the author's
previous publications, it should be taken as correcting them.) In addition, the greatly increased interest
in Renaissance and Baroque instruments has brought with it a flood of information not available
when they were written.
In this paper, an asterisk next to a name indicates that the information immediately preceding or
following was supplied in private correspondence or conversation. To all persons thus named the
author is greatly indebted, and particularly to Milton Babbitt, Anthony Baines, Philip Bate, David
Boyden, F. J. Carey, J. Bunker Clarke, Ulrich D~ihnert,G. A. C. De Graaf, Lawrence Earp, Linda Ferguson,
Thomas B. Hall, Pierre Hardouin, Bruce Haynes, Friedrich von Huene, Thomas McGeary, Nicolas
Meei's, Richard S. Merritt, Paula Morgan, Edward Parmentier, Harold S. Powers, William H. Scheide,
Hans Peter Schmitz, Don Smithers, Luigi F. Tagliavini, M. A. Vente, Rainer Weber.

2 A. Mendel: Pitch in Western.Music since 1500
Schlick (1511) ................... 37

...
Provision for Alternative Pitches in a Single Organ ....... 39
M. Agricola (1545) . .. . . . . . . .. . .. . . . ..40
Bermudo (1555) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 40
Other Spanish Pipe-Lengths .. .............. 40
De Caus (1615) ................... .. 42
Praetorius I (1618) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 43
Kircher (1650) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . .43
Dom Bedos (1766) ................... . 43
j. Praetorius II on Multiplicity of Pitches ............ 44
2. Harpsichords . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 44
B. Voice-Ranges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
1. Of Moderate Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
a. Primarily in Chant ................. ..... . 48
(1) Schlick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
(2) Earlier Transpositions ................. 53
(3) Bermudo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
(a) Kyrie, Sanctus, Agnus, and Hymn Chants ........ 54
(b) Psalmody ... ............ .........56....
(Including French Psalmody: Jumilhac [1673], Nivers
[1683], Brossard [1703])
b. In Polyphony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
(1) Diruta (1622) 58
....................
........ ......... 58
(2) The "Chiavette" ..
Kiesewetter (1820) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Praetorius III (1619) . ................ 60
Vincentius ........ ...... 60
(1611,1625)........
Morley (1597) and Glareanus (1547) . . . 61
Schonsleder (1631) ........ ........ .......... 61
Palestrina, Landi, Lejeune ....... ....... 061
Schiitz ...........62
...................... .62
Gibbons .... . ... . . . . . . . . . . .....
Byrd . . . . . ....
. . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. 62
(3) Organ Transpositions of English Church Music .. ..... 63
2. Exceptionally Low, High, and Wide Ranges .... ........ . 67
C. Some Pitches in the 18th Century ..... . . . ........... 73

KuhnauandBach... ............... ......... 73
QuantzandAgricola .... ................ 73
France in the later 18th century ...................... . 75
Mozart 79
.................................

A. Mendel: Pitch in Western Music since 1500 3
III. Tuning-Forks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . 80

Handel . . . . . .. .. .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . .. 81
Mozart .. .... .. ......... .... . ..... 82
Taskin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . 82
Later Forks . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . .. ... 83
IV. Absolute Standards Proposed in Terms of Frequencies ......... 89

V. Some Conclusions . .. . . .. .. . . . . . . .. . . ... . 90
Bibliography
Key to abbreviations not explained in MGG:

GSJ = The Galpin Society Journal
JASA = Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
ISA = Journal of the (Royal) Society of Arts
L'Org = L'Organo
Org = The Organ
OY = Organ Yearbook
PAMS = Papers of the American Musicological Society
RiM = Rivista italiana di musicologia
P. Aaron, Libri tres de institutione harmonica (Bologna 1516; facs. ed. Bologna 1970).
Idem, Thoscanello de la musica (Venice 1523; later eds. as Toscanello in musica,
1529, 1539, 1562; facs. ed. of 1539 ed. G. Frey, Kassel 1970).
Adam of Fulda, Musica (1490)' in: GerbertS 3 (1784), p. 329-381.
J. Adlung, Anleitung zur musicalischen Gelahrtheit (Erfurt 1758; facs. ed. H. J. Moser,
Kassel 1953; 2nd ed. J. A. Hiller, Dresden 1783).
Idem, Musica mechanicaorganoedi, 2 vols., ed. J. L. Albrecht,with additions by J. F.
Agricola (Berlin 1768; facs. ed. Kassel 1931).
J. Agricola, see Adlung (1768) and Tosi (1757).
F.
M. Agricola, Musica instrumentalis Deudsch, 2nd ed. (Wittenberg 1545; dipl. repr. in
PGfM 20, 1896).
J. L. Albrecht,see Adlung (1768).
D. Altenburg, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Trompete im Zeitalter der Clarin-
blaskunst (1500-1800) (Regensburg 1973).
J. E. Altenburg, Versuch einer Anleitung zur heroisch-musikalischen Trompeter- u.
Paukerkunst (Halle 1795; facs. ed. Leipzig 1972).
H. K. Andrews, The Transposition of Byrd's Vocal Polyphony, in: ML 43 (1962),
p. 25-37.
H. Angles, Datos per una biografia de Cabanilles, in: Cabanilles I., Opera omnia, 1
(Publicaciones del departamento de misica de la Biblioteca de Cataluiia 4, Barcelona
1927) p. ix-xxxix.
Idem, El organo de la catedral de Lerida en 1543-1556, in: AnM 3 (1948), p. 205-211.
C. Antegnati, L'Arte organica (Brescia 1608).

4 A. Mendel: Pitch in Western Music since 1500
W. Apel, Gregorian Chant (Bloomington, Ind. 1958, 1973).

J. Backus, The Acoustical Foundations of Music (New York 1969).
F. Baldell6, Organos y organeros en Barcelona (Siglos XIII-XIX), in: AnM 1 (1946),
p. 195-237.
L. Balmer, Tonsystem u. Kirchentiine bei Johannes Tinctoris (Bern 1935).
A. Banchieri, Conclusioni nel suono dell'organo (Bologna 1608).
Idem, Cartella musicale (Venice 1614).
E. B. Barber, Arnolt Schlick, Organ Consultant, and his ,Spiegel der Orgelmacher u.
Organisten", in: OY 6 (1975), p. 33-41.
A. Barcotto, Regola e breve raccordo, Ms. C 80, Bibl. Mus. G. B. Martini (Bologna 1650);
cf. Tagliavini (1974).
J. Barnes, Pitch Variations in Italian Keyboard Instruments, in: GSJ 18 (1965), p. 110
to 116.
Idem, The Specious Uniformity of Italian Harpsichords, in: Keyboard Instruments.
Studies in Organology, ed. E. M. Ripin (Edinburgh 1971), p. 1-10.
Idem, The Stringing of Italian Harpsichords, in: Bericht der internationalen Tagung
von Restauratoren fiir besaitete Tasteninstrumente ..., Graz 1971 (Graz 1973),
p. 35-39.
Dom Bedos de Celles, L'art du facteur d'orgues (Paris 1766-1778; facs. ed. Kassel 1963
to 1966).
H. Bellermann, Der Contrapunkt, 2nd ed. (Berlin 1877).
C. Bendinelli, Tutta l'arte della Trombetta (Ms. 238, Accademia Filarmonica, Verona,
dated 1614; facs. ed. E. H. Tarr, Kassel 1975).
H. Berlioz, Le diapason, in: A travers chants (Paris 1862), p. 290-301.
J. Bermudo, Declaraci6n de Instrumentos Musicales (Osuna 1549, 1555; facs. ed. of 1555
ed. M. S. Kastner, Kassel 1957).
N. Bessaraboff, Ancient European Musical Instruments (Boston 1941).
H. Besseler, Bourdon u. Fauxbourdon (Leipzig 1950; 2nd rev. ed. P. Giilke, Leipzig 1974).
B. Bis Mantova, Compendio musicale (Ms. dated Ferrara 1677), excerpts printed in:
A. Cavicchi, Prassi strumentale in Emilia nell'ultimo quarto del seicento: flauto
italiano, cornetto, archi, in: Studi musicali 2 (1973), p. 111-143.
Q. van Blankenburgh, Elementa musica (The Hague 1739).
W. Boetticher, Orlando di Lasso u. seine Zeit, 1532-1594, 1 (Kassel 1958).
V. Bona da Brescia, Regole del contraponto et compositione (Casale 1595).
F. Bossinensis, Tenori e contrabassi intabulati 1 (Venice 1509).
H. Bottrigari, II Desiderio ... (Venice 1594; repr. ed. K. Meyer, Berlin 1924).
H. Bouasse, Instruments a vent 1 (Paris 1929).
S. de Brossard, Tuono, in: Dictionnaire de musique (Paris 1703).
P. G. Bunjes, The Praetorius Organ (Univ. of Rochester, Ph. D. diss. 1966, Ann Arbor,
Mich., University Microfilms, no. 66-11542).
C. Burney, The Present State of Music in France and Italy (London 1771).
J. Caldwell, The Pitch of Early Tudor Organ Music, in: ML 51 (1970), p. 156-163.
A. Cavaill6-Coll, De la determination du ton normal ou du diapason pour l'accord des
instruments de musique (Paris 1859; repub. as app. in: C. et E. Cavaill&-Coll, Aristide
Cavaill6-Coll, ses origines, sa vie, ses ceuvres, Paris 1929).
P. Cerone, El melopeo y maestro ... (Naples 1613).
G. Cesari and G. Pannain, eds., IMAMI 6 (1939), p. xv-xxii.
H. W. Chisholm, On the Science of Weighing and Measuring (London 1877), p. 53.
J. B. Clark, Transposition in Seventeenth-Century English Organ Accompaniments and
the Transposing Organ (Detroit 1974).

H.-G. Daehn, Wohin treibt der Kammerton?, in: NZM 132/4 (1971), p. 184-189.
U. Diihnert, Die Orgeln Gottfried Silbermanns in Mitteldeutschland (Leipzig 1953).
Idem, Der Orgel- u. Instrumentenbauer Zacharias Hildebrandt (Leipzig 1962).
C. R. Day, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Musical Instruments Recently Exhibited at the
Royal Military Exhibition, London 1890 (London 1891).
S. De Caus, Les Raisons des forces mouvantes (Frankfurt/M. 1615; facs. ed. W. L.
Sumner, Amsterdam 1973).
Charles Delezenne, Memoires de la Societe des Sciences a Lille, 1826-1857, incl. Sur
le Ton des orchestres et des orgues, second series, 1854, as cited by Ellis (1880).
G. Diruta, Il transilvano, 2da parte (Venice 1622).
A. Dolge, Pianos and their Makers (Covina, Calif. 1911; repr. New York 1972).
G. B. Doni, Annotazioni sopra il compendio (Rome 1640).
Idem, Compendio del trattato de' genere, e de' modi della musica (Rome 1635).
J. A. de Donostia, El organo de Tolosa (Guipz'zcoa) del afio 1686, in: AnM 10 (1955),
p. 121-136.
H. Doursther, Dictionnaire des poids et mesures (Brussels 1840).
A. Diirr, Zur Auffiihrungspraxis der Vor-Leipziger Kirchenkantaten J. S. Bachs, in:
MuK 20/2 (1950), p. 54--64.
Idem, Studien iiber die friihen Kantaten J. S. Bachs (Leipzig 1951, rev. 1977).
Idem, Zur Chronologie der Leipziger Vokalwerke J. S. Bachs, in: BI 44 (1957), p. 5-162;
repr. with annotations and additions (Kassel 1976).
N. Dufourcq, Documents inedits relatifs A l'orgue franqais, PSFM (Paris 1934, 1935).
Idem, Le livre de l'orgue franqais, 1589-1789 (Paris 1971-1972).
R. Ehrmann, Die Schliisselkombinationen im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert, in: StMw 11
(1924), p. 59-74.
A. Einstein, Italienische Musiker am Hofe der Neuburger Wittelsbacher (1614 bis 1716),
in: SIMG 9 (1907-1908), p. 336-424.
R. Eitner, Biographisch-Bibliographisches Quellen-Lexikon (Leipzig 1900).
A. J. Ellis, On the History of Musical Pitch, in: ISA 28 (1880), p. 293-336; 400 to
403; and 29 (1881), p. 109-112.
A. J. Ellis and A. Mendel, Studies in the History of Musical Pitch (Amsterdam 1968;
repr. of Ellis, 1880, 1881, and Mendel, 1948, 1949, 1955, rev. Mendel 1965). Where
the present article differs from the Mendel articles of this reprint it is a revision
of them.
R. Erickson, Sound Structure in Music (Berkeley 1975).
A. Favre, Les origines du systeme metrique (Paris 1931).
H. Federhofer, Hohe und tiefe Schliisselung im 16. Jahrhundert, in: Festschrift Friedrich
Blume zum 70. Geburtstag (Kassel 1963), p. 104-111.
Idem, Die Musikpflege an der evangelischen Stiftskirche in Graz (1570-1599), in: 7b.
der Ges. f. die Geschichte des Protestantismus in Osterreich, Jg. 68-69 (1953), p. 69
to 97.
Idem, Zur Chiavetten-Frage, in: Anzeiger der philosophisch-historischen Klasse der
Usterr. Akad. der Wissenschaften (Vienna 1952), p. 139-152.
E. H. Fellowes, The English Madrigal Composers (Oxford 1921).
J. T. Fesperman, Three Snetzler Organs in the United States, in: OY 2 (1971), p. 23
to 32.
Idem and D. W. Hinshaw, New Light on North America's Oldest Instruments: Mexico,
in: OY 3 (1972), p. 52-63.
E. Flade, H. R. Rottenstein-Pock, Ein niederlindischer Orgelbauer des 16. Jahrhunderts
in Zwickau i. S., in: ZfMw 15 (1932), p. 1-24.
Idem, Gottfried Silbermann (Leipzig 1953).

H. Fletcher, E. D. Blackham, and R. Stratton, Quality of Piano Tones, in: JASA 34 (1962),
p. 749-761.
H. Fletcher, E. D. Blackham, and D. A. Christensen, Quality of Organ Tones, in:
JASA 35 (1963), p. 314-325.
G. Fock, Arp Schnitger u. seine Schule (Kassel 1974).
A. Freeman, The Organs of Eton College, in: Org 4 (1924-1925), p. 157-171.
Idem, The Organs of Worcester Cathedral, in: Org 5 (1925-1926), p. 65-77.
Idem, The Organs of Exeter Cathedral, in: Org 6 (1926-1927), p. 100-112.
R. Freeman, The Travels of Partenope, in: Studies in Music History; Essays for Oliver
Strunk, ed. H. S. Powers (Princeton 1968), p. 356-385.
J. A. Fuller Maitland, Alfred James Hipkins, in: Grove's Dictionary of Music and
Musicians 2, 2nd ed. (London 1906), p. 407-408.
A. Furio da Todi (1687-1723), Libretto secondo - Piena instrutione sopra l'intavolatura
(Bologna, Bibl. Mus. G. B. Martini, Ms. D52).
F. W. Galpin, The Sackbut, Its Evolution and History, in: PRMA 33 (1906), p. 1-25.
S. Ganassi, Opera intitulata fontegara (Venice 1535; facs. ed. Milan 1934).
C. Gervasoni, La scuola della musica (Piacenza 1800; facs. ed. Bologna 1969).
O. Gibbons, A Collection of the Sacred Compositions of Orlando Gibbons ..., ed.
F. A. Gore Ouseley (London 1873).
H. Glareanus, Dodecachordon (Basle 1547; Eng. tr. C. Miller [Rome 1965]).
J. Golos, Letter to the Editor, in: ML 50 (1969), p. 429-430.
P. Gossett, The Operas of Rossini (Princeton Univ., Ph. D. diss. 1970, Ann Arbor, Mich.,
University Microfilms, no. 71-1603).
W. Gurlitt, Der kursaichsische Hoforgelmacher Gottfried Fritzsche, in: Fs. Arnold Sche-
ring zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. H. Osthoff et al. (Berlin 1937; repr., Hildesheim 1973),
p. 106-124.
F. Hamel, Die Schwankungen des Stimmtons, in: Deutsche Musikkultur 1-2 (Kassel
1944), p. 10-17.
P. Hardouin, Les flottements du diapason, booklet with record album in series Orgues
historiques, No. 29, Souvigny, St.-Michel de Provence (Paris 1963).
S. Hermelink, Dispositiones modorum (Tutzing 1960).
Idem, Zur Chiavettenfrage, in: Ber. iiber den internat. mw. Kgr. Wien, Mozartjahr 1956
(Graz-Cologne 1958), p. 264-271.
A. J. Hipkins, The Standard for Musical Pitch, in: JSA 44 (1896), p. 335-345.
Idem, Pitch, Musical, in: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th ed., 21 (1910-1911), p. 660-663.
E. J. Hopkins, Organ, in: Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians 2 (London 1880).
E. J. Hopkins and E. F. Rimbault, The Organ, Its History and Construction, 3rd ed.
(London 1877).
A. C. Howell, Jr., French Baroque Organ Music and the Eight Church Tones, in: JAMS
11 (1958), p. 106-118.
F. Hubbard, Three Centuries of Harpsichord Making (Cambridge, Mass. 1965).
F. Ingerslev and W. Frobenius, Some Measurements of the End-corrections and Acoustic
Spectrum of Cylindrical Open Flue Pipes, in: Transactions of the Danish Academy
of Technical Sciences 1 (Copenhagen 1947), p. 7-44.
P. Jambe de Fer, Epitome musical (Lyon 1556; facs. ed. Lesure, in: AnnMl 6, 1958-1963,
p. 341-386).
T. B. Janowka, Clavis ad thesaurum magnae artis musicae (Prague 1701; repr. Amster-
dam 1973).
R. Jauernig, Johann Sebastian Bach in Weimar, in: Johann Sebastian Bach in Thiirin-
gen, ed. H. Besseler and G. Kraft (Weimar 1950), p. 49-105.
P. B. de Jumilhac (1611-1682), La science et la pratique du plain-chant (Paris 1673).

K. k. Ministerium fiir Cultur und Unterricht, Beschliisse und Protokolle der Internatio-
nalen Stimmton-Conferenz in Wien, 1885 (Vienna 1885). Resolutions translated and
discussions abstracted by A. J. Ellis, in: JSA 34 (1886), p. 439-445.
S. Kastner, Organos antiguos en Espaila y Portugal (Siglos XVI-XVIII), in: Miscelinea
en homenaje a Monsefior Higinio Angles (Barcelona 1958-1961).
R. G. Kiesewetter, 1iber den Umfang der Singstimmen in den Werken der alten Meister,
in Absicht auf deren Ausfiihrung in unserer Zeit ..., in: AmZ mit besonderer Riick-
sicht auf den Osterr. Kaiserstaat 4 (Vienna 1820), col. 153 ff. .... 361 ff.; repr. with
minimal changes in: AmZ 29 (Leipzig 1827), col. 125-135; 145-156.
G. L. Kinsky, Kleiner Katalog der Sammlung alter Musikinstrumente (Cologne 1913).
A. Kircher, Musurgia universalis (Rome 1650).
E. Krauss, L'opera di tutela degli organi storici in Austria, in: L'Org 1/2 (1960), p.
152-184.
Idem, Die Renaissance-Orgel auf Churburg, in: L'Org 10 (1972), p. 131-142.
J. B. de Laborde, Essai sur la musique ancienne et moderne (Paris 1780).
A. de La Fage, De l'unite tonique (Paris 1859).
L. Langwill, Index of Musical Wind-Instrument Makers, 4th ed. (Edinburgh 1974).
P. de La Rue, Requiem (Missa pro defunctis), in: Chw. 11, ed. F. Blume (Wolfenbiittel
1931).
O. Lassus, Magnum opus musicum (Munich 1604; Bassus ad organum by C. Vincentius,
Wiirzburg 1625).
G. Le Cerf and E.-R. Labande, eds., Instruments de musique du XVe siecle; les traitis
d'Henri-Arnaut de Zwolle et de divers anonymes (Paris 1932).
E. Leipp and M. Castellengo, Du diapason et de sa relativit6, in: RM, No. 294 (1977),
p. 5-39.
Idem, Le Diapason, in: Bulletin du groupe d'acoustique musicale, Facult6 des sciences
36 (May 1968).
C. Le Jeune, Dodecacorde (La Rochelle 1598, Paris 1608, 1618).
U. Leone and P. Righini, II diapason, storia e vicende della sua normalizzazione (Turin
1969).
P. A. Llorden, Notas de los maestros organeros que trabajaron en
Malaga, in: AnM 13
(1958), p. 167-193.
L. S. Lloyd, International Standard Musical Pitch, in: iSA 98 (1949), p. 74-89.
E. E. Lowinsky, The Concept of Physical and Musical Space in the Renaissance, in:
PAMS 1941 (1946), p. 57-104.
R. Lunelli, Der Orgelbau in Italien (Mainz 1956).
Idem, L'arte organaria del rinascimento in Roma ... (Rome 1958).
Idem, Studi e documenti di storia organaria Veneta (Florence 1973).
A. Machabey, La metrologie dans les musees de province ... (Univ. of Paris, diss.
1959).
V.-C. Mahillon, Catalogue dIscriptif et analytique du musee instrumental du conser-
vatoire royal de musique de Bruxelles (Ghent: 1, 1880; 2, 1909; 3, 1900;
4, 1912;
5, 1922).
C. Mahrenholz, Die Berechnung der Orgelpfeifenmensuren
.. . (Kassel 1938).
J. F. B. C. Majer, Museum musicum (Schwlibisch Hall 1732; facs. ed. Heinz Becker,
Kassel 1954).
E. Mandyczewski, Zusatz-Band zur Geschichte der K. K. Ges. der
Musikfreunde in Wien:
Sammlungen u. Statuten (Vienna 1912).
S. Marcuse, Transposing Keyboards on Extant Flemish Harpsichords, in: MQ 38 (1952),
p. 414-425.
J. Mattheson, Das neu-ercffnete Orchestre (Hamburg 1713).

Idem, ed., Niedtens musicalischer Handleitung andrer Theil (Hamburg 1721).

Idem, Critica musica 2 (Hamburg 1725).
N. Meeiis, Letter to the Editor, in: OY 3 (1972), p. 93-94.
Idem, Some Hypotheses on the History of Organ-pitch before Schlick, in: OY 6 (1975),
p. 42-52.
B. Meier, Die Hs. Porto 714 als Quelle zur Tonartenlehre des 15. Jahrhunderts, in:
Mus. Disc. 7 (1953), p. 175-197.
Idem, Bemerkungen zu Lechners ,,Motectae sacrae" von 1575, in: AfMw 14 (1957),
p. 83-101.
Idem, Die Tonarten der klassischen Vokalpolyphonie (Utrecht 1974).
A. Mendel (This and the two following articles repr. with those of A. J. Ellis listed
above, q. v.): Devices for Transposition in the Organ before 1600, in: AMI 21 (1949),
p. 24-40.
Idem, Pitch in the 16th and Early 17th Centuries, in: MQ 34 (1948), p. 28-45, 199-221,
336-357, 575-593.
Idem, On the Pitches in Use in Bach's Time, in: MQ 41 (1955), p. 332-354, 466-480.
M. Mersenne, Harmonie universelle (Paris 1636; facs. incl. ms. annotations by author,
ed. F. Lesure, Paris 1963).
Idem, Harmonicorum libri XII (Paris 1648).
C. B. Miller, Chiavette: A New Approach (Univ. of Calif. M. A. thesis, Berkeley 1960).
O. Mischiati, L'organo della basilica di S. Martino di Bologna ..., in: L'Org 1 (1960),
p. 213-256.
O. Mischiati and L. F. Tagliavini, Un anonimo trattato francese d'arte organaria del
XVIII secolo, in: L'Org 11 (1973), p. 3-98.
T. Morley, Plaine and Easie Introduction to Practicall Musicke (London 1597; facs. ed.
E. H. Fellowes, London 1937).
H. J. Moser, Paul Hofhaimer (Stuttgart 1929; repr. Hildesheim 1965).
G. Muffat, Florilegium secundum (Passau 1698; repr. ed. H. Rietsch, DTO 4; Jg. II/2,
1895).
C. Naike, ClberOrchesterstimmung (Dresden 1862).
F. E. Niedt, Musikalischer Handleitung Andrer Theil, ed. J. Mattheson (Hamburg 1721).
G.-G. Nivers, Dissertation sur le chant gregorien (Paris 1683).
J. Ockeghem, Complete Works, ed. D. Plamenac, 2 (New York 1947).
Andreas Ornitoparchus, Musice active micrologus (Leipzig 1517; transl. J. Dowland,
London 1609).
W. J. Owen, The History of the English System of Weights and Measures, in: U. S.
National Bureau of Standards Miscellaneous Publications, No. 272 (Washington
1966), p. 130-136.
G. Paolucci, Arte pratica di contrappunto (Venice 1765).
A. J. P. Paucton, Metrologie (Paris 1780).
J. F. Petri, Anleitung zur praktischen Musik, 2nd ed. (Leipzig 1782).
G. Pietzsch, Quellen u. Forschungen zur Geschichte der Musik am Kurpfiilzischen Hof
zu Heidelberg bis 1622, in: Akademie der Wissenschaft u. der Literatur zu Mainz,
Abhandlungen der geistes- u. sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse (1963), p. 687-696.
A. Pirro, Orgues et organistes de Haguenau, in: RMI 10 (1926), p. 11-17.
H. S. Powers, L'Erismena travestita, in: Studies in Music History; Essays for Oliver
Strunk, ed. H. S. Powers (Princeton 1968), p. 259-324.
Idem, Mode, in: Grove's Dictionary, 6th ed., ed. S. Sadie (London 1979).
M. Praetorius, Syntagma Musicum II (Wolfenbiittel 1618; repr. ed. R. Eitner in PGfM
13, 1884; facs. ed. W. Gurlitt, Kassel 1929, also Kassel 1958).

Idem, Syntagma Musicum III (Wolfenbiittel 1619/1; repr. ed. E. Bernoulli, Leipzig 1916;
facs. ed. W. Gurlitt, Kassel 1958).
Idem, Polyhymnia caduceatrix (Wolfenbiittel 1619/2).
J. J. Quantz, Versuch einer Anweisung die Flate traversiere zu spielen (Berlin 1752).
H. E. Rahner, Der Neubau der Stiftsorgel St. Blasien unter Abt M. Gerbert durch Joh.
Andr. Silbermann, in: AfMf 2 (1937), p. 433-454.
F. Raugel, Organs of the Church of St. Gervais, Paris, in: Org 4 (1924-1925), p. 90-94.
J. F. Reichardt, Clber die Pflichten des Ripien-Violinisten (Berlin & Leipzig 1776).
F. G. Rendall, The Clarinet, 2nd rev. ed. S. Bate (London 1957).
R. S. Rockstro, A Treatise on the Construction, the History, and the Practice of the
Flute (London 1890, 1928).
W. S. Rockstro, The Life of George Frederick Handel (London 1883).
J. J. Rousseau, Dictionnaire de musique (Geneva 1767, Paris 1768).
S. Rubio, Los organos del monasterio del Escorial, in: La ciudad de Dios, 178 (1965),
p. 464-490.
C. Sachs, Staatl. Ak. Hochschule f. Mus. (Berlin), Sammlung alter Musikinstrumente ....,
beschreibender Katalog (Berlin 1922).
K. J. Sachs, Mensura fistularum. Die Mensurierung der Orgelpfeifen im Mittelalter, 1,
Edition der Texte (Stuttgart 1970).
J. Sanchis y Sivera, La catedral de Valencia (Valencia 1909).
J. Sauveur, Principes d'acoustique et de musique, in: Histoire de l'acadimie royale des
sciences (1700... 1713).
Idem, Rapports des sons et des cordes ... et nouvelles determinations de sons fixes (ibid.
1713).
A. Schadaeus, coll., Promptuarium musicum (Strasbourg 1611).
J. H. Scheibler, Der physikalische u. musikalische Tonmesser (Essen 1834).
A. Schindler, Die gegenwairtige hohe Orchesterstimmung u. ihr Ausgang, in: Nieder-
rheinische Musik-Zeitung 3/8--9 (1855).
A. Schlick, Spiegel der Orgelmacher u. Organisten (Speyer 1511; repr. R. Eitner, MfM 1,
1869; repr. in modem German by E. Flade, Mainz 1931 and Kassel 1951; facs. ed.
of the Halle copy with version in
modern German by P. Smets, Mainz 1959); partial
Engl. transl. by F. S. Miller, in: Organ Institute Quarterly 7 (1960) - 10 (1963). (The
modern versions not always accurate.)
Idem, Tabulaturen etlicher Lobgesang ... (Mainz 1512; mod. ed. G. Harms, Hamburg
1957).
Idem, Hommage a l'Empereur Charles-Quint, ed. S. Kastner (Barcelona 1954).
Idem, Orgelkompositionen, ed. R. Walter (Mainz 1970).
J. Schlosser, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Die Sammlung alter Musikinstrumente (Vien-
na), beschreibendes Verzeichnis (Vienna 1920).
C. B. Schmidt, Antonio Cesti's La Dori: a Study of Sources, Performance Traditions, and
Musical Style, in: RiM 10 (1975), p. 455-498.
T. Schneider, Die Orgelbauerfamilie Compenius, in: AfMf 2 (1937), p. 8-76.
W. Schonsleder (pseud. Volupius Decorus), Architectonice musices (Ingolstadt
1631).
H. Schiitz, Musicalische Exequien (Dresden 1636).
J. D. Shortridge, Italian Harpsichord-Building in the 16th and 17th Centuries (Washing-
ton, D.C. 1960).
R. Smith, Harmonics, or the Philosophy of Musical Sounds (Cambridge 1748; 2nd enl. ed.
1759).
D. L. Smithers, The Music and History of the Baroque Trumpet before 1721 (New York
1973).

D. Speer, Grundrichtiger . . . Unterricht der mus. Kunst (Ulm 1687).

P. Spitta, Johann Sebastian Bach 1 (Leipzig 1873), 2 (Leipzig 1880); transl. (not always
accurate) by C. Bell and J. A. Fuller Maitland (London 1884-1885).
J. Steele, English Organs and Organ Music from 1500 to 1650 (Cambridge University,
Ph. D. diss. 1958).
R. Steiner, Questions about the Gregorian Offertories and their Verses, in: JAMS 19
(1966), p. 162-181.
J.A. Stellfeld, Bronnen tot de geschiedenis der antwerpsche clavecimbel- en orgelbouwers,
in de XVIe en XVIIe eeuwen (Antwerp 1942).
D. Stevens, Thomas Tomkins, 1572-1656 (London 1957).
R. Stevenson, Spanish Cathedral Music in the Golden Age (Berkeley and Los Angeles
1961), p. 303 and 409.
E. van der Straeten, La musique aux Pays Bas 8 (Brussels 1888).
L. F. Tagliavini, Considerazioni sulle vicende storiche del Corista, in: L'Org 12 (1974),
p. 119-132.
W. Tans'ur, The Elements of Music Display'd, or its Grammar or Groundwork Made
Easy ..., 1 (London 1772).
W. R. Thomas and J. J. K. Rhodes, The String Scales of Italian Keyboard Instruments,
in: GSJ 20 (1967), p. 48-62.
Idem, Schlick, Praetorius and the History of Organ-Pitch, in: OY 2 (1971), p. 58-76.
Idem, Harpsichord Strings, Organ Pipes, and the Dutch Foot, in: OY 4 (1973), p. 112
to 121.
J. Tinctoris, Liber de natura et proprietate tonorum (1476), in: CoussS 4 (Paris 1876),
p. 16-41; also in J. Tinctoris, Tractatus de musica, ed. E. de Coussemaker (Lille 1875),
p. 39-104.
Idem, De inventione et usu musicae (1487), in: K. Weinmann, Johannes Tinctoris (1445
bis 1511) u. sein unbekannter Traktat De inventione et usu musicae (Regensburg 1917;
repr. Tutzing 1961; partial repr. and tr. in A. Baines, Fifteenth-century Instruments
in Tinctoris's De Inventione et usu musicae, in: GSJ 3 (1950), p. 19-26.
T. Tomkins, Musica Deo sacra, Pars organica (London 1668).
P. F. Tosi, Opinioni de' cantori antichi e moderni (Bologna 1723); tr. and annotated by
J. F. Agricola, as Anleitung zur Singkunst (Berlin 1757); facs. of both eds. ed. E. R.
Jacobi (Celle 1966).
C. Van den Borren, Etudes sur le XVe siecle musical (Antwerp 1941).
C. Van Loo, Etude sur la normalisation du "la", in: Revue de l'Union Europeenne de
Radiodiffusion 76 (1962), p. 254-265.
M. A. Vente, Bouwstoffen tot de geschiedenis van het nederlandse orgel in de 16de eeuw
(Amsterdam 1942).
Idem, Viif eeuwen Zwolse orgels 1447-1971 (Amsterdam 1971).
N. Vicentino, L'antica musica ridotta alla moderna prattica (Rome 1555; facs. ed. E. Lo-
winsky, Kassel 1959).
S. Virdung, Musica getutscht (Basel 1511; facs. ed. R. Eitner, in: PGfM 11, 1882;
facs. ed. L. Schrade, Kassel 1931).
P. Wagner, Einfihrung in die gregorianischen Melodien, 2. Palaeographie . . . (Leip-
zig 1912).
R. Walter, Johann Andreas Silbermann e i suoi criteri costruttivi, in: L'Org 9 (1971),
p. 3-34, 153-199.
J. G. Walther, Musicalisches Lexicon ... (Leipzig 1732).
W. D. Ward, Musical Perception, in: Foundations of Modern Auditory Theory, ed.
J. V. Tobias (New York 1970-1972), p. 407-447.

R. Weber, Some Researches into Pitch in the 16th Century . . ., in: GSJ 28 (1975).
P. F. Williams, The First English Organ Treatise, in: Org 44 (1964), p. 17-32.
Idem, Organs in Freiberg,Saxony, in: OY 2 (1971), p. 13-22.
D. Wulstan, The Problemof Pitch in Sixteenth-centuryEnglish Vocal Music, in: PRMA
93 (1966-1967), p. 97-112.
R. W. Young, Why an InternationalStandardTuning Frequency?,in: JASA 27 (1955),
p. 379-380.
L. Zacconi,Pratticadi musica (1, Venice 1592, 1596; facs. ed. G. Vecchi, Bologna 1967).
G. Zarlino, Istituzioni armoniche (Venice 1558).
Introduction
"Pitch" as used in this article means a relation between letter-names and the
frequencies to which they have been attached. Pitch-standards may be relative
("choir-pitch", "chamber-pitch", [London] "Philharmonic pitch", etc.) or ab-
solute, e. g., a' = 440 Hz. (i. e., vibrations per second), today's officially accepted
standard pitch.2 But while there is greater uniformity today than in the past,
even now the pitch-standard of the Di piccolo is a semitone higher, of the Bb
clarinet a whole-tone lower, of the horn a 5th lower, etc. And many performers
intentionally deviate from officially accepted standards, playing at pitches per-
ceptibly higher--or, for music of earlier periods, at pitches (usually lower) which
they believe to be the original ones (cf. Section IV, below, and especially foot-
note 103).
In attempting to write the history of pitch-standards, one is tempted to agree
with W. D. Ward (1970, p. 408), writing about a related subject, that "the
best one can do is to consider the fields of controversy one by one and to point
out what we do not know." Much of what is "known" turns out to be doubtful
or untrue.
I. A. The Relativity of Early Pitch-Standards
Early rough measurements of frequencies were made by Mersenne, Sauveur,

B. Taylor, D. Bernoulli, Euler, Diderot, Marpurg, De Prony, and Cagniard de la
Tour, among others. But not until 1834, with J. H. Scheibler's Tonmesser, did
2
Throughout this paper, when a pitch-name occurs without quotation-marks or frequency-number
it implies approximately this standard. Pitch-names according to other standards, and those whose
approximate equivalents in frequencies are not definitely known (to the nearest semitone) are placed
in quotation-marks. An italic capital letter refers to a pitch-class (e. g., "C" in any octave). Register
is indicated as follows:
&va-.
8va ..j C c cl
c2 c3 c4
C1

frequency-measurements become sufficiently accurate for most purposes. Before

the invention of the tuning-fork (traditionally ascribed to John Shore in 1711),
the only convenient means of setting a pitch-standard was the pitch-pipe (French:
3
"'ton", "choriste"; Italian: "corista")--a rough instrument at best. Pitch-
standards were specified approximately, by organ-pipe lengths, or only relatively,
by reference to one another, e. g.: "Der Thon nach welchem die Lullisten ihre
Instrumente stimmen, ist ins gemein umb einen ganzen, ja in Teatralischen Sachen
umb anderthalb Thon niedriger als unser Teutscher" (Muffat, 1698/1895, p. 24).
Reports of such relations are only as accurate as the hearing and memory of their
reporters, and tend to refer to any perceptible difference smaller than, say,
3/4 tone as a semitone. This tendency may be illustrated by the statement of Doni
(1640, p. 181-182) that the organ pitches of Naples, Rome, Florence, Lombardy,
and Venice form a series ascending by semitones. (The same tendency is often
observable in catalogues of instrument-collections.) Yet he has stated (Doni,
1635, p. 70) that one Iacopo Ramerino, excellent Florentine maker of harp-
sichords, is building one "nel quale ingegnosamente con muover solo la chiave
del Registro, l'istesse corde serviranno al tuono di Roma, a quel di Firenze, & a
quel di Lombardia..."
At any rate, Doni's statement documents the absence of any widely prevail-
ing single standard of pitch. Indeed, the sense of any need for such a standard
developed only late and slowly, as will be seen. The first organized attempt at
setting a single standard in terms of vibration-frequency ascertained by an
accurate method was that of the Deutsche Naturforscherversammlung of 1834,
which accepted Scheibler's recommendation of a1 = 440; but, this standard was
not widely adopted at the time. Before that, there had been many attempts by
individuals, the history of which is outlined below. But as late as Adlung-Hiller
(1783, p. 373) one reads: "Woher nehmen wir den Anfang des Stimmens, oder
wie bestimmen wir die Tiefe des C? Es ist bekannt, dass die Orgeln nicht i-berein
sind... Man wiinschet deswegen nicht unbillig, dass die Orgelmacher hierinnen
einig wiiren, und dass sie eine gewisse Regel haben m chten, nach welcher sie
einerley Tiefe und Hbhe zu finden im Stande wiiren. Aber hieran fehlt es bis
jetzo . . ." Schlick (1511), Banchieri (1608), Praetorius II (1618), Barcotto
(1650), Mattheson (1713), Quantz (1752), Tosi-Agricola (1757), and Gerva-
soni (1800) all confirm the variety of pitches in use. De la Fage (1859) says that
organs still show this sort of difference, though within a narrower range. Aaron
(1539, Cap. XLI) writes: ". .. bisogna che prima tu consideri la chorda ouer posi-
tione, chiamata C fa ut, con quella intonatione che a te piacera...", and essentially
the same position is taken by Bossinensis (1509), Bermudo (1549), Bottrigari
(1594), Antegnati (1608), and Cerone (1613), and by lutenists in general. Matthe-
son (1713, p. 74) even says: "Ob nun oder warum jener Thon a, oder b, Cammer-,
Chor- oder Opern-Thon heist, daran liegt im Grunde nichts." There were, how-
ever, as this quotation indicates, many relative standards: Cornet-Ton, Zintk-
3 See footnote 90.

Ton, Chor-Ton, quire pitch, ton de chapelle, corista, Cammer-Ton, ton de

chambre, Grofkammerton, Kleinkammerton, tief Cammer-Ton, Opern-Ton, ton
d'opera, etc. Any one of these terms can have had different meanings at different
times and places. It will be simplest to consider first the usage of 18th-century
Germany.
I. B. The Relative Standards

For all Bach's church music (1707-c. 1750) the woodwinds were at a lower
pitch than the organs. The higher pitch was normally called "Chor-Ton"; the
lower "Cammer-Ton" or "tief Cammer-Ton". (To avoid confusion between the
meanings of the modern German term Kammerton4 and the old term Cammer-
Ton, the latter will be so spelled in what follows.) In the years 1707-1717 Bach
treated the Cammer-Ton woodwinds as transposing instruments, their parts
being written sometimes a whole-tone, sometimes a minor third higher than the
others. Bach had no need to explain this practice. But we have an explanation
of it in a Pentecost Cantata ("Daran erkennen wir") by Johann Kuhnau, an ex-
planation necessitated by a slight complication (explained under point 2):
"1. NB Dieses Stick geht in dem Chorton in denen Violen, Singestimmen
und dem Generalbass aup dem B. 2. Sind die trompeten ex C? geschrieben. MuP
also auff der trompete ein Aufsatz bey dem Mundstiick gesetzt werden, dass
die trompeten einen Ton niedriger biP in den Cammerton klingen ... [Without
the Aufsatz, the trumpets would have been in Chorton.] 3. Die Hautboi und
Bassono miifen Cammerton stimmen, und sind diese parteien im aupschreiben
schon einen ton hcher transponiret, Art alles also accordiret."
dat auff diese
(MS in StB Pr as
K).5 Except regards the trumpets, this was the system Bach used
in Miihlhausen and Weimar.
But both Kuhnau and Bach changed their practice, as Kuhnau explains in
a letter dated 1717, whidh Mattheson (1725, p. 235) quotes: "... ich habe aber
fast von der ersten Zeit meiner Direction der Kirchen-Music [der Leipziger
Thomaskirche] den Cornet-Ton6 abgeschaffet, und den Kammer-Ton, der eine
Secunda oder kleine Tertia, nachdem es sich schicken will, tieffer ist, eingefiihret,
ungeachtet die transponirten Continui nicht allemahl mit willigen Hiinden auf-
genommen werden wollen..." That is, in Leipzig Kuhnau and Bach normally
wrote the voice, string, and woodwind parts in Cammer-Ton, and the organ,
trombone, and often trumpet parts a tone lower, because their Chor-Ton was
a tone higher.
It may be that both these ways of using Chor-Ton and Cammer-Ton instru-
ments together were practised in Mozart's time in Salzburg. Gerhard Walters-
kirchen, who is preparing a dissertation on Salzburg organs, writes* (1978):
"Die Auffiihrungspraxis scheint in Salzburg der von Ihnen geschilderten [Bach-
4 = Stimmton.
5 Cf. Walther (1732, p. 162-163) under Chromatico.
6 Kuhnau uses the terms Chorton and Cornet-Ton as synonyms, referring to the pitch of the organs
of the Thomas-Kirche and Nicolai-Kirche (the same in both).

schen Weimarer] Praxis zu entsprechen: Vokalstimmen, Streicher, Trompeten,

Posaunen und Fagotte sind gleich notiert, lediglich die Oboen und gelegentlich
1 Fagott erscheinen als [um einen Ganzton haiher] ,Trasposti'. Ich kbnnte Ihnen
dazu eine Menge Beispiele geben, z. B. Gradualien von Michael Haydn aus den
Jahren um 1780, die sich im Salzburger Dommusikarchiv befinden, und die ich
zur Kontrolle eingesehen habe. Ein Beispiel: Chor und Orchester stehen in Es-
Dur, Oboen und 1 Fagott in F-Dur.... Trasposti wurden aber nur gebraucht, wenn
die Besetzung der Oboen und gelegentlich eines zusiitzlichen Fagottes iiber das
normale Dominstrumentarium hinausging. Dann muften die Hofmusiker mit
ihren Instrumenten, die im Kammerton standen, einspringen [und ihre] Stimmen
... um einen Ganzton h6her geschrieben werden."
Confirmation of this practice will be found in the description of parts for
Mozart's Masses KV 66, 167, and 262 in the Neue Mozart-Ausgabe, Serie I,
Band 1 and 2, prefatory material and Kritische Berichte. The words "notiert in B"
applied to the oboe parts of KV 66 in the Kritischer Bericht are misleading. They
mean that the oboe (and flute) parts are notated as if for a B%instrument, as can
be seen from the facsimiles in the Notenband of Band I, p. XXVI.
The opposite method of reconciling Chor-Ton and Cammer-Ton instruments--
the same method as that of Bach in Leipzig -may also have been used in the Salz-
burg Peterskirche: see footnote 21.
Before the adoption of a single international norm, it would have been useless
to ask "What is the real pitch?" The relativity of pitch-standards was reflected
in some organs and harpsichords whose keyboards could be shifted to the right
or left, so that they governed higher or lower pipes or strings. If to produce a
tone of given frequency in one position of such a keyboard one struck the key a',
then to produce the same tone when the keyboard was shifted to the right one
would strike the key g1. The a1 key would now govern the pipe or string that
had formerly been governed by the b1 key. This would be a shift from one
standard to a higher one (e. g., from Cammer-Ton to Chor-Ton). In this con-
nection, simple truths are often forg~otten, even by specialists. When one says
an instrument or a performance is at relatively high or relatively low pitch, one
is referring to the relation between the pitch-names involved and the frequencies
to which they are attached in the given case: the lower the pitch-name for a given
frequency, the higher the pitch-standard.7
Mattheson (1713, p. 74) and Adlung (1758, p. 387, and 1768 I, p. 193-194)
state explicitly that Cammer-Ton is a whole-tone lower than Chor-Ton, as it
regularly was in Leipzig. But Adlung, in the same paragraph with his explanation
"weil das c in Chorton dem d in Kammerton gleich ist", says: "An manchen
Oertern differirt Chor- und Kammerton nur um einen Ton, an andern um andert-
7 Thomas & Rhodes (1971, p. 74, and 1967, p. 60) wish to distinguish between differences in pitch and
"merely keyboard variants". But this is to confuse frequency and pitch. When one speaks of "the pitch"
of a keyboard instrument, one is referring not to the frequencies of its strings or pipes alone, but
equally to what keys govern the frequencies.

halb Tcone".Mattheson says: "Der Chor-thon ist 9 bis 14 Commata hbher als
der Opern- und Cammer-Thon", which raises two questions: whether he intends
9 and 14 (Pythagorean) commas as alternatives or (more likely) as limits, and
whether he considers Opern- and Cammer-Ton to be identical.
We have no documents in which Bach mentions either Chor-Ton or Cammer-
Ton. But he does write "tief Cammerthon" as an instruction in the string and
woodwind parts of BWV 194, to indicate the pitch a semitone lower than the
normal Cammer-Ton of those instruments.8
Bach seems to have agreed with the dictum of Adlung (1758, p. 387): "In
der hiesigen Gegend ist es gewahnlich denjenigen Ton zu nennen hohen Kammer-
ton, welcher 1 grosse Sekunde tiefer ist, als der Chorton; der tiefe Kammerton
ist um I und einen halben Ton tiefer, als der Chorton."9 In general, woodwind-
players had to be equipped with different instruments at different pitches.
Was Chor-Ton also variable, and were Chor- and Cornet-Ton two different
standards? Bach's friend and kinsman J. G. Walt'her (1732) writes: "Cammer-Ton,
heisset: wenn ein musicalisches Stack nicht nach dem alten Chor- oder Cornett-
Tone, sondern . . . entweder um einen gantzen Ton, oder gar um eine kleine
Terz tieffer executirt wird." Neither this nor the Kuhnau documents quoted
above are unambiguous. But Muffat (1698) apparently considers Chor-Ton and
Cornet-Ton identical;10 and J. F. Agricola (1757, p. 45) uses "der gewahnliche
Chor- oder Trompetenton" unambiguously as synonymous. On the other hand,
J. F. Petri (1782, p. 138) mentions the existence of (doubtless primarily military
signal-) trumpets in Feld-Ton, a semitone higher than Chor-Ton (see below).
The Protokoll of the Domkapitel in Wiirzburg (1713, p. 21) speaks of the organ-
builder's proposal to lower the pitdh of two old organs to Chor-Ton or, "wann
Sie aber Uf Zweyerley als Chor, und Cornetthon zu richten," to do this for an
additional fee. And Janowka (1701) writes: "In Arcensi quidem Sacra Metro-
8 This cantata, incorporating some music from a work composed in C5then, was first performed as
we know it for the inauguration of an organ in Starmthal in 1723. When it was repeated in Leipzig
in 1724, a new organ-part was written, notated by exception a minor third lower than the other parts, and
the oboe- and string-parts were marked "tief-Cammerthon". This meant that the woodwind-players
were to use instruments pitched a semitone lower than their usual ones, and the string-players were
to tune down a semitone, "um nicht alles umschreiben zu miissen", as Adlung-Hiller (1783, p. 385) says
in describing this way of reconciling different pitch-standards. On the significance of this case,
see Section II. C, below. Cantata 23 is the one other exception. It is in C minor, and its first movement
passes through Eb minor and Ab minor. If transposed down a major 2nd, the organ part would have
involved the organist in such remote keys as Db minor and G minor, so it was transposed down
a minor 3rd instead. The strings again had to tune down, and the parts for oboi d'amore, whose pitch
was a minor 3rd below the normal Cammer-Ton, were transposed up only a major 2nd instead of the
minor 3rd. But the choice of tief Cammer-Ton in this case was motivated not by the desire or need
for a lower pitch for its own sake or for the sake of the voices, but by the need to avoid a forbidding
part for the organist.
9 In practice, the word Cammer-Ton is usually used without either adjective, and may mean either
one. See also footnote 38.
10 The Introduction to his Florilegium Secundum, in which the relevant passage occurs, is printed
in German, French, Latin, and Italian. The French text is unambiguous on this point; the Latin
almost so; the German is ambiguous; the Italian seems to indicate that Chor-Ton is "una voce pizt
Basso" than Cornet-Ton. (Muffat was born in Savoy, and spent his youth partly in German-, partly
in French-speaking towns; but six years of it were devoted to study in Paris. Conceivably for the
Latin and Italian texts he was the victim of a "traduttore-traditore".)

politana Pragensi Ecclesia Organum hac notabile habet: quod utrumque & C h or
& Zinck-thon sonare possit, trusa nimirum cert6 spati6 ad sinistrum latus tam
Manualis quam Pedalis Claviatura, imo et infra Chor-thon adhuc profundius
aliquid." So in this respect, too, practice varied, and Adlung (1768, II, p. 55-56)
writes: "Wie hoch aber unser Chorton sey, ist wegen der Varietiit nicht zu
melden ..."
Terms similar to "Chor-Ton"(not always having the same meaning) occur as early
as 1511 (Schlick: "dem Chor gemejp","Chormop"), 1513 (Innsbruck:"zwayerlaiChor-
mass"), 1564 (Kiel: "Cor mate"), 1599 (H. Compenius d. J.: "Cohrhbhe");"corista"
in 1507 (Montortone [Padua]), 1608 (Antegnati), 1611 (Bologna, A. Banchieri), 1648
(Antwerp); "thon coriste" in 1601 (Pertuis, Vaucluse); "ton de chapelle" in 1539
(Cavaillon); and, from 1604 (H. Compenius d. J.) at the latest, frequently "Chor-
Ton". That these terms do not have uniform meaning at different times and places
is clear: e. g., the WiirzburgDom organ, the pitch of which was lowered to "Chor-Ton"
in 1713, had been built in 1614, "Chormasslautendt".And PraetoriusII (1618) reports
that what is called "Chor-Ton" in Prague is a tone lower than what is "in unsern
Deutschen Landen . . . an den meisten Ortern Chor-Ton genennet". "Cornet-Ton"
occurs at least as early as 1661 (Wiirzburg, Neumiinsterkirche;Hermann Fischer*).
Explicit references to "Cammer-Ton"and similar terms before 1700 are scarcer, since
church archives concerningthe building and alterationof organs (the principal sources
for "Chor-Ton",etc.) have little occasion to mention it. But PraetoriusII (1618) uses
both terms (Cammer-Tonand Chor-Ton),now as differentiating,now as synonymous.
Ellis (1880) writes that he finds the uses of the terms Chor-Ton and Cammer-
Ton in Praetorius II "so confused [and contradictory] that, though I have studied
it for months, I cannot pretend to be certain". The following quotations will
illustrate what he means: [p. 14:] "Es ist aber der Chor Thon bey den Alten an-
fangs umb ein Thon niedriger und tieffer gewesen, als jtzo .. ." But [p. 116:] "fast
die meiste do mahlige [c. 1530-1560?] Orgeln, umb einen Thon h6her, als unser
jetziger Cammerthon . . ." In introducing his tables of vocal and instrumental
compasses, Praetorius specifies (p. 19) that "in diesem ganzen Werck durch und
durch nicht nach dem Chor Thon, sondern nach dem Cammerthon (wie es, als
vor erwehnet, von etlichen gar wol und recht unterschieden) die Instrumenta und
Stimmen gerechnet, und ausgetheilet werden. Dieweil ... fast alle, sowohl besait-
tete als blasende Instrumenta, wie auch itziger zeit die Orgeln, auff diesen Cam-
merthon gerichtet und gestimmt werden." His table shows the violin tuned to "g,
d', a', e2" like ours. But four pages earlier he has said: "... so miissen solche und
dergleichen besaittete Instrumenta gemeinlich umb ein Thon tieffer gestimmet,
und alsdann notwendig mit den andern Instrumenten, auch umb ein Secund tiefer
musicirt werden." Quite apart from such confusions, Praetorius mentions in
addition to "unser jetzigen Cammerthon" (by which he seems to have meant
approximately the pitch represented by his diagram of organ-pipe dimensions
[see Section II.A. 1.i, below], which may have had considerable currency in the
places he was familiar with) pitches "ein gar geringes" lower, a tone lower, a
minor 3rd lower, a 5th lower, a 7th lower, a semitone higher, a tone higher, a
minor 3rd higher, and a 4th higher.

II. The Evidence Concerning Absolute Pitches before 1834

The first published attempts at a systematic history of pitch were by Delezenne
(1854) and De la Fage (1859). Their principal findings were incorporated in
the far more comprehensive study by Ellis (1880, 1881). Ellis, who had assembled
great quantities of data and applied to them the best analytic techniques
available,11 reported his methods and results in great detail, giving his best
estimate of each pitch as a single frequency-number precise to one decimal place
(= 1 cycle in 10 seconds). For example, he entered in his table "a1 = 373.7" for
the pitch-standard represented by a stopped organ-pipe whose dimensions were
stated by Mersenne to be 113/4 French inches long by 11/2 inches in diameter.
But Mersenne did not give any pitch-name for this pipe and Ellis noted that
it might be 4'F, 4'G, 4'B, or 2'C; Ellis assumed 2'C. He pointed out, too, that
Mersenne was very inaccurate, presenting on another occasion a table of fre-
quencies in which the numbers "should be increased by at least 17 per cent".
Thus Ellis did not really claim to have determined what Mersenne's pitch was;
he simply stated that, accepting Mersenne's measurements and factoring in what
he considered the most probable among many uncertainties, his arithmetic pro-
duced the figure 373.7.
Unfortunately, Ellis summarized his results in another table giving one such
figure for each pitch he had discussed, without mention of any of the uncertainties
attending it, and he printed an even more condensed table in the second edition
of his Helmholtz translation. From there these figures spread throughout the
literature, giving the impression that Ellis had determined, to a precision of one
decimal place, frequencies which (as he had conscientiously explained) might in
some instances be wrong by several tones. Since few non-electric means of tone-
production can sustain any single pitch with perfect constancy, and since the
ear cannot detect a change of frequency of less than about 3 Hertz (although it
can of course count beats much slower than that), specification in units smaller
than one cycle per second is useless for most purposes relevant to pre-electronic
music.
Our informants on all these matters - indeed on our whole subject - tend to
fall into three groups: (1) those who are knowledgeable in physics but not in
music or music history; (2) those whose qualifications are quite the opposite;
and (3) those who rely (only sometimes with acknowledgment) on members of
the first or second group. Ellis, by far the most careful of them all, must never-
theless be assigned to the first group,12 and almost all later writers have relied
11 The impugning of one of those techniques by Mendel (1948, p. 578-590) is mistaken.

12
When, for example, he says of one of his informants, Delezenne, "I have great confidence in his
results", we may be assured that the frequencies he reports for Delezenne's forks are accurate, but
not that either he or Delezenne has fully faced the historical questions.
Clearly, the present writer belongs to the second group. B. R. Gossick * vainly attempted in 1949 to
make him aware of his failure to understand some relevant elements of physics. From Thomas & Rhodes
(1967), who belong to the first group, and especially from Ingerslev and Frobenius (1947), he learned
what Gossick had tried to show him, and in preparing this article he has attempted to learn what
is necessary.

principally (sometimes without acknowledgment, or at second hand) on Ellis.

(Cf. the first two paragraphs of Section III, below.)
II. A. Surviving Instruments. 1. Wind Instruments

It would seem that surviving wind instruments should be the most reliable
evidence we have about pitches in use before 1834, but there are limitations on
what we can learn from them. On some, it is possible to vary the pitch of an
individual tone considerably by embouchure, breath-pressure, etc. But an esti-
mate of the pitch of the instrument ought to be found between the limits within
which a given tone (the one listed is usually the lowest, or the "natural tonic")
takes its proper place in the whole scale when that scale is best in tune from
top to bottom. To what extent pitches listed have been determined in this way,
and from the playing of accomplished performers, is in most cases not known.
(Curt Sachs* stated that he determined many of the pitches listed in his 1922
catalogue by blowing the instruments himself.) As an example of the imprecise
nature of many such listings: G. Kinsky (1913) says a trumpet by J. W. Haas
(now in the collection of the Leipzig Karl-Marx-Universitait, No. 1789) is in "C
bzw. Cis", presumably according to the standard a' = 435. H. Zeraschi * states
that it is 2.2 semitones 'higher, in a slightly sharp D according to a' = 440.
Zeraschi*, with proper caution, determined the pitch by finding "ein Mittelwert
aus den Tonh6hen der Naturt6ne 2 bis 6 und 8 bis 10 umgerechnet auf a"';
Kinsky does not state how he arrived at his estimate. Further cautions are in order:
1. Many surviving instruments are clearly exceptional, owing their preservation
to their rare materials or their ornamentation, and there is no way of knowing
how representative even the totality of the surviving instruments of a given
species may be. 2. What one can learn from these instruments depends partly
on their date and place of origin, when these things are known. It depends also
on which of the relative pitch-standards their makers and players considered
them to represent, and this is rarely known. 3. Writers and even museum-collec-
tion cataloguers sometimes use terms like Chor-Ton or Cammer-Ton as if each
had a precise meaning for absolute pitch, or as if the meaning had been the same
for different times and places. 4. They often refer to instruments by key
or pitch-name of the lowest tone without specifying their standard; wel-
come exceptions are Bessaraboff (1941, a1 = 440), Mahillon (1892 ff., a' = 435),
and Day (1891, a1 = 452.5). Since a1 = 435 and a1 = 440 are only 1/5 of a semi-
tone apart they may for the purpose of this survey be treated as variants of
"the same pitch". 5. R. Weber * is studying the extent to which woodwind instru-
ments have shrunk since they were built, as indicated, for example, by the loosen-
ess of metal rings with which larger instruments are often ornamented, and by
evidence of their 'having already been shortened at some past time. He reports
that when museum instruments are blown repeatedly, or oiled, they become
noticeably lower in pitch, at times by as much as 20 Hz, which in the one-line
octave amounts to nearly a semitone.

II. A. L.a. Recorders

Of all wind-instruments, recorders present the fewest purely technical prob-
lems. There are no missing reeds, crooks, or mouthpiece-inserts to take into
account; the 16th-century instruments are mostly in one piece, and even the
later two- and three-piece instruments cannot endure any great variation of
length or breath-pressure (embouchure variation has relatively little effect)
without putting one part of their scale or another out of tune.'3 F. von Huene *
believes that he can determine their pitch within 15 cents (0.15 semitone). They
were, however, made in many sizes, for which different writers disagree on the
nomenclature, and it is not always clear what their lowest note was called in its
time. Virdung (1511), Ganassi (1535), Jambe de Fer (1556), Zacconi (1596), and
Praetorius II (1618) all call the lowest notes of the most frequently used sizes
"f", "c'", and "gl". The following table lists the 16th-century instruments in
three leading collections whose stated overall lengths most closely approximate
those shown by Praetorius II for these three pitch-names, and the pitches of
their lowest notes in a scale presumably based on a' = 435 (except for those of
Praetorius):
cm. lowest note
37.5 bb' Vienna C. 143
42.5 "gl" Praetorius
43.5 gl Vienna C. 146
55.0 el Vienna C. 154, 155, 158

60 c1 Berlin658
62.5 c1 Vienna C. 160, 161, 162
63.5 "c1" Praetorius
85.5 ab Brussels 1032
86.0 g Berlin 2818
92.0 bb [!] Brussels 1033
97.0 "f" Praetorius
Little wonder that Mahillon (1909, p. 289) early came to the conclusion "qu'il
y avait des flates douces dans presque tous les tons". Even within a single church,
instruments varied in the 16th century as they did in Bach's time: three 16th-
century Tenorflaten, all from the St.-Wenzels-Kirche in Naumburg, are listed
(without dimensions) by Sachs (1922, col. 239) - two as being in c and one
in c#.
Baroque recorders survive in greater numbers, many signed by makers whose
approximate dates and places of work are known. But three recorders made by
is Bis Mantova (1677), however, suggests lengthening by pulling out the upper end, and also the
lower end a bit, in order to lower the pitch: "Occorrendo slongare il flauto, in occasione di calarlo di
voce, per farlo chorista, bisogna che il flauto sia di tre pezzi come oggi di usano; e poi bisogna
prima slongarlo in cima, e poi anco slongarlo un tantino in fondo con le giunte, acci6 le voci tutte
venghino giuste, e andarlo slongando di sopra e di sotto sin'a tanto che sara' chorista con l'organo o
con altro stromento, perche slongarlo in cima e non in fondo le voci non sarianno tutte giuste."

the famous Denners around 1700 are reported by R. Weber (1975, p. 10) to be
at a1 = 410, 450, and 465--that is from more than a semitone low to a semitone
high--and other baroque instruments vary even more widely. (To save space,
the words "low" and "high" will here be used to mean below and above a1 = 440.)
F. von Huene * and B. Haynes *, specialists who have examined many instruments
in various countries, state that the most common pitch of baroque woodwinds
is about a semitone low. But according to Fock (1974, p. 182-185) H. C. Fritzsche
in 1647-1649 lowered the pitch of the organ in Altenbruch to "Chormaf3", so
that ,alle best und recht chormiif3igeInstrumenten, al3 Dulcian, Zincken, Trom-
meten, Fleuten [recorders], Posaunen etc. ohne einigen Difonanz und Zwang
mit darein ... stimmen kinnen". And the pitch to which he lowered it seems to
have been between 11/2 and 2 semitones high.14
II. A. i. b. Transverse Flutes

The pitch of transverse flutes varies more from player to player. F. von Huene*
believes he can determine it within 0.2 semitone, while H. P. Schmitz* would
widen this to 0.5, and the two differ by almost exactly this amount in their
judgment of the Hotteterre flute in Berlin (v. Huene a1 = 395-400, Schmitz
al = 404-416), while the difference between the extremes of their estimates is
virtually a semitone. F. Brueggen* considers it impossible to determine the
original pitch of this instrument, stating that both its mouth-hole and some critical
finger-holes have been considerably enlarged. Reports of the pitches of Renais-
sance flutes are conflicting and difficult to interpret. It seems that the pitch of
those corresponding in size to the modern flute ranged from a semitone or
more low to approximately a semitone high.
During the 17th century the flute, hitherto built in one piece, was divided at
first into three,sections. These, Quantz (1752, 1. Hauptstiick, 9. ?) explains, "wiir-
den auch zuliinglich gewesen seyn: wenn man aller Orten einerley Stimmung
hiitte. Weil aber der Ton, nach welchem man stimmet, so sehr verschieden ist",
the middle section was divided into two pieces, and of these the upper piece was
made in two or three different sizes, about a semitone apart. These were even-
tually replaced by as many as eight sizes, separated by much smaller intervals.
Sachs (1922) calls an instrument he ascribes to "Frankreich um 1700" (No. 1666)
and a Denner instrument on loan in Berlin "C-Fli6ten" (at a1 = 435). But for such
instruments there may often have been alternative center-pieces unknown to us.
A flute that belonged to Frederick the Great is in the Berlin Collection and another
in the Library of Congress. Sachs (1922, col. 258) says the Berlin instrument
has 8 Mittelstiicke "fiir verschiedene C und A Stimmungen"; von Huene* says
the longest of the 6 centerpieces of the Washington instrument shows the most
wear, and makes the instrument play almost a whole-tone low, while the shortest
makes it play about a semi-tone low.
14See also below, Section II. A. 1. i, where it appears that what Praetorius 11 (1618) called the "'rechte
Chormass" was close to a1 = 440. It is possible, of course, that either the organ parts or the recorder
parts were transposed, though it seems implicit in this passage that they were not.

A flute that had belonged to Quantz, in the London collection of C. Zoeller,

built by F. Boie and dated by R. S. Rockstro (1890, p. 227 ff.) as "1724 ante",
was in four pieces, of which the second was marked "2". With this joint, "blown
at the mean between possible sharpness and possible flatness", it sounded a' =
440. "This [joint] was probably the flattest but one, of an uncertain number of
interchangeable joints of different pitches." In the same collection, another flute
that had belonged to Quantz, branded "I. Biglioni di Roma" and dated by Rockstro
"1725 ante", had only one of its interchangeable second joints, marked "4". "If, as
is probable, this was the sharpest but two, of six interchangeable joints, the flute
may be estimated to stand at nearly its original average pitch . . . the a', when
blown at the mean pitch of the instrument, has 441 vibrations" (ibidem, p. 229-
230). For a flute by E. G. A. Kirst of Potsdam, dating from about 1780-1790,
given to the Berlin collection by H. P. Schmitz, the pitches are: shortest center-
piece, a shade above at = 440; longest centerpiece, about a semitone lower
(Schmitz * and von Huene *).
Brueggen* owns twin flutes by G. A. Rottenburgh of Brussels (c. 1750) each
of which has six interchangeable middle pieces that he says put the instrument
at at = 370, 409, 412, 415, 418, and 422. They are in their original case, which
shows that no piece for pitches between 370 and 409 is missing, as might other-
wise be thought. It may be wondered whether pieces as far apart as 422 and 370
(more than a whole-tone) may not have been intended to facilitate playing not
only at different pitches, but in different keys (like modern A and Bb clarinets),
since intonation on the flute presented particularly difficult problems outside
a few favorable keys. Other flutes and recorders in Brueggen's collection from
the first half of the 18th century play, he says, at from 410 to 425. He warns
that for determining the pitch the embouchure must be as close as possible to
that described by Quantz. But did the uniformity of technique that this implies
really prevail?
II. A. 1. c. Oboes
Oboes frequently came from the same makers as recorders and flutes, but
because of the reeds their pitch cannot be determined as precisely as that of
recorders or flutes, which is doubtless why the catalogue of the Berlin collection
does not indicate pitch for oboes. B. Haynes * believes that it can be fixed within
about 1/4 of a whole-tone. But of the Eichentopf oboe d'amore (Brussels 971),
of which Pieter Dhont has played a copy in public at at = 440 (Paul Dombrecht *),
Mahillon (1909, p. 251) says it is "un ton entier plus bas que notre diapason officiel
[aW= 435]", while Haynes puts it at only a half-tone below at = 440,15 as he
does the Wolravpier oboe d'amore Brussels No. 970, which Mahillon calls "presque
tout un ton au-dessous du normal actuel". The development of the discant shawm
into the oboe was completed in France not earlier than 1650, so no oboes exist
15 He says it "can be played at about 440, although it sounds better and is easier to play at 415."

corresponding to the 16th-century recorder. Haynes says that of 100 instruments

belonging to the period 1650-1765 which he has examined, 8 play at about
a1= 440, and all the rest lower: 71 by about a semitone, 10 by about 3/4 tone,
and 11 by about a whole-tone. Those he considers to be at 440 all date from
1700 or later. Kuhnau and G. E. Bestell, reporting on the Gottfried Silbermann
organ of the Freiberg Cathedral at its completion in 1714, said: "... so hat man,
umrzu erfahren, ob es im richtigen Cornet- oder Chor-Tone steht, einige von den
Stadtpfeifern mit ihren Hautbois und Trompeten kommen, und etliche Lieder
blasen lassen, da man denn befunden, dap, als man mit dem Werke accompagniret,
solches mit den Instrumenten vollkommen eingestimmet" (Ddihnert,1953, p. 107).
But "Cornet- oder Chor-Ton" was (were?), according to all evidence of this
period, the name(s) for the highest pitch(es) in use, and the Freiberg organ was
almost a tone higher than aI = 440 (see II.A.1.h, below).16 In the 1723 contract
for Alkmaar, Laurenskerk, F. C. Schnitger agreed to preserve the existing pitch
"te weeten netto cammer of haubois thoon" (Fock, 1974, p. 255).
II. A. 1.d. Clarinets

Because the clarinet overblows at the 12th, unlike the other woodwinds,
which overblow at the octave, the tuning of the instrument by the builder is
particularly difficult. Once it is built, its pitch is fixed within fairly narrow
limits. 17 (This means not that individual tones cannot be "lipped" up or down,
but that the entire scale of the instrument cannot be raised or lowered with
impunity.) This should make it an ideal instrument for determining the pitch at
which it was played. Some early instruments survive, including two or three
by members of the Denner family, one of whom is credited with the "invention"
of the instrument. Those of approximately present-day size range in key from
at to d2 at approximately present-day pitch. But for most of them we do not
know in what keys they were considered to be, and, to make our confusion
complete, J. F. B. C. Majer (1732, p. 32) writes that "chalumeaux" (the immediate
forerunners of the clarinet, about whose pitch he says nothing) were made "theils
mit Franzasischem / theils mit Teutschem Ton". Mahillon (1909 and 1912) and
Sachs (1922) list many clarinets, of which the ones listed on p. 23 are represent-
ative of those from before 1800.
Many later clarinets listed by Mahillon and Sachs have the key thus indicated.
Since neither Mahillon nor Sachs comments on the pitches, they were presumably
established, like the other pitches in these catalogues, according to at = 435.
1e Again, it is possible that it was the "gl" of the organ that was in unison with the "a1" of the oboes
(cf. footnote 14 above).
17 Rendall (1957, p. 50-51) says it is "immutable . . . The player cannot, like the flautist or oboist,
vary his pitch appreciably without devastating effects upon intonation and embouchure. One vibration,
or possibly two, up or down is all that can be contrived with safety." This, according to Philip Bate * and
Keane Ridley *, is an exaggeration, though Ridley writes that "doubtless the clarinet is the least tractable
of the woodwinds" in this respect.

Period (acc. No.

Langwill, 1974) Maker of keys Key Catalogue
[Early18th c.] [I. C. Denner; copy] 2 C Brussels911
Early18th c. I. Denner 2 C Brussels912
Early18th c. I. Denner 2 C Berlin223
18th c. G. A. Rottenburgh 1 C Brussels2683
18th c. G. A. Rottenburgh 2 Brussels915
18th c. G. A. Rottenburgh 2 E,
C Brussels2571
18th c. G. A. Rottenburgh 4 B% Brussels2572
Mid 18th c. T. Boekhout 2 C Brussels2561
Later18th c. I. B. Willems 2 (High) G Brussels916
Later18th c. I. B. Willems 4 C Brussels2560
Later18th c. I. B. Willems 2 Bi Brussels2573
c. 1752-1775 C. F. Riedel 4 B% Berlin2873
c. 1755-1783 M. Lot 4 B%* Berlin2878
1788 J. N. Gehring 4 B%* Berlin520
(Jehring)
c. 1790? G. A. Rottenburgh 5 B% Berlin2876
Late 18th c. Charlier 4 C Berlin2871
* Both these
clarinets, one Germanand one French,are marked"B" (i. e., Bb).
II. A. 1. e. Trumpets
Natural trumpets are often cited as evidence of early pitches, but are for
several reasons not clearly indicative. Smithers* (and 1973) believes that many
of the handsomest and best-preserved instruments were made and used for
ceremonial and military purposes rather than for church, chamber, or opera.
Original mouthpieces are most often missing, as are any crooks and inserts
with which the trumpeter may have lengthened the sounding air-column of his
instrument. Praetorius (1618, p. 33, and 16192; see MGG 13, col. 783) speaks
of the trumpet in the "D" of his Cammer-Ton (see below), sometimes lowered
by crooks from a semitone to as much as a major 3rd. Walther (1732, under
Clarino) lists trumpets in "F, E, D, C, and Bb". Bendinelli (1614/1975, f. 1) in-
dicates that the trumpet for which he writes is in "F". An instrument that he
gave to the Accademia Filarmonica of Verona, built by Anton Schnitzer in 1585,
sounds a little less than a semitone below present-day F. E. H. Tarr (in Bendinelli,
1614/1975, Nachwort) says it is a twin of a Schnitzer instrument of 1598 in
Vienna, which Schlosser (1920) and Mandyczewski (1912) list as in E? (pre-
sumably at a' = 435), and Smithers* says is in E (at a1 = 440). Schlosser also
lists a 1581 Schnitzer instrument as being in D. Altenburg (1795, p. 85), at the
end of the period of the natural trumpet, speaks of instruments in "G, F, D, and
Bb", which with the aid of mutes and crooks could be played also in "A, E, E4,
and C". Indeed, Smithers* believes that, as regards trumpets used in concerted
music, one should speak of an instrument not "in", but rather "crooked in", such
and such a key, since the small crooks inserted between the mouthpiece and the
body of the instrument served not only to lower the pitch 'but also as the most
convenient means of emptying the moisture that collects within the instrument in

playing; see MGG 13, Tafel 40, Abb. 1, and Praetorius II (1618), Tafel VIII, Nos.
10,11, and 13. For this reason, he thinks many instruments were built to be played
at lower pitches than they produce without crooks. Thus Bach usually wrote for
trumpets in Chor-Ton "C" (= his Cammer-Ton "D") but also sometimes in
Cammer-Ton "C" (= his Chor-Ton "Bb"), for which his players probably used
either trumpets built in that key, or, more likely, the same instruments with
crooks (cf. the first quotation from Kuhnau under I. B. above). "It is very rare,"
Smithers-* says, "to find a natural trumpet that [without crooks] is any lower
than D [where a1 = 440]." Trumpets were also played with mutes, which raised
their pitch. (See also Altenburg, 1973.)
II. A. 1. f. Cornetti
Concerning the pitch of cornetti (Zincken) R. Weber (1975, p. 9) says: "It is

well known that different players blowing the same instrument can play accurate
scales more than a tone apart", but he explains * that the difference really is
between modern and original mouthpieces. With the latter, he reports that 'of the
eleven 16th-century cornetti in the Verona collection, two are slightly more than a
semitone low, eight about a quarter-tone high, and one a semitone high, and that
three different "wirkliche Zinkenisten" differed no more than 5 Hz in the
pitches they produced on these instruments. Smithers * has carefully measured
all the cornetti in the collections of the Vienna Kunsthistorisches Museum and
the Brussels Conservatoire Royal. He reports that the playable instruments include
17 cornetti muti (stille Zincken) and 25 cornetti curvi. For some, the pitch cannot
be stated as a single frequency: they overblow at about the major 7th (in two
cases, about the minor 9th) instead of the octave. The pitch of the instruments
corresponding to what Praetorius calls the "rechter Chor-Zinck" (with all holes
closed, but not counting what Praetorius calls the one or two possible lower tones
"im falset") varies from about a = 220 to a semitone or a whole-tone higher.
Many of these date from before 1600. Smithers reports further that some 17th-
century instruments-two at Christ Church College, Oxford, one at the Victoria
and Albert Museum, London, and several in the collection of Christopher Monk--
are at about a1 = 440.
II. A.1. g. Trombones

Trombones sometimes had crooks, inserts, and mutes, and thus, like trumpets,
do not furnish sure evidence of the pitches at which they were played. Moreover,
Praetorius II (1618, p. 32) says that by variation of lip-tension and breath-pres-
sure, "es nach allerley Tonen, umb etwas haher und niedriger ... von einem geiib-
ten und erfahrnen Kianstier, nach seinem Gefallen, per tonos & semitonia gezwun-
gen und gebraucht werden kan". H. Bouasse (1929, p. 308)18 says "il faut insister:
au dessous de chaque partiel vrai, I'artiste donne ce qu'il veut dans un intervalle
knorme". The surviving instruments are mostly without crooks or inserts.
18 As quoted in Bessaraboff, 1941, p. 187.

F. W. Galpin (1906, p. 22) gives the specifications of a trombone made by Jorg

Neuschel in 1557 whose pitch was practically identical with that of a Bb tenor
trombone of 1907 (bW1= 479.3 or a' = 452.4, a quarter-tone above a' = 440).
Praetorius II (1618, p. 20) gives the compass of an instrument of approximately
this size as "E to fl or gl", which by a good player may be extended one or two
tones above and below. D. Speer (1687, p. 108-111) gives it as "E-al". He names
only four positions, producing the harmonic series beginning with "A1, G, F,
and E" (the last three being the second partials, an octave above their unplayable
fundamentals), and states that "Bb" can be produced (as the third partial, and-
by implication-"bb" as the sixth) by extending the slide still further so as to
produce the series derived from ("E"i"). The semitones are to be found between
these diatonic positions. The modern trombonist includes such intermediate
points as "positions", making seven in all, from Bb down to E. Speer similarly
envisions extending the slide down half an octave, but he thinks of the highest
and lowest of these positions as "A" and "Eb".Mattheson (1721), Majer (1732),
and Walther (1732) repeat what Speer says-Mattheson almost verbatim. The
fundamental tone of the highest position of some tenor trombones is given as
follows (in terms of a1 = 435-440): 17th-century: Berlin 641: B?i, 733: BOtI;
Brussels 1265: Bbi; Leipzig 1895 and 1897: (Kinsky 1913:) Bbi, (Zeraschi* 1974:)
Bti (somewhat flat); 18th-century: Berlin 29: Ai, 475 and 1473: BV1, 566: C;
Vienna E 264 and 265: Bbi.
II.A.I.h. Organs
The woodwinds and brasses discussed thus far belonged to instrument-families
that frequently played together, their pitches being reconciled by mechanical
means (crooks, slides, alternative sections, etc.) or by transposition. Most of the
organs dating from 1500-1800 doubtless also took part in concerted music, but
particularly in the smaller churches, we cannot be sure of this in every instance.
A fair number .of organs of this period survive. Many were rebuilt so many
times that in the absence of complete archival records one cannot know what
their original pitch may have been. But it was common practice even when a
"new" organ was built to incorporate in it such of the pipes of the old as were
usable, and some of these are identifiable as to date and marked with the pitch-
names for which they were made. In addition, for some organs there are copious
archival records.
For organs that no longer survive we have some pipe-measurements. '9 Of these,
the most important is the length, measured from the top of the foot to the other
end of the pipe. The lengths given in old organ contracts, proposals, and descrip-
tions are usually those of the longest open flue pipes. The effective length of
19 These measurements are usually stated in feet, but sometimes in
spans. The English foot has
been standardized at about its present length (305 mm.) since very early times (see footnote 61). The
French pied de roi of about 325 mm. is also very old (A. Machabey, 1959, p. 31-45), but as late as
the 18th century "le pied de Paris, ou pied de roi, est connu dans toute la France, mais n'est pas
partout d'emploi general" (Favre, 1931, p. 6-7). In other countries, particularly those longest divided
(like Italy and Germany) into small principalities and city-states, the units of measure varied in

such a pipe consists of the actual length plus allowances (known as "corrections")
for the area of the pipe's cross-section and for the area of the mouth. From
all of these measurements, the frequency of vibration can be calculated fairly
closely (see Ingerslev and Frobenius, 1947; the air-pressure used and the tempera-
ture further affect pitch, but too slightly to be considered here; cf. Leipp & Castel-
lengo, 1977, 1968). Usually, we 'do not have all of the measurements. The mouth-
dimensions are rarely given, but the width (of the mouth of a metal pipe) was
most often 1/4 of the circumference, and the height 1/4 of the width. Most often
the circumference is not known either, but its proportion to the length varied
also within known limits. Ellis estimated the frequency of "a1" implied by a pipe
for which only the length was given as between 364 and 378. Thomas & Rhodes
(1971) suggest as the limits 374 and 392. The first range of variation is about 2/3,
the second 3/4 Ofa semitone.
Table I lists organs dating from before 1800 for which the evidence seems
fairly reliable. Most of the instruments listed either are still in existence or
were so at a late enough date for their pitch to be measured accurately.20
Exceptions are those whose pitch is identified as calculated from the measure-
ments, which, except where otherwise indicated, include both length and width.
The first column gives the date of original construction, or of drastic rebuilding.
The third column lists the builder (or, in the latter case, rebuilder). Many organs
have been rebuilt more than once, but the tables include only those for which
the evidence seems adequate. The fourth column indicates the source of our
information, and the last, the approximate number of semitones above or below
a1 = 440, with the actual frequency where known. Frequencies given by Ellis
(1880) are rounded off to the nearest integer.
This table must not be taken as showing more than it purports to show. The
pitches of organs were frequently different from the pitches at which the choirs
sang with them, or other instruments played, there having been numerous con-
ventions of transposition (see below under II.B).
size from town to town, sometimes very widely. Illustrative of this variety are the following lengths
of the foot: Amsterdam, 284 mm.; The Hague, 325 mm.; Utrecht, 273 mm.; Rhineland, 314 mm.;
Heidelberg, 279 mm.; Rome, 298 mm.; Ferrara, 401 mm.; Modena, 635 mm. (Paucton, 1780).
Since the documents rarely specify which foot is meant, it would be convenient to think that there
had been tacit agreement on some "organ-builders' foot", and indeed the preponderance of meas-
urements in multiples of 2, 3, and 5, suggests this. In reply to a question on this point, M. A. Vente *
states: "Organ-builders used the foot or the shoe of their own region for the construction of their
organ parts, but not for matters of pitch. There was indeed some tacit agreement, otherwise contracts
would have mentioned very strictly the exact measures. Very important were the exact measures for
the wind-pressure, as the graden [degrees] were always part of the regional foot." L. F. Tagliavini*,
in response to the same question, states it as the opinion of himself and of O. Mischiati that organ-
builders used the term "foot" as an approximate measure, not necessarily agreeing with any of
the many sizes of foot prevailing in different places. In the 18th and 19th centuries, he says, Italian
organ-builders frequently used the term "piede armonico", to emphasize the fact that they were using
a musical term not the foot of any specific place. (Cf. footnote 42.) But Tagliavini * points out that
in Italian contracts before about 1600 pipes for the pitch called "F" and the octaves below are almost
always referred to as of 5', 10', and 20', while later they are called 6', 12', and 24'. He suggests
that this fact may be connected with the particularly high pitch of such early organs as those of
San Petronio, Bologna, and Santa Maria della Scala, Siena (see the table of Italian organ-pitches
below).
20o Accurately enough, that is, for present purposes, which means to the nearest semitone.

Table I *
Austria
c. 1550 Klosterneuburg, Stiftskirche Jonas Scherer Krauss (196

1559 Castel Coira (Churburg) M. Strobel Tagliavini (1
1561 Innsbruck, Hofkirche J. Ebert Krauss, Tag
16th c. Innsbruck, Silberne Kapelle (Italian) Krauss (196
17th c. Innsbruck, Stift Wilten Krauss (196
1640 Vienna, Franziskanerkirche, Ellis (1880)
groite Orgel
1642 Vienna, Franziskanerkirche, Woeckerl Krauss (196
kleinere Orgel
(1642? same organ? Ellis [1880]
End 17th, Salzburg, Cathedral, Joseph C. and G. Walterski
1st half, several organs,21 Johann C. Egedacher
18th c. Kajetanerkirche
* The footnotes to this Table will be found on

page 34, 35.

England
1519 London, Alhalowe Barking22 A. Duddyngton Hopkins-Ri

1614 Worcester, Cathedral 22 T. Dallam N. Tomkin
a. 1621 Oxford, St. John's College22 T. Dallam N. Tomkin
in Freeman
a. 1642? London, St. Paul's Cathedral22 R. Dallam? and Steele
1665 Exeter, Cathedral22 J. Loosemore Freeman (1
1670 Newcastle-on-Tyne, St. Nicholas R. Harris Ellis (1880)
parish church
1683 Durham Cathedral B. Schmidt Ellis (1880)
1690 Hampton Court B. Schmidt Ellis (1880)
1696 Undershaft, St. Andrew R. Harris Ellis (1880)
1708 St. James's Palace, Chapel Royal B. Schmidt Ellis (1880)
1708 Trinity College, Cambridge B. Schmidt R. Smith (
1708-48 London, St. George's, A. Jordan, Ellis (1880)
Botolph Lane Sr. and Jr.
1740-80 St. James's Palace, J. Snetzler Ellis (1880)
German Chapel Royal
1740 Great Yarmouth, St. George's Chapel Byfield, Jordan Ellis (1880)
& Bridge
1742, 1761, 3 small organs in U.S.A. J. Snetzler Fesperman
1762
1744 Maidstone, old parish church A. Jordan, Ellis (1880)
Sr. and Jr.
1749 London, All Hallows the Great Glyn & Parker Ellis (1880)
and the Less
1759 Trinity College, Cambridge B. Schmidt R. Smith (
1778 London, St. Katharine's, Regent's Park S. Green Ellis (1880)
1780 Winchester College R. Harris (as repaired Ellis (1880)
by S. Green)
c. 1790 Kew parish church (built S. Green Ellis (1880)
for Kew Palace)
1805 Hanover Square Rooms Elliott Ellis (1881)
1843 Wimbledon Church Walker Ellis (1880)

France
1601 Paris, St. Gervais M. Langhedul Hardouin*,

1627 Meaux, Cathedral Gonzales Hardouin(1
1648 L'Isle-sur-la-Sorgue C. Royer Hardouin (19
Dufourcq (1
1674 Les Andelys, St. Sauveur Hardouin (1
17th c.? Lille, L'Hospice Comtesse Delezenne, E
1710 Marmoutier A. Silbermann, with Hardouin*
modification by J. D.
Silbermann in 1746
1716 Strasbourg, Cathedral23 A. Silbermann Ellis (1881)
1732 Houdan L. A. Clicquot Hardouin *
1758-68 Paris, St. Gervais Hardouin * (a
1773 St. Maximin J.-E. Isnard Hardouin (19
Dufourcq (19
1782 Souvigny [F.-H.] Clicquot Hardouin (19
1787-90 Poitiers F.-H. and C. Clicquot Hardouin *
1789 Versailles, Chapelle du chateau24 R. Clicquot, 1711; Ellis (1880),
restored by C. Dallery Dufourcq (19
(?) and F.-H. Clicquot Hardouin*
* But Hardouin sums

up his impressions as follows: most French organs before 1660, -2; 1660-1735, -1; 1735-1820

Germany80
1361 or Halberstadt, Cathedral25 N. Faber (1361) or Praetorius II

1495 G. Kleng (1495)
(1501 Altenbruch bei Cuxhaven J. Coci Fock [1974]
[See 1649 below]
1512 Hamburg, St. Jacobi J. Iversand & H. Stiiven Fock (1974)

(RohrflSte 4')
1581, 1687 Steinkirchen D. Hoyer, A. Schnitger Fock (1974)
1600 PomfBenbei Grimma unknown Dihnert*
1603, 1683 Liidingworth, Parish Church A. Wilde, A. Schnitger Fock (1974)
1616 Organ for King of Denmark, E. Compenius, with P. G. Anders
Frederiksborg M. Praetorius
1649 Altenbruch bei Cuxhaven H. C. Fritzsche Fock (1974)
(See 1501 above)
1688 Neuenfelde A. Schnitger Fock (1974)
1690 Hollern A. Schnitger Fock (1974)
1693 Hamburg, St. Jacobi A. Schnitger Schmahl, El
Fock (1974)
1693 Hamburg, St. Jacobi: Gedackt 8' A. Schnitger Niedt-Matth
Adlung (17
1698 Bremen, Cathedral A. Schnitger Fock (1974)
1699 Liibeck, Cathedral A. Schnitger Ellis (1880)
1706 Berlin-Charlottenburg, A. Schnitger K. Schuke, v
Eosander Chapel
1714 Freyberg, Cathedral27 G. Silbermann Flade (1953
Williams (1
1716 Rendsburg A. Schnitger Ellis (1880),
1722 Dresden, Sophienkirche28 G. Silbermann & Ellis (1880),
Z. Hildebrandt Adlung-Agri

Germany (continued)
1723 StJrmthal29 Z. Hildebrandt H. Eule*, w

the organ in
1736 Dresden, Frauenkirche G. Silbermann Flade (1953
1749 Hamburg,Positiv built for Lehnert Schmahl, El
a Biirgermeister
1754 Dresden, Catholic Court Chapel G. Silbermann& Ellis (1880)
Z. Hildebrandt
1762 Hamburg, St. Michaelis J. G. Hildebrandt Ellis (1880)
? Liibeck,Cathedral,"old,small organ" - Ellis (1880)

Italy (Data kindly supplied by L. F. Tagliavini)
1471-1475 Bologna, S. Petronio Loren

organo "in cornu Epistolae"
1519 Siena, S. Maria della Scala Giova
Piffar
stored
by the
1531 Bologna, S. Petronio (rebui
organo "in cornu Epistolae" Batista
1556 Bologna, S. Martino Giova
1581 Brescia, S. Giuseppe Grazi
Anteg
1669-1670 Carpi (Modena), S. Bernardino Ottavi
Torton
1708 (?) Bologna, S. Petronio (pitch
organo "in cornu Epistolae" Giova
1754 Venice, S. Pietro di Castello Pietro
1778 Treviso, S. Nicol6 Gaeta
1822 Serravalle Pistoiese Giosu
1870 G. B.
Vicenz
1974,

Netherlands
c. 1480 (?) Groningen, Martinikerk R. Agricola (?), Fock (1974)

(See 1692 below) J. ten Damme
1506 Arnhem, St. Eusebius Bernt, of Embryck Vente (1942
c. 1560 Groningen, Academie- or A. de Mare (?) Fock (1974)
Broerkerk, now in the A-Kerk
1627 Groningen, Pelster Gasthuiskerk -; enlarged by Fock (1974)
A. Schnitger (1693)
1692 Groningen, Martinikerk Rebuilt by A. Schnitger Fock (1974)
(See c. 1480 above)
Several stops from the old organ had been made "choormatich", but Schnitge
other pipes three places to the right, adding larger pipes below, in addition to
When F. C. Schnitger repaired the organ in 1728 one of the clauses of the co
Orgel in die toon staan blijven, soo als 't tegenwoordig is, sonder hoger of l
weten netto Chor Thon."
c. 1695 Nieuw Scheemda, Positiv A. Schnitger Fock (1974)

1695 Noordbroek A. Schnitger Fock (1974)
1701 Uithuizen, Herformde Kerk A. Schnitger Fock (1974)
1721 Zwolle, Grote- or Michaelskerk J. G. & F. C. Schnitger Vente (1971
Pock (1974, p. 251) writes: "Die Shne Schnitgers hatten das Zwoller Wer
Brauch ihrer Werkstatt nach in Chorton eingestimmt, in dem ihrer Aussage nac
allerlei Arten von Instrumenten musiziert wird'". Vente (1971, p. 60-64) prin
examiners of the new instrument, dated 30 September, 1721. They note that, wh
differs from the one usual in Holland, it may pass. But they had been charge
the organ could be used conveniently with other instruments in concerted m
that the temperament used prevents the customary resort to transposition for
was the expedient used by Bach and Kuhnau, described in Section II. B, below.
in their opinion, is to lower the pitch of two stops one tone, to the pitch
instruments] in concerted music. (This suggestion was not adopted, according
that, as compared with the pitch of the organ as it stands, the organ-pitch in t
Kerk in Amsterdam and the Nieuwe Kerk in the Hague is a semitone lower, in
in the Hague 3/4 of a tone lower, and in the big organ in Rotterdam a whole
(p. 33) says the original pitch of the Zwolle organ was "almost a whole-tone hi
day pitch; the instrument was restored by D. A. Flentrop in 1953-1956, and
been lowered to the modern standard, was then made precisely a whole-tone high.

21 Surviving organ and trombone

parts for the first performance of Mozart's C-minor Mass, K. 427,
are in Bk-minor, as Bach's organ and trombone parts for a C-minor work would have been in
Leipzig, but probably not for the same reason. The organ of the Peterskirche, where the performance
took place, had been built in 1620 by Daniel Hayl, and, according to the archives, "in die Chorh6he ge-
richtet" in 1631. 162 years later-i.e., two years after Mozart's death, Abbot D. Hagenauer wrote in
his diary: "Ich lie? heuer nebst anderen betriichtlichen Reparaturen die grope Orgel auf Cornet stim-
men" (G. Croll*). How different the Comet-Ton of 1793 was from the Chorhbhe of 1631, and what
either of these pitches was, we have no way of knowing. All of the pipes of this organ were replaced by
new ones in 1920 (G. Walterskirchen*). It would apparently have been unusual in Salzburg to reconcile
the high- and low-pitched instruments by transposing organ and trombone parts down, instead of
the oboe parts up as in numerous other works performed at the Peterskirche and in the Cathedral.
W. Plath * suggests that there may have been a different reason for the unusual key of Bb minor
in this instance. Mozart, he thinks, may have been unsure of Constanze's ability to handle the upper
reaches of her pieces and may have transposed the entire work down for this performance. (Only
the Kyrie is in Bb minor. The Qui tollis, originally in G minor, requires in the transposition four
flats, also rare in Mozart, and none of the other movements require more than three.) For the possible
significance of this question, see Section III, below.
22 Calculated from the measurements. For Worcester and Oxford, Tomkins gives both the length (10')
and the diameter (7.5"); for St. Paul's, he gives only the diameter (8"), seeming to imply that the
length was the same as at Worcester. For Exeter, Freeman (1926-1927, p. 110-112) gives both the
length (20'6") and the circumference (3'11"). For Barking, Duddyngton's contract specifies only the
length: 5' for the Principal and 10' for the diapason (= sub-octave). Since for Exeter, Worcester, and
Oxford the circumference is about 1/5 the length, the estimate of the Barking pitch is based on the
same proportion. A later organ at Worcester Cathedral, built by Thomas Harris in 1666, also began
with a 10' pipe, "as at Sarum and Gloucester", according to Harris's contract (Freeman, 1925, p. 69).
On the relation of the organ pitch to choir pitch, see below under II. B. 1. b. (3).
The Talbot Manuscript of the late 1690's gives length and circumference for "Chappell Pitch" of
three pipes: for "C2", "C1", and "C". Williams (1964, p. 27-28) thinks the measurements may
come from B. Smith's organ of 1695-1696 in St. Paul's Cathedral, though the rare term "chappell
pitch" suggests a translation from "ton de chapelle". Calculation from these two dimensions gives
approximately a1 = 432, 430, and 410 for the three pipes--a reminder that other dimensions, not
usually available and therefore guessed at for our calculations, also influence pitch, so that our results
may be wrong by a semitone or more.
23 J. A. Silbermann, the son of Andreas, in a letter to the Abbot of the Stift St. Blasien, dated 1772,
wrote "dap viererley thane sind, worin die Orgeln gestimbt wurden. In ganz Teutschland ist vor
diesem der Cornet Thon iiblich gewesen... Dieweil aber dieser Thon wegen seiner H6he dem Gesang
beschwerlich war, so machte man denselben einen 1/2 Thon tiefer und nannte ihn den Chorthon. Nach
diesem wurde derselbe wieder einen 1/2 Thon herabgesetzt, den man den Kammerthon nante. Dieser
Thon scheint allgemein und vollkomen eingefiihrt zu seyn, denn alle Musikalische Instrumenten sind
darein gestimmet. Man nennt ihn auch den Italidinischen Thon, weilen er in ganz Italien briiuchlich ist.
In Frankreich war der Thon noch einen 1/2 Thon tiefer weder der Kammerthon, und hie3 der Franz6-
sische Thon, wird aber selten mehr gebraucht.. ." (H. E. Rahner, 1937, p. 453). How oversimplified
and even distorted this summary is, the reader can see from the evidence presented in this article.
Andreas Silbermann had built the organ of St. Margarethen in Strasbourg in 1703 "11/2 Ton h6her als
Franz6sischer Kammerton, der sehr tief war" (Flade, 1953, p. 62), and 2 organs in Basel, in Chorton
(ibidem p. 66-67). And Johann Andreas himself had built 3 organs, in Marbach (1736), in the Neue
Kirche in Strasbourg (1747), and in Soultz (1750), all in "Opera[!] oder franz6sischer Thon", while
for Villingen (Baden, 1751), St. Blasien (1772), and St. Mirgen (1776) he contracted to build organs
"in dem Kammerthon, welcher 1/2 Thon haher wie der frantzbsische thon ist" (Walter, 1971, p. 170).
24 See the passages below referred to in footnotes 38 and 82.
25 Calculated from the measurements: length 31' (8835 mm.), circumference 3.5' (998 mm.).
26 F. Hamel (1944, p. 12), who takes most of the pitches he lists from Ellis, gives this one on the
authority of the organ-builder Karl Schuke. The organ was destroyed in the same year that Hamel's
article appeared, and was reconstructed by Schuke in 1965. Since he gave the pitch as 411.3, it seems
likely that he had measured it carefully, and that his report is more accurate than that of Fock (1974),
who placed it almost a semitone lower.
27 Ellis gives a1 = 419 for this organ, slightly modifying information from
Nike (1862), which is
confused and Nike's conclusion erroneous. Flade (1953, p. 99) says "Etwa 7/8 Ton h6her als Normal-
stimmung", which is confirmed by P. Williams *, who is sure the pipes have not been moved, shortened,
or lengthened. DAhnert (1953, p. 107) gives the quotation from Kuhnau and Bestell included in the
discussion above, which proves that the organ was at "Cornet- oder Chorton", and lists 13 other
organs by G. Silbermann, built between 1717 and 1750, in a Chor-Ton only slightly lower than that
of Freyberg.

Spain
Almost no reliable and precise information seems to be available about the pitches
of old Spanish organs. Ellis (1880) stated that a fork tuned by him to 419.6 (almost a
semitone below 440) was "sent to Seville to compare with the old [Cathedral] organ
of Jorge Bosch (a Spaniard of Majorca) and was pronounced by the organist, Don
Yfiiguez, to be exactly in unison with 2 A of the organ at a mean temperature.... He
also said that this was the pitch of all organs in Spain." Ellis does not say how he
happened to have chosen this frequency for the fork he sent to Seville. But from the
context it appears that he calculated an equal semitone below 444.5, the pitch in use
at the Teatro real in Madrid in 1858, as reported in that year by H. Eslava to A. de la
Fage. Ellis says, referring to this frequency: "The ton de chapelle is said to be an
equal semitone flatter." That a frequency chosen on this basis should have been exactly
in unison with that of the Seville Cathedral organ, built, according to Ellis, in 1785-1790
and that "all organs in Spain" were at this pitch seems too good to be true. R. G. de
Amezua, in the article Orgel in MGG, writes: "Die politische Einheit der Nation spiegelt
sich in der Orgel wider: selbst in voneinander weitentfernten Provinzen bleibt sich die
Struktur gleich . ." Amezua does not specifically say that pitch is or was included in
this uniformity, but the impression that such uniformity prevailed is not new. Fesper-
man and Hinshaw (1972) report that the order dated May 21, 1688 for a new organ
to be built for the Cathedral of Mexico City "specifically states that the organ should
be pitched lower than was customary in Spain since the voices in the vice-
royalty did not have the compass of Spanish choirs, but that the c a d e r e t a [trans-
lated by the authors as Riickpos.itiv] should be pitched the same as Spanish
or ga n s since it would be used to accompany wind instruments in their natural pitch
[emphasis added]."
28 lists several other organs by G. Silbermann, built between 1710 and 1754 in a
Dihnert (1953)
Cammer-Ton about a semitone below a1 = 440.
29
Dihnert * corrects his earlier statement (1962) that this organ was "knapp ein Ganzton iiber dem
Pariser Kammer-A [435]".
30 See Mendel
(1955, p. 477 f.).
31 The organ is now being restored and will again have the pitch of 1531.
U Calculated from the
specified length ("sestien voeten") and the name of the longest pipe "f"
(meaning "Fi"). Several elements make this pitch uncertain: How long was the "voet"? Was 16' the
actual length or already at this early date merely an indication of register? Vente*
suggests the
former.
33 Aangaande het accoort van 't
gantsche orgel vinden wij dat wel passeeren kan (dogh is niet gestelt op
die manier als men gewoon is in Hollant de orgels te stellen) omdat de Terz van
g en h en die van g en
e mol wat grooter sijn gemaakt om de terz van h en dis eenighsints
passabel te maken.
Volgens aanschrijvens van Haar Wel Ed. Hoogh Aghtb. als dat wij niet alleen versocht wierden om
het orgel te visiteeren of de bestecken voldaan waren, maar ook of hetselve
bequamelijk onder de
musicq soude konnen gebruykt worden, soo hebben wif sulkx niet alleen gedaan, maar ook na de
toonen van verscheyde groote orgels in Hollant vernomen als 't laaste gemaakte in de Nieuwe
Luyterse
Kerk tot Amsterdam, hetwelke een halve toon lager is als deese, in den Haagh d'nieuwe Kerk meede
een 1/2 toon, en d'Groote Kerk aldaar
3/4 toon lager. Alsmede 't groot orgel tot Rotterdam een toon
dieper . . . Maar vinden ons verplight te seggen dat wij in de bestecken niet vinden dat er een vasten
toon gestipuleert is, dogh wat belangt om hetselve onder de musicq te konnen
gebruyken door trans-
positie bevinden wij, dat sulkx altiidt gebreckkelijk is, voornamentlijk het orgel soo gestelt sijnde
als dit tegenwoordigh gedaan is gelijk op pag. 5 aangetoont is.
Soodat het eenighste middel (onses bedunkens) is twee registers in het derde clavier
op die toon
te doen maken, welke vereyst wort onder de musicq, te weeten een toon
lager als tegenwoordigh
het orgel staat, als de Prestant Quint van 6 v. gemaakt tot een Prestant van
8 v. en het Gedaght (of
Holpijp) 8 v. door het verschuyven van de piipen van die 2 registers een toon hoger en doen maken
alsdan 2 piipen daar onder bij als C en Cis en
ieder register boven die manquerende pijpen om de
Prestant Quint tot 8 v. te maken, hetwelke
gemakkeliik kan gemaakt worden en volkomen effect
doen onder de musicq.

36 A. Mendel:Pitchin WesternMusicsince1500
Pitch data for old Spanish organs are extremely sparse as comparedwith those for
other countries of Western Europe, so the impression of uniformity created by these
statements cannot be directly supported or disproved today. The Dutch organ-builder
G. A. C. de Graaf writes*: "Obwohl ich jetzt 8 Jahre in Spanien wohne und arbeite und
meine Forschungen jetzt alle der spanischen Orgel gewidmet sind, gibt es viele offene
Fragen. Und ungelast ist auch noch die Frage der alten spanischen Stimmungen.
Die Instrumente selber sind alle in sehr schlechtem Zustand, und nur wenige sind
iiberhaupt spielbar. Von vor 1700 gibt es kaum Instrumente mehr. Die alten Pfeifen
sind alle oben mit dem Messer eingeschnitten, oft 5 bis 10 cm tief-oder auch zusam-
mengedriickt. Bevor man irgendwelche Schliisse iiber die Stimmung ziehen kann,
muj man sie erst restaurieren. Und dann noch haben wir keine Garantie, daj die
Liingen noch original sind. Man hat an allen Orgeln in den 200 Jahren repariert, ge-
iindert, und gestimmt, sehr oft durch ausgesprochene Pfuscher. Bis jetzt habe ich mich
deswegen konzentriert auf das, was man in alten Biachernund Kontrakten finden kann -
was wiederum sehr wenig ist . . ."
Information about pipe-lengths gathered from Spanish organ-contractsof the 15th
to 18th centuriesby De Graaf and others will be found in Section II.A. 1. i. (Organ-pipe
dimensions) below, following the discussion of Bermudo. It will be seen that they
hardly testify to uniformity. Indeed, Bermudo (1555) explains the many choices of
transposition he recommends for mass-sections and hymns (see Section II.B.l.a. [3],
below) on the grounds that "todos los organos no son uguales, y en todos los choros
no cantan ugualmente".And it is known that in the basilica of the monastery of the
Escorial,one of the four organs donated by Philip II and built by G. and H. Brebos
in 1579-1584 was 3 semitones lower than the others (Rubio, 1965). See also Sections
II. A. 1. i. and II. B. 1. a. (3). (a) and (b) below, and Stevenson (1961).
Organ Pitch-Changes
There are many records of proposed and actual pitch-changes in organs. Some,
from which conclusions can be drawn about the absolute pitch changes involved,
are the basis for entries in the previous tables. Others may be grouped as follows:
Raised about 5 semitones: 1517, Utrecht, St. Marie (Vente, 1942).34
Raised about 2 semitones: 19th-20th c., Paris, St.-Nicholas-des-Champs,built 1776
(Hardouin,1963); Villiers-le-bel,built 1703 (ibid.), St. Dizier (ibid.).
Raised about I semitone: 1510, Haguenau, proposal by Schlick (1 or 2 semitones;
Pirro, 1926); 1634, Chilons, Notre-Dame-en-Vaux (Hardouin, 1963); 1659, Paris, St.-
Jacques-de-la-Boucherie, built 1589 (ibid.); 1673, Bernau, built 1573, "wieder chormiipig
gemacht" (Fock, 1974); 1673, B&ziersJoyeuse, built 1623 (Hardouin, 1963); 1675, Vau-
luisant (ibid.).
Raised about a quarter-tone: 1675, Paris, St. Sulpice (Hardouin, 1963); 1691, Paris,
Notre Dame (ibid.).
Lowered about 1 semitone: 1539, Cavaillon, Cathedral (Hardouin, 1963); 1564, Paris,
Notre Dame, built 1402 (ibid.); 1582, Cremona,Cathedral,built 1542, change proposed,
"in modo che il tono... corrisponda al coro ed ai concerti che si fanno. ... con tutte le
sorte di strumenti che . . . occorrono" (Cesari & Pannain, 1939); 1902, Brescia, San
34 Changes by 5 or 6 semitones in either direction involve chiefly changes in the keyboards and
in the relation of the pitch-names to the pipes, not a major change (if any) in the actual frequency of
the pipes. A. Banchieri (1608) speaks of tunings a 4th apart, but Tagliavini (1974, p. 131) does not
know of a difference in 16th-17th-century Italy of more than the 3rd between Naples and Venice
mentioned by Doni (1640) and Barcotto (1650).

Giuseppe, built 1581 (Lunelli, 1956); 1690, Magdalen College, Oxford, built 1637
(Hopkins, 1880); Bologna, 1708 (?), San Petronio,built 1471-1475, previously lowered
2 semitones (Tagliavini*).
Lowered about 2 semitones: 1529, Goes, St. Maria Magdalena (Vente, 1942); 1531,
Bologna, San Petronio, built 1471-1475 (Tagliavini*); 1546, Bergamo,S. Maria Mag-
giore, built 1498, "quiasequendotonum presentemipsius organifit magnavis cantoribus
in canendo aut fit magna dissonantia" (Lunelli, 1956); 1562, Averbode, Abbey, built
1517, enlarged1530 (Stellfeld, 1942; Vente, 1942); 1599, Schleiz, proposalby H. Com-
penius, Jr.,to change to "Cohrhbhe"(T. Schneider,1937); 1630, Braunschweig,Martini-
kirche (W. Gurlitt, 1937).
Lowered about (5? or) 6 semitones: 1500, Besanqon, St. Jean, "B" to serve as "F"
(Dufourcq,1934).
II. A. 1. i. Organ-Pipe Dimensions

Some dimensions are available for a good many other organs-often simply
the length of the longest pipe. This alone might make it possible to make an
informed guess if one knew both the intended pitch-name and the length of
the unit of measurement (foot or span) involved. The pipe-length is usually
given in a multiple of 2' (8', 16', 32') or of 3' (6', 12', 24'), but sometimes of
other prime numbers: 5', 7', 11', 13', even 31'. Sometimes these clearly indicate
the actual length; more often, 8' or 16' probably indicates the register but not
the precise length of "C" or "C1", and 6' or 12' of "F" or "Fi", etc. (But the
pipe for C in the Worcester Cathedral organ of 1613-14 was 10'.) The size
of the foot or span varied widely from region to region and even town to town.
Sometimes the measurement given is explicitly approximate; e. g., a contract of
1519 for San Pietro in Modena provides "che l'organo sia di piede dese et piu, e
mancho secundo il bisogno del Coro" (0. Mischiati, 1960, p. 213).35
A number of books of the 16th to 18th centuries give recommended dimensions
for organ-pipes. Arnolt Schlick had lines printed in the margins of his Spiegel
der Orgelmacher und Organisten (1511) to indicate various organ dimensions he
recommended. Estimates of the pitches he proposed-mostly based on Ellis
(1880)--are frequently cited, but several facts make this evidence of doubtful
reliability. Among the lines he gives is one for 1/16 of the length of the lowest
pipe, to be treated preferably as "F", or (less desirably) as "c". Another line is
for 1/5 of the distance from the pedal keyboard to the top of the bench. This line
measures about 129.5 mm.-doubtless about 132 mm. before the paper had
shrunk, which, multiplied by 5, = 66 cm. or about 26 inches-too high to be
practical. Thomas & Rhodes (1971) dismiss this objection because Schlick's
pedal keyboard embraced only a 12th and because they think he probably never
used his heels. But the Spiegel (ff. ii' and vi') speaks of playing in 7 voices, 4 on
the manuals and 2 or 3 on the pedals. And one verse of Schlick's Ascendo ad
35 The contract with Leonardo d'Alemagna, dated 1507, for the new organ of S. Maria di Monte-
ortone (Padua) provides that the organ shall be made "ita quod prima cana sit longa decem pedibus
computato eius pede. [This is unusual; when the foot of the pipe is mentioned at all, it is usually
excluded from the measurement.] Item sea coristo a voce de homo over da coro . . ." (Lunelli, 1973, p. 37).

patrem meum36 is in 10 voices: 6 for the hands and 2 for each foot. Barber (1975)
is aware of this piece, but ignores it in her explanation, which, in addition,
mistakenly reckons with 25 inches (= 63.5 cm.) as the height of the bench. She
also prints a drawing which purports to show in outlined profile "a modern
organist (5'7" tall) using a typical German keydesk layout" compared "with
a sixteenth century organist (height 5'4") using the dimensions given by Schlick".
But what is not shown is how he played three or four voices in the pedals. If
the line given to indicate the height of the bench is wrong, the others may or
may not be correct."' Some months after the appearance of the Spiegel, Schlick
in his Tabulaturen etlicher Lobgesang (1512) warns in general terms against
possible mistakes of his own and against printers' errors. (The Spiegel contains
both.)
If one allows for paper-shrinkage, the length of the line given for the lowest
pipe, to be treated preferably as "F" or alternatively as "c", would make that
pipe 2080 mm. long. This "F" would then have been from 2 to 3 semitones
below ours. Schlick's reason for his choice is to suit the voices in plain-chant,
but for some mensural music he also recommends what he has on his own organ:
a transposing device for shifting the keyboard one whole-tone to the right, to
31 In Arnolt Schlick, Hommage a l'Empereur Charles-Quint, ed. S. Kastner (Barcelona 1954); also in:
Arnolt Schlick, Orgelkompositionen, ed. R. Walter (Mainz 1970).
53 The history of such lines does not encourage confidence in their accuracy. In a mediaeval treatise
(Rogatus) a line captioned "Longitudo post foramen in graciliorem partem, quae est in capsa"
has the following lengths in its four manuscript sources, according to K. J. Sachs (1970, p. 75):
Montpellier, Bibliotheque Universitaire, Section Medecine, H 491 (11th c.) 169 mm.
Rome, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Regin. lat. 1661 (11th-12th c.) 162.5 "
Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional, 9088 (12th c.) 93 "
Rome, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vat. lat. 4539 (15th c.) 162.5 "
Schlick's Spiegel has been reprinted several times. The measurement of the line for the pipe-length
in the original and in the reprints appears as follows (figures rounded to the nearest millimeter):
1511: 128 mm., in the British Library copy
1931, 1951: 133 mm., in the modern German version of Flade
1959: 117 mm., in the modem German version of Smets
1959: 126 mm., in the facsimile, which appears in the same volume with the Smets version.
It is by sheer good fortune that the last of these measurements is as close to the original as it is.
For in the same facsimile, the length of the line representing the width of three pedal keys with the inter-
vening spaces (on folio viv Icf. footnote 47]) is 159 mm., in the Smets version 185, and in the original
183 mm. The facsimile was made not from the British Library copy, long considered an unicum,
but from a copy in the Marienbibliothek, Halle, that turned up about 1954. That copy has been
trimmed, and this line shortened in the process to 175 mm., since it originally extended almost
to the top edge of the page (H. Koehn*, in Halle). The reason why it is so much shorter in the
facsimile is that the printer included only that portion of it that fell within the vertical dimension
of the type-page.
A similar comedy of errors in connection with Praetorius II (1618) borders on farce. In Praetorius's
diagram of the lengths and circumferences of organ-pipes (discussed below), the length for "cs" is
135 mm. and for "c4" is 66 mm. (In the 1929 facsimile, these measurements are 132 and 65 mm.) Eitner,
reprinting the book in 1884, apparently did not realize that the dimensions were of the essence;
at any rate, his substitute for the original woodcut is a rough imitation using type-rules, with the lengths
120 mm. and 60 mm. Mahillon III (1900, p. 444-445), eminent acoustician and organologist as he was,
took Eitner's diagram at face value, and had wooden pipes built to Eitner's dimensions for c3 and c4
in order to determine Praetorius's intended pitch. These dimensions were further taken over by Lecerf &
Labande (1932) in their comparative chart of pipe-measurements.
Of course, neither Schlick nor Praetorius is responsible for the absurdities of modern writers and
printers. But if their dimensions are so roughly mishandled in a period of high technological achieve-
ment, and after centuries of experience in printing and in reproduction, we cannot be sure that the
blind Schlick fared better at the hands of his own printers.

accommodate specially low tessiture in the bass. His recommendation is thus for
two organ pitches: one for plainsong and some polyphonic music; the other for
polyphonic music in which the bass part lies particularly low. For some plainsong
melodies, he recommends that the organist transpose, so that the choir will be
singing at still another pitch, a 4th higher (see below under II. B. 1. a. [1]). Thus
his recommendation is not for one "Millennial Church Pitch" (Thomas & Rhodes,
1971, p. 73), but for two organ pitches a tone apart and for two choir pitches a 4th
apart, the lower of which is the same as the lower of the organ pitches. It will
be seen that the pipe-length line seems irreconcilable with the recommended
transpositions.
A number of organs had provision for alternative pitches: 1513, Innsbruck,
St. Jacob Pfarrkirche, both pitches referred to in a contemporary document as
"chormass" (Moser, 1929); 1559, Coira=Churburg (Krauss, 1972); 1574, Au-
gustusburg bei Fliha, organ built c. 1569, proposal by the builder (Flade, 1932);
c. 1590, Graz, Evangelische Stiftskirche (Federhofer, 1953); a. 1604, Magde-
burg Cathedral (Schneider, 1937); 1693, Hamburg, St. Jacobi (Niedt-Mattheson,
1721); Prague Cathedral (Janowka, 1701); 1716, Halle, Liebfrauenkirche (Flade,
1953); 1718, Halberstadt (Adlung, 1768); 1721 and 1725, Czqstochowa (Golos,
1969); a. 1722, Breslau, St. Maria Magdalena (Adlung, 1768); 1738, Miihlhausen,
Marienkirche (3 pitches; Albrecht, 1768).38 Where tihis provision involved a
shifting keyboard, either it made the tuning less satisfactory for one pitch than
for another or else the tuning actually in use approached equal temperament more
closely than the instructions for tuning usually indicate. Praetorius II (1618)
suggested the inclusion of one or two stops 2 or 3 semitones lower than the rest
of the organ, and he says Calvisius (d. 1615) had had the same idea. The best-
known example of such an arrangement was at Hamburg, St. Jacobi.
Schlick mentions further, as less desirable alternatives: (1) an organ "ein quint
grosser", in which his suggested pipe-length is to be used for "c";39 (2) an organ
"ein octaff grosser"; and (3) organs with "die graf3t pfeiff xx, xxiiij, oder xxx
schuch lenghet". It is not clear whether the 20', 24', and 30' really represent dif-
ferent pitdh-standards or simply different lowest notes of the instruments and
their keyboards.
Nor can we be sure what size foot he had in mind. The Rhenish foot, =
314 mm., is generally assumed, perhaps for no better reason than that Eitner,
reprinting the Spiegel in MfM (1869), gave the measurement of Schlick's line
in Rhenish inches. But Schlick lived in Heidelberg, where the foot was 279 mm.
s8 Adlung-Albrecht (1768, I, 260) specifies for the Miihlhausen church: "Zwei Kammerkoppel, eins
Grof- das andere Kleinkammerton durchs ganze Werk." A similar provision was planned in 1679 for
the Versailles chapel organ; see the passage below referred to by footnote 82. See also the last para-
graph of Section II. A. 2, below. For organs with provisions for alternative pitches in Poland, see Golos
(1969).
39 Schlick speaks in the text of "Fa under dem gamaut" and "cfaut", which seems to place them
in the gamut as l and. But in the caption accompanying the pipe-length line
the orthography is reversed: they are called [small] "f" and [capital] "C". He is often not careful to
indicate the register he has in mind, which must be inferred from the context.

If Schlick's line is the size he meant it to be, his recommended pipe-length would
be about 61/2 Rhenish feet or about 71/2Heidelberg feet- the latter perhaps closer
to the right length for what would have been thought of as an 8' pipe, if
allowance is made for the other dimensions. If it was thought of as an 8' pipe,
the alternatives he suggests would have been respectively 12, 16, 20, 24, and
30 Heidelberg feet. That is, Schlick would have been thinking of pipes bearing
simple ratios to the one he recommends (except for 30'; one may wonder
whether he did not mean 32'), which means that they would have been respec-
tively a 5th, an 8ve, a 10th, a 12th, and a 14th (15th?) lower. And this whether
they were all called "F" or whether the last three were to have different pitch-
names. But in Section IIB.1.a.(1) below it will be seen that a pipe 16 times
as long as Schlick's line would produce an "F" much too low for the transposition
instructions he gives for faccompanying plain-chant melodies on this organ.
M. Agricola (1545/1896, p. 271) gives both lengths and circumferences for
a whole octave of pipes ("G-g"). His "G" is 16 Spannen long and 4 Spannen in
diameter, which (if the Spanne was 245 mm.) would make it sound about a major
third low.
Bermudo (1555, Libro Quarto, Cap. xlv, f. lxxxv) divides organs into three
groups: in the first, the longest pipe ("C" or "c") is 13-14 palmos long (or half
these lengths); in the second, he says, it is a 4th higher; and in the third he
classes organs that do not belong in either group. But he says the longest pipe
in the second group is 91/2 palmos (which he calls 3/4 of 14) or 9 palmos (which
he calls 3/4 of 13). Actually, 9'/2 and 9 are closer to 2/3 of 14 and 13, which
would make the pitch a 5th higher, not a 4th.40 So Bermudo is mistaken either
about the pitch-interval separating the two groups or (more likely) about the
proportion.
The table below gives the length of the longest pipes (and occasionally of
those one or two octaves higher) specified in contracts for the building or reno-
vation of organs of the indicated dates, from various parts of Spain. G. A. C. de
Graaf *, who furnished most of these data, writes*: "Daraus schon geht gleich
hervor, daf3 schon in derselben Provinz 12, 13, und 14 palmos vorkommen (bis
etwa 1520 auch 10 palmos). Nun ist der palmo in den verschiedenen Provinzen
nicht gleich lang (z. B. in Barcelona 194,3 mm; Arag6n 193 mm; Valladolid
208,9 mm; Toledo 209,2 mm, usw. - Extreme: Teruel 192 mm; Alicante 228 mm).
Daraus ergibt sich z. B.: 12 palmos in Castilla = 2508 mm, waihrend 13 palmos
in Arag6n = 2509 mm. Deswegen sind wohl die meisten Orgeln in Arag6n 13
palmos, wiihrend sie in Valladolid meistens 12 palmos erhielten. Aber es war nicht
immer so, und man braucht noch viel mehr Kontrakte, um solche Details genau
verfolgen zu k6nnen .../"
40 Schlick's keyboards began on "F", whether the lowest pipe was of the length he recommended or,
alternatively, "ein quint grosser". Bermudo's 14- and "91/2"-palmos organs were apparently also at
different pitch-standards; that is, the lowest pipe was called "C" irrespective of which length it had
(Libro segundo, Cap. xix, f. XXVv). (This is clear from the fact that he says that on the "9/12"-palmos
organ the modes are to be played a 4th lower than what he recommends for the 13-palmos. See
II. B. 1. a, below.)

Year Place Source of Length of

information longest pipe **
in palmos
Catalonia
1468 Valencia, Cathedral Sanchis y Sivera, 24, 16, 8
1909
1480 Barcelona, Frailes Menores Baldell6, 1946 15
(sounding "fa")
1483 Barcelona, Frares Prehicadores Baldell6, 1946 71/2
1495 Barcelona, S. Antonio De Graaf *, 1977 5 (c) [C?]
1503 Barcelona (private) De Graaf *, 1977 6
1510 Valencia, Cathedral Angles, 1927 30, 26
1534 Sarria, Parish Church De Graaf *, 1977 12
1544 Lerida, Cathedral Angles, 1948 13
1552 Caldas de Montbuy, De Graaf *, 1977 12
Parish Church
1560 (?) Barcelona, S. Maria del Mar De Graaf *, 1977 27 (Ci)
1565 Barcelona, San Esteban de Baldell6, 1946 121/2, 6
Granollers
1566 Barcelona, San Feliu de Alella Baldell6, 1946 61/2
1596 Barcelona, Jer6nimas De Graaf *, 1977 12
1613 Barcelona, S. Juan de las Baldell6, 1946 13
Abadesas
1624 Lerida, Cathedral Angles, 1927 27, 13, 7
1629 Camprodon, N. S. del Carmen De Graaf *, 1977 14
1709 Barcelona, Carmelitas De Graaf *, 1977 14 (C)
1741 Barcelona, N. S. de los Baldell6, 1949 14
Reyes (Pino)
1793 Barcelona, S. Just de la Baldell6, 1946 14
Ciutat
1808 Barcelona, N. S. de los Baldell6, 1949 28, 14
Reyes (Pino)
Aragon
1522 Zaragoza, Portillo De Graaf *, 1977 13
1574 Zaragoza, S. Gil De Graaf *, 1977 13
1581 Tafalla De Graaf *, 1977 13
1588 Huesca, Cathedral De Graaf , 1977 13
1595 Paniza De Graaf *, 1977 14, + 2 dedos
1599 Zaragoza, S. Francisco De Graaf *, 1977 13
1697 Muel De Graaf *, 1977 13
Valladolid
1555 Valladolid, Colegiata De Graaf*, 1977 changed from
14 to 16
1588 Horcajo de las Torres De Graaf , 1977 9
1591 Medina del Campo, S. Miguel De Graaf *, 1977 7
** Where more than one figure, longest pipe of each department of organ

Year Place Sourceof Lengthof

information longest pipe**
in palmos
1625 Valladolid, S. Lorenzo De Graaf *, 1977 12

1625 Medina del Campo, Colegiata De Graaf *, 1977 12
1630 Valladolid, S. Pablo De Graaf *, 1977 12
1683 Medina de Rioseco, De Graaf *, 1977 12
S. Francisco
1706 Valladolid,Las Huelgas De Graaf*, 1977 13
1529 Trujillo,Ayuntamiento De Graaf , 1977 6

1541 Toledo, Cathedral De Graaf , 1977 26
1587 El Espinar (Segovia) De Graaf *, 1977 14
1595 Trujillo, S. Maria De Graaf *, 1977 7
1615 Burgos, Cathedral, Kastner, 1958 13
Capilla del Condestable
c. 1660 Malaga, Cathedral Llorden,1958 13
1667 Trujillo, S. Martin De Graaf *, 1977 14
1686 Tolosa Donostia, 1955 26
1749 Jerez de los Caballeros, De Graaf*, 1977 13
S. Maria
1759 Trujillo, S. Martin De Graaf *, 1977 13
**Where more than one figure, longest pipe of each departmentof organ
De Graaf points out further that the numbers must often have been used
symbolically (as such expressions as "8-foot and 16-foot tone" are used today)
rather than as exact measurements. On the other hand, it will be noted that in
Barcelona itself the numbers 12, 13, 14, and 15 occur. It is not likely that all
these are symbols having the same meaning, nor is such variation attributable
to palmos of different length. The numbers that occur most often are 13 and 14.
The contract for Malaga (c. 1660) calls for "un flautado abierto de tono trece
que se llama tono de cantadores" (Llorden, 1958); that of 1460/1468 for Valencia
says that the orgue del respatle (the organ at the back) is tuned to cant d'orgue
(mensural music), while in another department a pipe of VIII palmos is tuned
to the orgue maior (Sanchis y Sivera, 1909). Was the pitch of mensural music
the tono de cantadores? At any rate, the orgue maior seems to have been at a
different pitch. (Cf. Section II. A. 1. h. above and, in Section B. 1. a. (3) below, the
different transposition instructions that Bermudo gives for mensural music and
for psalmody.) And if there had been only one uniform pitch in Spain, why
would it have needed the name tono de cantadores?
S. de Caus (1615, Livre troisiesme, Problesme III) gives 1.5 "pieds" as the
length of a pipe for "fl", and, unlike Schlick or Bermudo, gives its other dimen-
sions. Its circumference is to be 1/5 of its length, the width of the mouth 1/4 of
the circumference, and the height of the mouth 1/s of its width. With these
measurements it should be easy to calculate its pitch fairly closely (by the

methods described by Ingerslev & Frobenius, 1947)41- provided, that is, that one
can know what foot he was using. De Caus was a Huguenot exile at the court
of Heidelberg, where Schlick had been. His Les Raisons des Forces Mouvantes
was published in French, in Frankfurt/M. Ellis (1880) assumed the Rhenish
foot, Mendel (1948) suggested the Heidelberg foot (279 mm.), but further
study makes it most likely that De Caus had in mind the pied de roi
(325 mm.), or conceivably the pie harmonique, which was 17/18 of the pied de
roi (= 307 mm.).42 Perhaps in the hope of returning to his native country-
which he did in 1620, acquiring the title "ingenieur et architecte du roy"- De
Caus dedicated his book to the King of France. The only measure of
distance the writer has found in the work is to the lieues Franqoises, Livre premier.
Definition deuxibme. If De Caus's pied = 325 mm., the dimensions he gives
would make his pitch about a tone low; if 307 mm., about a semitone low--pitches
documented, as has been shown, for 17th-century French organs, and rarely for
German.
Praetorius II (1618, p. 232) printed a diagram of the lengths and circumferences
of a series of pipes for "c3 to c4-".Ellis (1880) had a pipe constructed to twice
the dimensions of Praetorius's "c3", and from it estimated Praetorius's pitch as
something more than a quarter-tone low. From the same diagram and other
information furnished by Praetorius, Thomas & Rhodes (1971, p. 75) estimated
it at about the same or very slightly higher pitch. P. G. Bunjes (1966, p. 722-787)
reports on a series of pipes, built under his direction by the Schlicker Organ
Co. according to Praetorius's measurements, which were less than a quarter-tone
high. The data given by Mersenne (1636, 1648) are, as has been mentioned,
not sufficient to warrant definite conclusions. Kircher (1650, Lib. VI, ? II, p. 507)
prints a very close Latin translation of De Caus's instructions, without any
adjustment for the fact that Kircher lived and wrote in Rome. Dom Bedos, unlike
any of the writers so far quoted, was an organ-builder himself, and his treatise
(1766) gives instructions in minute detail for constructing an organ. The firm of
J. G. Koenig in Sarre-Union has built a whole organ following these instructions,
and reports* that the pitch is about a whole-tone low--again a pitch well
documented for French organs of Bedos's period. Mischiati & Tagliavini (1973)
describe and reprint an Italian translation of an anonymous French treatise
apparently of about 1710, copied (or translated, or both) for Padre Martini,
giving pipe-measurements.43 They had pipes built to the indicated dimensions and
report that the wooden pipes sounded about a' = 440 and the metal pipes a semi-
tone lower.
41 De Caus gives instructions for finding the circumferences of stopped pipes from "f" to
"c3" (and
of open pipes an octave higher), and he gives a drawing to illustrate this process. But the drawing
is not made in accordance with his instructions. (For an explanation, see Mahrenholz, 1938, p. 50-51,
58-59.)
42 According to the Encyclopedie (under JEUX in the explanation of the Table des raports des
jeux
de l'orgue, Planche XI, 1765). But cf. footnote 19.
" The authors comment:
"IIl piede impiegato dall'autore sembra doversi identificare con il piede
commune (= cm. 34.25) piuttosto che col pied du roi (= 32.4839) di uso normale in Francia." The
difference is slightly more than 5 per cent. - just less than a semitone.

II. A. 1. j. Praetorius II on Multiplicity of Pitches

De Caus, Kircher, and perhaps Dom Bedos were less concerned with setting a
pitch-standard than with the proportions of length to width and mouth-dimen-
sions of the pipes. But Praetorius, like Schlick, perhaps Agricola, and Bermudo,
was concerned with pitch itself. He was thoroughly aware that it varied from
place to place, from church to chamber, and from use to use-i. e., from plain-
chant accompaniment to participation in mensural and concerted music. (Up
to and including his time, 1618, no one speaking of pitch seems to have had solo
organ music particularly in mind, except perhaps in England, although Sweelinck
was almost at the end of his life. But while numerous vocal works by Sweelinck
were in print, his organ works circulated only in manuscript copies.) In Prae-
torius's chapter on pitch, he states: "Und ist anfangs zu wissen, dass der Thon
sowol in Orgeln als andern Instrumentis musicis offt sehr variire . . ." Indeed
this is the reason for his diagram of pipe-lengths and -widths: "Dieweil in diesem
Tomo Secundo zum offtern des rechten Chor-Thons erwehnet: und ich befunden,
das an vielen artern... der Tonus entweder zu hoch oder zu niedrig...". Yet
between these two statements, in speaking of the pitch of the old Halberstadt
organ, he has explained the variety of pitches in old organs on the ground "das
man vieleicht zu der Zeit noch keinen bestendigen Choristen oder Chor-Thon,
darnach man sich richten magen, wie Gottlob nunmehr im gebrauch, erwehlt ge-
habt." (A glance at the tables of organ pitches of this period printed above
will show how restricted in time and place the uniformity Praetorius rejoices in
must have been.) Cf. also the end of Section I. B, above.
II. A. 2. Harpsichords
Stringed instruments present greater obstacles to the determination of pitch than
wind instruments. The factors that determine the pitch of a vibrating string are
its length, thickness, material, and tension. The vibrating length of each string
is fixed on keyboard instruments by the structure of the instruments; the pitch
then varies with the other factors. It is easy to measure the vibrating length, but
many harpsichords were rebuilt long after their original creation. Keyboards
were often altered or replaced, giving them compasses different from the origi-
nal, and thus changing their pitch-standards. So were other parts of the
instruments. Hubbard (1965, p. 38) lists the measurements of 16 harpsichords of
the 16th century; Barnes (1971, p. 37) states that he has examined 5 of these,
and found that not one is in its original state. Marcuse (1952, p. 415) states that
nearly all extant Flemish harpsichords have had their compasses increased or their
dispositions changed. Barnes (19711) describes several harpsichords (all Italian)
in Edinburgh, London, and Brussels, all of which have been altered from their
original 16th-century or 17th-century state.
Hypothetical reconstructions are based on numerous assumptions on which
experts disagree. Barnes is convinced that on these Italian instruments the original
strings were of brass. Thomas & Rhodes (1967) are sure that some of them

were strung at least partly in hard-drawn iron, to which greater tension can-
or, as they believe, must-be applied. They insist that all harpsichord strings
were strung to the highest pitch possible without excessive risk of breaking.
They state that in steel and iron strings the tension must be much higher than
in copper and brass; otherwise the partial tones will be too sharp. There is a
tacit assumption here that the closer the frequencies of the partials are to integral
multiples of the fundamental frequency, the better the tone. R. Erickson (1975,
p. 30) writes: "The strings of a modern grand piano are large enough and stiff
enough to act somewhat like rods. Even though their chief modes of vibration
are stringlike, an element of inharmonicity is introduced. While small, it is not
negligible: 0. H. Schuck and R. W. Young, studying piano tones (1943), were
unable to find any true harmonics at
These statements prove nothing about all;...."
harpsichords. They do show that the
desirability of minimum inharmonicity cannot simply be taken for granted.
Desirability, as Ward (1970, p. 443) says, "must be determined by preference
tests, not by authoritarian decree." Within a range including that of the largest
harpsichord keyboard ("Fi"--"f3"), Fletcher (1962, p. 758-759) asked a mixed
group of musicians and non-musicians not only about resemblance between
synthesized "piano" tones having partials of the same inharmonic frequencies
as those of real piano tones and synthesized tones in which those frequencies had
been made harmonic, but also about their preference. In 7 of 12 such comparisons,
the majority chose the inharmonic. Whatever the significance of these results,
they do not invite tacit assumption of the superiority of tones composed only
of harmonic partials.
Hipkins (1896), exceptionally qualified both musically and technically to judge
these matters44, wrote: ". .. if a piano were tuned to French pitch [1/3 of a tone
below Broadwood's concert pitch at the time], it did not injure it at all; it sounded
a little fuller and it changed its character a little .. ."
Experts (who have their own preferences) disagree on the original pitch of
old harpsichords, and on their pitch after they were rebuilt.45 Only rarely is it
possible to know the date of their rebuilding, since there is usually no archival
evidence, as there often is for the rebuilding of organs. Exceptional in this
respect is a harpsichord built in 1585-1586 by A. Bortolotti, now in the Brussels
collection, which was made into a claviorganum in 1677 (1657?) by G. W. S. Gut.
The organ part of the instrument seems to have been originally at about a1 =
440-probably the pitch of the harpsichord when the organ was added to it.
But the keyboard, now "G1/Bi" - "c3", was originally "C/E"--"f3". Presumably
the keyboard alteration is of the same date as the addition of the organ mechanism
44 He was associated with the Broadwood firm for 63 years; Chopin when in England insisted on
having his pianos tuned by him; "his own playing of Chopin was of exquisite beauty" (Fuller Maitland,
1906, p. 407). Ellis acknowledged his "valuable assistance . . . in every possible way", and Hipkins
himself wrote the article Pitch, Musical appearing in the 9th ed. of the Encyclopaedia Britannica and,
somewhat augmented, in the 11th ed., 21 (1910-1911), p. 660-663.
45 Some of their disagreements are aired in articles and correspondence in GSJ 21-23 (1967-1969),
by W. R. Thomas & J. J. K. Rhodes, Van der Meer, Barnes, Parsons, M. Thomas, and Strong.

(Thomas & Rhodes, 1967, p. 50-53). Shortridge (1960) and Barnes (1965)
suggested that many Italian instruments were at a pitch a fourth or fifth lower
than "certain other contemporary instruments" and "should be thought of as
transposing instruments". Barnes (1971, p. 36) still believed that low pitches were
usual in the Italian harpsichords and virginals of the 16th century, but not that
they were looked on as transposing instruments. "The biggest difficulty with
the 'fourth transposition' theory," he says, "is that surviving instruments cover
the whole spectrum of scales, and that those of about 1600, when fully investigat-
ed, often have scales intermediate between those of the mid-16th and the mid-
17th century. It seems to me that a gradual rise of pitch took place in Italian
harpsichords and virginals between 1550 and 1650, beginning at about a fourth
below modern pitch and ending at approximately modern pitch. The early low-
pitched instruments usually have the compass C/E--f3 and the later high pitched
ones are often C/E-c3. To be more precise than this is, I believe, to try to impose
on history a more orderly progress than actually took place." Indeed, the very
concepts "gradual rise" and "Italian" (as applied to the many principalities and
foreign-ruled regions of the Italian peninsula in the period of harpsichord-build-
ing) are questionable. Thomas & Rhodes reject the "fourth transposition" theory
and explain the pitch differences by the difference in metals, citing Q. van Blan-
kenburgh (1739) as "the earliest writer we know to have recorded clearly the
difference in string length appropriate to a change from iron to copper alloy
wire." About the change in keyboard compass of the Bortolotti instrument, they
say (p. 60): "The essential point is that this keyboard change indicates no neces-
sary change in the pitch of the harpsichord strings." By "pitch" here, they mean
the frequencies produced. But the "Gi" key now governs what had been the
"C" string, which means that the "C" key now governs what had been the "F"
string. If the frequency of each string was not changed, the pitch of the instrument
(its pitch-standard) was raised a 4th. From the point of view of the new key-
board, the original one was a transposing keyboard, and vice versa. On the
question of what "transposing" can have meant before there was a standard
pitch, see the last paragraph under II.B.1.b.(3) below.
Praetorius II (1618, Plate VI) prints a woodcut with the caption "Clavicymbel,
so eine Quart tieffer als Chor-Ton", although in his description of the instrument
he does not mention this pitch. In describing the spinetta (which includes the
virginals) he says that it is "umb eine Octava oder Quint h6her gestimmet, als
der rechte Ton", and he mentions having seen a harpsichord with "2 Aequal,
eineQuint, und einOctavlin von eitel Saitten... Und gar wol lieblich und priichtig
in einander geklungen". He 'has previously explained "Aequal" as the 8' pitch of
organs tuned to the "jetziger zeit gew6hnliche Cammer-Ton, . . . welcher Ton
dann mit den rechten Clavicymbeln und spinetten gleich iiberein k6mpt, und
wird von den Orgelmachern Aequal genennet, darumb es mit der Menschen
Stimme, an der Tief und Hbhe quadriret." In his description of the four-stop
harpsichord, he seems to be referring to the use of the stop a 5th higher as
part of a "mixture". But it could, of course, have been used alone, and would

share "octave equivalence" with that a 4th lower. Tagliavini (1974) quotes
Angelo Furio (1687-1723): ". . . il cembalo codato et armato di corde d'argento
o d'ottone richiede il suono pizi grave del non codato, o sia spinetta quadrangolata
armata di corde d'acciaio". And we know that there were harpsichords, and
apparently organs, with different keyboards a fourth apart in the same instrument
(Mendel, 1949; Marcuse, 1952).
But Barnes's "whole spectrum of scales" receives apparent confirmation from
C. Antegnati (1608, c. 6), who, in his directions for tuning says one may "stabilire
la cordatura [l'accordatura?] come si vuole Corista di tutto ponto, o di mezzo,
o alta, o bassa come si vuole, & e commoda". A. Banchieri (1608, p. 94-95) is
even more explicit: he recommends, under "Accordatura dell'Organo et strumento
da penna", that the tuner begin with "f", the note "detta da gli musici & Organisti
corista, & quella si pone in tuono della natura dell'instromento in voce corista
overo un tuon piz' basso overo 4. superiore, o inferiore . . .". Tagliavini (1974,
p. 131) says no such variety of pitches occurs on the surviving Italian organs of
about 1600 known to him; he thinks Banchieri's instructions were for tuning
quilled instruments.
By the early 18th century, when many harpsichord-builders began to build
pianofortes as well, variations in pitch seem to have been less wide than earlier
(see II. C. below). Yet after 1732, J. G. Walther, in the manuscript additions he
made to his own copy of his Lexicon, added to this article on Jakcb Adelung
information about a harpsichord that stood in tief Cammer-Ton and could
be raised by a device to normal Cammer-Ton and even a semitone higher.
And Burney (1771, p. 181-182) describes a combination harpsichord and piano-
forte, built under the direction of Frederick the Great, with a keyboard that
could be shifted over the range of a minor 3rd.
II. B. Voice-Ranges
While the evidence of instrumental pitches is so variegated, voice-ranges ought
to offer clearer guidance, since there is no reason to believe that the natural limits
of human voices have varied significantly in pitch over the centuries (though
methods of voice-production and taste have undoubtedly changed since 1600).
In considering the early evidence it must be remembered that the gamut of
20 degrees ("GABcde f gab [or bb] c1 d1 e1 f1 g' a' b [or bb] c2 d2 e2"•) was
not what to the modern reader it seems-a series of pitches- except when tied
to a particular instrument at a particular time and place. Thus "e2" represented
not a pitch but simply the note at the upper end of the pattern of tones and
semitones:
TTSTTSTT or TTSTT or T T
ST ST
Staff-notation mostly stayed within the limits "F"-"e2" until about the middle
of the 15th century. Since the overall compass of human voices varies and is
generally wider than this, the location of the gamut pattern within the pitch

continuum was doubtless higher in some places and lower in others. We know
too little about how the upper and middle voices were sung in each work
to draw definite conclusions. The top voice in 4-part writing was regularly can-
tus, discantus, or superius, even when it was notated in tenor clef (e.g., Josquin,
Missa Mater Patris; Pierre de la Rue, Requiem).
II.B. 1. Of Moderate Size. a. Primarily in Chant. (1) Schlick

It has been stated above that Schlick's reason for treating the pipe-length he
recommends as "F" is to suit the voices in the accompaniment of (or alternation
with) plain-chant. The recommendation and the arguments Schlick presents
to support his choice are contained in his second chapter, where there is no
mention of mensural music except in connection with the transposing mechanism
he has on his organ and uses daily. (By this mechanism, he says, if the bass
part in a polyphonic piece goes down to "Bb" or "A", say, and this is so low
that the bass voices cannot be heard clearly enough, all the manual and pedal
keyboards can be shifted a major second to the right. Then the keys that would
normally govern the "BV"-and "A"-pipes will govern pipes a tone higher. Some
organists, he says, would hardly know how to transpose a piece a whole-tone
upwards, using "F#" and "C#" in place of "E" and "B"; this mechanism does
the transposing for them.) For accompanying or alternating with plain-chant,
the purposes to be achieved by the transpositions he recommends are three:
1. To accommodate the bulk of the chant repertory in the smallest compass
compatible with 2.46
2. To avoid having to play any of the characteristic half-steps of the modal
species on keys other than "B-C", "E-F", and "A-B"'.
3. To make it possible to use the pedal keyboard, which is to have the compass
contra"
"F--c" (Bl. vir)47 both for accompanying the chant with a "frey bass
and for playing most chant-melodies themselves. (Of course, melodies with a
range bigger than a 12th could not be played on the pedals.)
Mendel (1948, p. 37-42) emphasized Schlick's Purpose 3, and wrote as if
Schlick's desire to be able to play the chants in the pedals was for the sake of
playing in unison with the singers. Actually, the organ was doubtless used more
frequently in alternation with the choir (or both in alternation and in unison or
octaves).
N. Meeuis (1972) points out that the first reason Schlick gives for his choice of
pipe-length is to make the organ suitable for playing free counterpoints against the
chant-melodies. But this is not instead of playing the melodies themselves: in the
46 Balmer (1935, p. 256-258) quotes passages from several mediaeval treatises, which explain the
choice of "d, e, f, g" as the natural finals of the modes on the grounds that they lie in a part of the
voice that leaves room above and below for the ambitus of the modes, and that is especially effective.
Schlick's purpose in transposing Modes 1, 3, and 6, then, agrees with the reasons these theorists
give for the convenience of the untransposed positions. This fact may throw some light on the
pitches the theorists had in mind, but to fully understand it one would have to know how the
chant-repertories they were dealing with compared with Schlick's.
47 In the facs. ed. of 1959, the verso of each folio appears opposite its recto.

A. Mendel:Pitchin WesternMusicsince1500 49
versets of hymns and canticles which the organ played in polyphony alternating with
the choir's unison singing, the chant melodies were often in even long notes (as in
Schlick's Gaude Dei Genetrix48) either above or below one or more free counterpoints.
Doubtless many organists, who had more manual than pedal facility, played the chant-
melodies on the pedals whether the counterpoints were above or below them. In
explaining that on an organ of his recommended pitch, first-mode melodies will have
their final on "g" (with a signature ?), Schlick first speaks about the advantages for
playing "frey bass contra" beneath them. But in the next sentence he says: "Auch
den Chor gesang in dem pedall zu fiiirn das sunst uff den andern wercken So ytz be-
stimpter gesang up dem dsolre gespillt werden mup / sich nicht als woll schickt des
pedals halb uber sich in die octaven / unnd haher darnach der Chor gesang und
ander bap contra zii zeiten begern / der organist w6ill dan das manuall ziim vortheill
nemmen wie dan ufpwendig deutscher lanndt bigher manualiter zii spiln der brauch
gewest ist" (Bl. iiv). Why will the first mode on "d" not suit the pedals well on
organs in which the recommendedpipe-length is used for "c"?Becausechant-melodies
as well as bass counterpoints to them "sometimes rise to the upper octave [of the final]
and beyond", and the "F-c'" keyboard does not, so that the organist will have to
play them "manualiter".
Schlick specifies that all the keyboards are to be fully chromatic, including the low
"FO"and "G#","in plain-chantand otherwise for good consonances",and says that the
fact that not everyone knows how to use the "semitones" is not sufficient reason to have
a whole organ made incomplete (Bl. viv). In the instructions for his system of (a sort of
mean-tone) temperament he explains that the "g#" will not be as well in tune as the other
tones. But this, he says, does not matter so much since the "go" is used [mainly] in
cadences on "a", and need not be sustainedlike the other voices, but can be ornament-
ed in various ways (Bl. xvi).
These things seem at first to throw doubt on the reasons for limiting transposition
to the interval of a 4th upward (Schlick's way of accomplishing Purpose 2). Clearly
organists are used to raising various tones by a chromatic semitone for leading-tone
cadences on various degrees, and (although Schlick does not specificallymention this)
lowering them in order to perfect augmentedfourths-that is, for musica ficta. But he
twice explicitly recommendsavoiding the transposition of chants in such a way as to
necessitate playing "mi in dsolre" or "mi und fa [in] elami . . . [oder] in ffaut" on
characteristicdegrees of a mode-an expedient "not -familiarto everyone.., which for
some organists is difficult or impossible" (Bl. iiiv, ivr).
Figure 1 shows on Staff I the compasses (o = final) of the eight modes accord-
ing to Meier (1974, p. 30) and Apel (1958, p. 148-152), compiled by merging
what these two writers say. The Apel ranges are those Apel calls "excessive",
and in them he takes account chiefly of downward extensions of normal modal
ranges. Excluded here are any exceptional pitches occurring only in solo sections.
Wagner (1912, p. 453 ff.) notes that of about 300 (chorally sung) introits and
communions, less than 10 per cent exceed an octave in range, and less than 3 per
cent reach a loth, whereas of 114 (responsorial) graduals almost 20 per cent reach
an 11th and a few even a 12th. (Schlick does not mention any responsorial chants;
clearly he is primarily concerned with accommodating the organ pitch to choral
unison singing.) Pitches in parentheses are those that Meier calls rare, or that
occur in Apel's tables and not in Meier's.
48 See footnote 36.

Mode Figure 1
I
1 2 3
II
III
(
IV
"
O O _ i
4 5 67 8
i--•
,,wL _\ t ,
-A
M
--il'
. 0 !(
* Schlickindicatesonly final, not range.

** Not playableon Schlick'spedalswith final on e.
On Staff II appear the untransposed compasses of the specific chants named

by Schlick for each mode (or otherwise indicated by him) to illustrate the ad-
vantages of his system; on Staff III appear the compasses of Staff I, transposed
or not according to Schlick's instructions; on Staff IV the possible accommoda-
tion of these compasses (and those of Modes 2, 4, and 8, which Schlick does not
mention) an octave lower on Schlick's pedal keyboard.
As Staff II shows, it is only for Modes 1, 3, and 5 that Schlick gives indications
of the compasses he has in mind, or examples from which they can be deduced.
The overall compass of these three modes, untransposed (Staff I) is apparently
"A-g'", a 14th. By the transposition Schlick suggests (Staff III), this would
remain a 14th: "c-bb'". But the low "c" Apel gives for Mode 5 is rare, and
while Schlick does not suggest transposition of this mode, the few chants in
which "c", "d", or "e" occur could easily be accommodated by the transposition
of the final to "bb", which he does recommend for Mode 6. That would reduce
the overall compass for these three modes to an 11th: "f-bb". Schlick does not
make any suggestions for Modes 2 or 4, but the suggestions in brackets on Staff

IV seem consistent with his purposes. They bring almost all the modal compasses
within the 12th "F--c" (the compass of Schlick's pedalboard), an octave below
where they were sung.
Schlick considers the placing -of the finals of both Modes I and 7 on "g" doubly
advantageous. It serves Purpose 1; and, it is convenient for some chants (Bene-
dicta sit semper and the "last" Et in terra) which begin in Mode 7 or 8, with the
final on "g" and a major third, and which later, by changing the "'b" to "bb",
become Mode 1 or 2 transposed. On organs "ein quint grosser" (where the pipe
he recommends for "F" is used for "c") he has stated that it is customary to
play Mode 1 on "d" and Mode 7 on "c". But if one played one -of these chants of
mixed mode on "d", the variable third degree would fall on "f#" and "f" ("mi
und fa in ffaut"), and if one played it on "c" the variable degree would be on
"/e" and "eo" ("mi und fa/elami") and these "nit ein iglicher geiibt hat".
Schlick says that melodies in Mode 3 that "hover too long on the upper
octave [of the final] or higher" may be played with the final on "e". In that
position, these melodies, like those with compass larger than a 12th, cannot be
played on Schlick's pedal keyboard, which contains no -octave "e-el" or "E-e"
The chant-melodies when played on the pedals were not necessarily to be
in the same octave as when sung by the choir. 49Doubtless they sometimes were.
When the chant was treated as a cantus firmus in long notes, as in Schlick's
Versets on "Gaude Dei Genetrix," it may have been played on the pedals even
when it was in an inner voice. This is presumably what Schlick means when he
says, in a passage that is not unambiguous:
"... . With the Principals in the ". .. Item mitt den principaln ym
pedal the Octaff goes well, but it pedal geet die octaff wol / doch das
must be possible to turn off the die principaln ab zii ziehen sein /
principalsas well as the Mixture, so man wil das die octaff allein gee/
when one wishes to have the Octaff als auch der hindersatz.
alone.
"../. It is good to be able ". .. Item gut ist das die

to turn off individuallyeach and register ym manual und pedal all und
every one of the stops, manual iglichs in sonderheit ab zii ziehen
and pedal, so that one may be able sein / der ursach/ das mann ein
to play manualiterand pedaliter iglichen gesang dar uff spilen mig
any composition that is set for manualiter und pedaliter der mit
equal voices. For this is not gleichen stymmen gesetzt ist / dann
suitable on any organ on which der schicktsich uff kein
[all] the pedal [stops are] an orgell do das pedal ein
octave or more lower than the octaff oder meer under dem manual
manual, for there the good ist die gutte species von con-
species of consonances are sonantzen werden verkert und
inverted and altered: the 5ths verandert/ als uIRden quinten
49 Mendel (1948, p. 100--101) misunderstood Schlick as meaning that they were.

become 4ths and the 3rds werden quarten / u13den tertzen

become 6ths etc. Therefore it is sexten etc. Deg halben nott ist
necessary to turn off the die principalnab zii ziehen dem
principals, so as to preserve the gesang sein art zii lossen. und
nature of the composition.And das ist zii thon wan die principaln
this is to be done when the Prin- ym manual / und die octaven in dem
cipals in the manual and the pedal mit einander geen oder uff
Octaves in the pedal are in andern registern do das pedal nit
unison, or on other stops when ein octaff under dem manual ist /
the pedal is not an octave lower sonder gleich stymmen sein."
than the manual but in unison with (Bl. xir)
it."
As has been mentioned above, if one takes the length of Schlick's line at
face value, his recommended "F" would have been from 2 to 3 semitones lower
than ours--say, a slightly high D. This would mean that the 12th within which
Schlick's transpositions encompass most chant melodies would have been between
our d and a1 or our eb and bb1. These are possible ranges for a choir consisting
exclusively of tenors, but they are a 3rd or a 4th too high for a choir composed
of both tenors and basses. And there is good reason to believe that Schlick's
choir, or the choirs he had in mind in writing the Spiegel, included both (Pietzsch,
1963, p. 659ff.). Mendel (1948, p. 41) suggested that a comfortable 12th for
a group -of assorted men's voices would be about our A-e'. E. Cardine*, who
for years was responsible for giving the pitch from the organ to the monks of
Solesmes, and with J.-G.-M. Gajard determined the pitches at which they sang
for their recordings, would make such a 12th or even B-f#1. But Cardine
was able to consider not only the compass but B--f1
also the tessitura of each chant
and was free to choose transpositions involving sharps and flats that in Schlick's
day would have been beyond the ken of most organists.
So if one locates Schlick's pedal compass of "F--c'" at our Bb-i-f, give or
take a semitone, for the Principals, and an octave higher for the voices, this
would seem to be as close an estimate as one can make from his transposition
instructions. This would make his recommended pitch-standard 6 to 8 semitones
lower than a = 440 for the Principals. The voices, then, would have sung every-
thing about 6 to 8 semitones lower than the notation of Staff III would indicate
at a1 = 440. This would place their pitch for Mode I and (usually) Mode 3
about I to 3 semitones, and Modes 5 and 7 about 6 to 8 semitones, below
what their original notation in the chant-books (equivalent to that on Staves I
and II) would indicate at today's pitch.
If one assumes that Schlick meant the Principals in the pedals to be an octave
lower than the is why one must 'be able to turn them off at
times-then 'hismanuals--which
largest pipe, which he calls "F", must sound an octave lower
than the lowest note of his suggested vocal range for the chants, i.e., about
equal to our Bb4. But if a pipe 2080 mm. long sounds approximately our D,
a pipe sounding Bbl would be about 2620 mm., which is 9.4 Heidelberg feet or
8.3 Rhenish feet. If one allows for the end-correction, this might have been

thought of as a 10' pipe (Heidelberg) or a 9' pipe (Rhenish). Organ-contracts

or descriptions sometimes give the length of the longest pipe as 10' - rarely
if ever as 9'. But if the pipe were thought of as 10' then the one "ein octaff
grosser" would be 20', and this cannot be what is meant since Schlick implies
that a 20' pipe is longer than the one "ein octaff grosser". Thus, to add to all
the other uncertainties, there is a conflict between what he says about the
pipe-length and what he says. about transposition of the modes: if the line is
correct, his notated vocal range is too 'high; if the latter is correct (as seems
more likely, since it is specified in considerable detail) the line is too short.
II. B. l.a. (2) Earlier Transpositions
Transpositions such as Schlick's were not new, and presumably they were
not conscious on the part 'of the singers, who were concerned only with relative
pitch.50 Their chant-books presented the melodies notated with their finals
mostly in the regular positions ("d", "e", "f", or "g"), but when Schlick's choir
sang a first-mode piece, for example, they took the pitdh the organist gave them
as "d"; it was 'his "g", so that his "d" (and accordingly his pitch-standard) was
for this mode and for modes 3 and 6 a fourth lower than theirs. Cerone (1613, col.
494) describes this attitude .on the part of singers, in connection with a table of
clefs that are equivalent for solmization purposes:
Vnedbsh1 tiq
Qurd~:
onra-Fl
remarking: "Concluyremos pues que algunas Claves, puntualmente se parecen, en
todo lo que toca al leer, y al hazer de las Mutan?as; mas diffieren solamente en las
letras e posiciones [pitch-names]; la qual differenga (como dixe) no es de con-
50 Schlick's contemporary Ornitoparchus (1517, Lib. 4, Cap. 8) summed up the treatment of the modes
concisely (perhaps too concisely): ". . . autentorum tonorum cantica profunde, subiugalium acute,
neutralia vero mediocriter intonent. Hec enim in profundum, illa in acutum, verum ista in utrunque
tendunt". (Translated by Dowland, 1609: "The Songs of Authenticall Tones must be tuned [misprinted
in the original: timed] deepe, of the subiugall Tones high, of the neutrall, meanly. For these goe deep,
those high, the other both high and low." Nearly a century later, Morley (1597, p. 156) is horrified when
his student brings him a passage that ends on a c-minor triad, with a 2-flat signature and all the "A"s
flatted: ".. . you have set it in such a key as no man would have done, except it had beene to have plaide
it on the Organes with a quier of singing men, for in deede such shiftes the Organistes are many times
compelled to make for ease of the singers... you shall not find a musician (how perfect soever hee be)
able to sol fa it right, because he shall either sing a note in such a key as it is not naturally, as la in C sol
fa ut, sol in b fa b mi, and fa in a la mi re, or then hee shall be compelled to sing one note in two several
keyes in continual deduction, as fa in b fa b mi and fa in a la mi re immediately after one another...;
and what can they possiblie do with such a number of flat b
b, which I coulde not as well bring
to passe by pricking the song a note higher?"
Surveys and explanations of transposition instructions in mediaeval treatises are contained in Balmer
(1935, p. 260 ff.) and in Powers (1979).

sideracion ci cerca del Cantante; el qual no considera otra cosa mas, que entonar
sus vozes [Guidonian syllables] rectamente, con la observacion los interualos
de Tono y Semitono." ,de
Some melodies, however, had traditionally been written in transposed notation
in the chant-books. Apel (1973, p. 151) speaks for example of the 2nd-mode
offertory Tollite portas, transposed up a 5th, as "unique in the entire repertory
of Gregorian chant because of its two-octave range": "F--f1". In its transposed
position its final was "a", its range extended (in its second verse, sung by a soloist)
a 10th below its final. In untransposed position, this would have taken it down
to "Bbl", below the lower limit of the gamut. But it may be that originally parts
of this melody-and of others whose notation in surviving sources involves
exceptionally wide ranges-were in practice transposed, so that the actual ranges
were considerably reduced (see Steiner, 1966, p. 169-171). And some entire
melodies were notated with their finals transposed up (or, less often, down) a 4th
or 5th, despite the fact that if notated in regular position they would not trans-
gress the limits of the gamut (Powers * and Idem, 1979).
The reason for a notated transposition up a 5th was sometimes that the gamut
theoretically contained "BV"in its lowest octave, but not "Bb". Thus if in modes
1 or 2 a major third below the final was desired, this could be obtained by placing
the final on "a", a 5th higher than its regular position. (The 6th degree of the
protus, like the 4th degree of the tritus, was traditionally at least as often flat
as natural.) Transposition upward by a 4th was also common. (It was known in
mediaeval terminology as "transformation", because it moved the mode from can-
tus durus, in which "B'"s for the most part prevailed, into cantus mollis, in which
the "B"s were flatted.) But both transpositions were applied mainly to chants of
nominally low tessitura - partly, no doubt, for what has here been termed Schlick's
Purpose 1: to bring all the chants within a smaller compass than the notation
would imply. Sometimes, too, the reason was Schlick's Purpose 2. A protus
melody with occasional major third degree could be notated with final on "g"
and its variable third degree on "bb"'or "bW";a deuterus melody with occasional
major second degree could for the same reason be notated with final on "a".
II. B. 1. a. (3) Bermudo. (a) Kyrie, Sanctus, Agnus, and Hymn Chants
For Bermudo (1555, Libro quarto, Cap. xxvi ff.), Sdhlick's Purpose 3 would
have been irrelevant: he does not mention pedals. And Purpose 2 had become
obsolete: he expects the organist to be able to transpose the modes to positions
calling for signatures of up to 2 flats or 3 sharps. (The reason for not going
further is the unequal tuning of the organ.) To accommodate the choir, he says
modes (modos) 1 and 2 can end on any white key except "F"; modes 3 and 4
on "A", "B", or "D"; modes 5 and 6 on "C", "D", or "G"; and none of these
modes on any other white key, "por el organo que ahora tenemos". Modes 7
and 8 can end on any white key except "B". In addition, two modes can end

on black keys: mode 4 on "F#" or "C#", and mode 6 on "Bb" or "Ev".51 What
this amounts to, as he says, is that a mode can be played in any position that
does not cause a tone that has been tuned as "fa" ("Bb" or "EW")to be used as
"mi", or one tuned as "mi" ("F#", "G#", or "C#") to be used as "fa".
These instructions do not, of course, give any clue to absolute pitches. Clearly,
they are intended to accommodate a variety of pitch-standards, "porque todos
los organos no son yguales, y en todos los choros no cantan ygualmente". But
in Cap. xxxiiij there are such clues. Bermudo recommends that on organs on
which the "c" pipe is 61/2 to 7 palmos long or 13 to 14 palmos, the modes should
be played as follows (compasses according to Meier and Apel, as in Figure I,
Staff I, except where otherwise indicated by Bermudo):
Mode
1 a(4 42 34
(13-palmos
organ)
5 6 *(a)> 7 E) 8
,) •(
Bermudo's notated range for the 13- or 14-palmos organ (in alternation with
the choir in Kyrie, Sanctus, Agnus, and hymn dhants), is then "G-d$ (el,
f1)'".
What frequencies might be represented by this notated range? The smallest
value of the palmo known to De Graaf * is 192 mm. (Teruel). A pipe 61/2 of these
palmos in length would measure 1248 mm. The smallest circumference likely
for this length is perhaps 1/7 of the length. On the assumption that Bermudo's
palmo was this very short one and that the circumference would 'have been
about 178 mm., and on the further assumption of likely dimensions for the
mouth, the pitch of his pipe of 61/2 palmos would be nearly a semitone lower than
a1 440, and his 7-palmos a good semitone lower still. If one assumed his
=
palmo to have been at the other extreme- 228 mm. (Alicante) - the pitch would
be three more semitones lower. But even the highest of these hypothetical pitches
would make Bermudo's vocal range the equivalent of our
Gb-db1 (eb1, f1), which
is low for a choir of average male voices. About this, Bermudo is explicit. He
introduces 'his organ-pipe of 61/2-7 (or 13-14) palmos with the sentence: "Lo
primero que se ha de notar para la claridad desta materia es, que los organos
communes de choros donde no ay capilla de cantores de canto de organo [poly-
phonic music] (y mayormente de frayles [clerics]) son en dos maneras".
Thus with Bermudo as with Schlick there is an apparent conflict between the
pipe-lengths and the recommended transpositions. But with Bermudo there is
51 He does not specify the register, using only capital letters for the
transposed finals in this passage
(Libro quarto, Cap. xxvii).

no reason to suspect 'his figures for the pipe-lengths; he refers to them repeatedly
in numerals.
Our calculations of the resulting pitdhes, for Schlick's line as well as for Ber-
mudo's figures, are based on Ingerslev & Frobenius (1947), and for Schlick are
essentially in agreement with Ellis (1880) and Thomas & Rhodes (1971). Our
estimate that the average range of a choir of mixed tenors, baritones, and basses
lies between our A and e1 (f#1) is supported by considerable evidence marshalled
in Miller (1960). At any rate, it can hardly have been as low as the pipe-lengths
would seem to make it.
II. B. 1. a. (3) (b) Psalmody

It is worth noting that while Schlick uses the ambiguous word tonus through-
out, which can mean either mode or psalm-tone, he never refers explicitly to
psalmody, and his only mention of the Magnificat is in mensural compositions.
Thus, while the position of the tenor or repercussa of the psalm-tones may
have had some influence on his choice of organ-pitch and of transpositions,
that influence is never mentioned.
Bermudo gives separate instructions for psalmody, which present problems: "Si
los psalmos quisieren taner: guarden este orden. Todos los modos52 que suben
a la mediacion (come son segundo, tercero, quinto, septimo, y octavo) tanganse
por ffaut ["f"]. Y los que abazan (que son primero, quarto, y sexto) en Gsolreut
["g"]. Aunque los psalmos vayan por los dichos dos signos: entienda el tanedor
la differencia de cada uno para guardarla en el dicho modo." It is not the compass
of the psalm-tones, which is small, but the position of the reciting-tone that
makes transposition desirable. The untransposed reciting-tones of tones 2, 3,
5, 7, and 8, which Bermudo says are to be played "por ffaut", are "f, c1, c1, d',
and c'"; those for tones 1, 4, and 6, which are to be played "en Gsolreut" are
all "a". It does not seem that he intends a distinction between "por" and "en"
or between the capital and small letters for "G" and "f". By "por ffaut" he
cannot mean "with final on 'f"', for that would call for using "g#" as "fa" in
tones 1 and 2 and "f#" as "fa" in tone 3--'which, as he has stated, would result
in out-of-tune consonances "por el organo que ahora tenemos". Nor can "en
Gsolreut" mean that the reciting-tone is to be on "g", since that would mean
using "g#" as "fa" in tones 1 and 6 (which in their regular positions have "bb"
above their reciting tone, "a"). It seems that "por ffaut" must mean with a flat
in the signature, and "en Gsolreut" with a sharp. That would make the reciting-
tones of tones 1, 4, and 6, "e(e'?)"; of 3, 5, and 8, "f(f0?)"; of 7, "g(g'?)". This
keeps all the reciting tones within a minor 3rd-except that for tone 2, which
would be "bb". But the inclusion of tone 2 in the "ffaut" group seems to put
the reciting tone unnecessarily far from the others; and its transference to the
other group would not help.
52 Bermudo uses the word modos in the sense of psalm-tones as well as that of modes, just as many
other writers use the word tonus and its cognates in both senses.

Van der Straeten (1888, p. 271) attributes to the 18th century a manuscript
of the Escorial, which differentiates not between psalmody on the one hand and
Kyrie-, Sanctus-, Agnus-, and hymn-melodies on the other, but rather between
chant and mensural music. It gives different sets of instructions for the two kinds
of music. 52a
It may be that the frequent mention of co-existing organs a 4th or 5th (or
even a 3rd) apart, reflects an earlier use of different organs in one and the same
church (or different sections of "the same organ") for mensural music and for
chant. Praetorius II (1618, p. 102) states that the Halberstadt organ (built in 1361
and rebuilt in 1495), is a major 2nd or a minor 3rd higher than "die unsrige jtzige
Chormij3ige Wercke". He speculates that "lange Zeit vorher alle Werck, wie sie
auch an vorbeschriebene Grc*ssem6gen gemacht seyn, dieweil dieselben alle im
Bapstthumb zu nichts anders, denn zum Choral [chant] gebraucht worden, also in
dem Thon, ... der eine Quart hcoherund Quint niedriger (nach unsrigen jtzigen
gew6hnlichen Thon, sonsten Cammer-Thon genandt, zu reden) fiUrden richtigsten
behalten, und in den vornehmen Stifft-Kirchen noch also befunden."
From the end of the 16th century till the supplanting of the modes in
theoretical writings by major and minor tonality in the early 18t.h, many systems
are proposed, from Banchieri (1614) to Brossard (1703), for bringing the reciting
tones.of all the psalm-tones within the narrow range of the most effective part
of the average male voice. Brossard (1703, p. 205-214), citing the authority of
Jumilhac (1673), recommends placing the dominants of all the modes (or psalm-
tones; the word "Ton" is used for both b'y French writers, cf. footnote 52) on
the same pitch: "A, mi, la": "Par exemple, suppose 1', qu'on aye entonn6 le Deus
in adjutorium de Vepres sur le Son de I'A, mi, la, et que l'Antienne & le pre-
mier Pseaume soient ou du premier, ou du 4e, ou du 6e Ton, comme la Domi-
nante de ces trois Tons est un La, & par consequent le meme Son d'A, mi,
la qui fait le Ton du Chceur, il n'y aura pas grande difficulte a donner le Nom,
et le Son du La au Ton du Chceur. 2'. Si ensuite il vient une Antienne & un
Pseaume du 3e, ou du 4e, ou du 5E, ou du 8e Ton qui ont pour dominante un Ut,
pour lors on donnera le nom d'Ut au Ton du Chceur, mais cet Ut aura toajours le
Son d'A, mi, la".53 Similarly, he says, for Tone 2 the choir will sing "fa", and
for Tone 7, "re", on the same pitdh. This means that the final of Tone 2 ("d") will
be played on "f#" by the organist, the final of Tone 3 ("e") will be played on "c0",
that of Tone 5 ("f") on "d", that of Tone 8 ("g") on "e", all with 3 sharps; and
that of Tone 7 ("g") on "d", with one sharp. (The choir's sense of pitch will be
only relative; it will be singing the different psalm-tones at three different pitch-
standards, while still singing the same pitch-syllables called for by the original,
untransposed notation.) For women's and unchanged voices, Brossard recom-
mends the uniform organ-note "d2"for the dominants of all the tones.
52a The instructions are puzzling, particularly because they explicitly state that
they are for the lower-
pitched organ and one of the higher-pitched ones. (Cf. Section II. A. 1.h, above.) Possibly the trans-
positions for mensural music are intended for one pitch and those for chant for the other, but the
instructions do not make this clear.
53 Quoted from the 2nd edition, Paris, 1705, p. 211 ff.

This system carries the principles of Schlick, Bermudo, and Diruta to their
logical conclusion. But what is logical is not necessarily musical, as Nivers (1683)
observed. Strict observance of Brossard's instruction would frequently make for
awkward junctions between successive chants, so slight departures from the one
fixed pitch for all dominants need to be made, which will still confine the organ
notes for these dominants to the narrow range "g-bV" (Howell, 1958). Nivers
states that he gives these pitch-names in terms of the pitch of the Royal Chapel
and most organs of Paris, which he calls "ton de la Chapelle". According to the
information about French organs given above, this was one or two semitones
lower than a1 = 440, so Nivers' recommended dominants were apparently
between our f and our a.
What emerges from our discussion of organ accompaniment of (or alternation
with) plain-chant is that not all chant-melodies could be accommodated without
transposition, no matter what the pitch of the -organ, because there had never
been any single fixed relation between the notation of the chants and the pitch
at which they were sung.
II. B. 1. b. In Polyphony. (1) Diruta

Diruta (1622, Libro terzo, p. 4) had shown transposition of all 12 modes of
Glareanus up a 4th and down a 5th, continuing: "... vi e necessario intendere
un' altra sorte di trasportationi per poter rispondere al Choro in voce commoda,
tanto nel Canto figurato, quanto nel Canto fermo. E perche la maggior parte
de gl'Organi sono alti, fuora del Tuono Choristo, bisogna che l'Organista si
accommodi 't sonare fuor di strada, un Tuono, & una Terza bassa. Et per facilitarvi,
faro sopra a tutti li Tuoni un Duo, & le trasportard in quanti luoghi si
pu6 trasportare, per rispondere al Choro". He then set out the promised duets-
in each of which both voices are in the same mode, their ambitus being an octave
apart-, first in the "corde naturali" and then transposed not only down a major
2nd and a minor 3rd, but also down a 4th (modes 5, 7, and 8), up a major 2nd
(mode 2), down a 7th (mode 9), up a 4th (mode 2), and down a 5th (modes 5, 7,
9, 12). (There is a similar but not identical set of transpositions for the tones of
the Magnificat.)
Thus for polyphony Diruta proposes many different pitch-relations between
choirs and organs, because, he says, organs are mostly (!) at a higher pitch
than "Tuono Choristo", or anyway at a different pitch. This statement both
implies that in Italy there was (in concept, at least) a sort of standard pitch
and asserts that most organs were not at that "standard".
II. B. 1. b. (2) The "Chiavette"

While pieces for fewer than 4 voices (like those of Diruta) were not rare,
composers and theorists throughout the 16th and into the 17th century thought
most often of a norm54 of 4 voice-ranges, separated approximately as follows:
54 There were, of course, many exceptional pieces.

Superius
us5thor4th
Altus
4thor5th
Tenor
5thor4th
Bassus
Since clefs were traditionally placed on staff-lines (not -spaces), the difference
of a 4th between ranges could not be exactly accommodated by them. Two
clef-combinations became most common, later dubbed
,,chiavinaturali" ,,chiavette"
5th 5th
3rd 5th and A 3rd 3rd
5th
The original purpose of different clefs had been practical: to accommodate dif-
ferent ranges. But the purpose of these clef-combinations gradually became sym-
bolic (as well?): to identify different modes (Ehrmann, 1924; Meier, 1953, 1957,
1974; Hermelink, 1960; Miller, 1960). Was this a simple exchange of function, i.e.,
did the clef-combinations lose their significance for pitch in acquiring their
significance for mode? There has been strong disagreement on the answer to
this question.
Kiesewetter (1820), observing that the nominal range of pieces notated in the
chiavette was a 3rd higher than that of those in the chiavi naturali, rejected the
idea that this notation could mean what it seemed to mean. In either clef-
combination, he noted, the range of each voice stayed mainly within the 11th
that could be notated on the staff without leger-lines, whereas if the music
notated in the one combination had really been intended to 'be sung a 3rd higher
than in the other, the overall range required of each voice without the use of
leger-lines would have been a 13th - and in both combinations occasional leger-
lines were used, making the overall range still larger. He attributed the limited
range within each combination to the "sehr richtigen Gefiihle der alten Meister,
welches die hachsten Tane der Discant-Stimme, so wie alle in der Hahe erzwun-
genen Thne jeder andern Stimme, dem Effecte des (alla capella)
und seiner nicht Kirchengesangs.
fiir nachtheilig, Wiirde angemessen hielt", implying that the
same feeling would have prevented them from stretching the ranges by a 3rd
through the use of different clefs. He rejected equally the possible explanation
that pieces notated in one combination were intended for one group of singers
and those notated in the other for a different group, remarking that "Stimmen
von zufiillig um einen oder einige Thne verschiedenen Umfange im Chor sehr

wohl zusammenwirken kcennen, und dass dieser durch eine solche Sonderung
nichts gewinnen, sondern nur verlieren kc6nnte".55
Thus he came to the conclusion that the chiavette must indicate transposition.
For this he found support in Paolucci (1765)--which still remains the earliest
source known to use the terms "chiavette" and "chiavi naturali", and calls for
transposition of chiavette-notation down a 4th or a 5th-as well as in certain
organ-accompaniment parts of the period marked "per quartam deprimitur" or
"una quarta bassa", etc. Despite these indications of transposition involving
the change of only ? or one # in the signature for the organist, Kiesewetter
recommended, "mit Riicksicht auf die Organisierung des heutigen Singchores"
(in which, unlike 16th-century choirs, women sang the soprano and alto parts),
transposition downward by a minor third. This appealed to 'him doubtless even
more than it does to modem musicians, since vocal parts in sacred music were
still written (as they continued to be by composers as late as Verdi and Brahms)
in CI, C3, C4, and F4 clefs, which were generally familiar to singers, conductors,
and organists.
Mendel (1948, p. 130)s5 wrongly implied that Kiesewetter had not suggested that
transpositionby a 3rd was the 16th-centurypractice.Actually, although the only early
16th-century precedents Kiesewetter cites involve the 4th, he does in one paragraph
(col. 130) suggest that in the 16th century the difference of a 3rd between the staff-
positions of the two clef-combinations made 3rd-transpositioneasy for the singers.
But elsewhere (col. 153) he clearlyunderstandsthat "Nur mit Raicksichtauf begleitende,
oder vor und zwischen den Siitzen spielende Instrumente,und nur um dieser willen,
ist die Wahl des [notierten] Tones far ein ganzes Stiick von Belang. Far einen blossen
Singchor ist die Wahl des Haupttones nur in Beziehung auf den Umfang und die Lage
der Stimmen zu beraicksichtigen;an und fiursich ist sonst der [notierte] Ton ... die
gleichgiiltigsteSache . . ."
But Kiesewetter's suggestion of 3rd-transposition was so neat and convenient
that it was taken up by Bellermann (1877, Cap. VI), who, developing a hint by
Kiesewetter, extended it (mutatis mutandis) to the "low chiavette": C2, C4,
F3, F5, a 3rd below the "chiavi naturali". Its supposed origin in 16th-century
practice was accepted by Ambros, Riemann, Kroyer, Haas, Jeppesen, etc., as a
fact, and arguments to the contrary by Ehrmann (1924) and Schering went for
the most part unheeded. Mendel (1948, p. 336-357) presented new evidence to
show that the transpositions most commonly applied to chiavette notation in
its own time were down a 4th when the bass used the F3 clef (and/or had a in
the signature) and down a 5th when it used the C4 clef (and/or had no ? in the
signature). Praetorius III (1619, p. 80-81) had stated a form of this practice
as a rule: "Ob zwar ein jeder Gesang, welcher hoch . . transponiret
werden mu. ..." But that the word "mufr claviret.
" is too strong is evidenced by Caspar
Vincentius, who served as organist in Speyer, Worms, and Wiirzburg, and who
55 Kiesewetter was an accomplished singer, and regularly produced and apparently conducted concerts
in his home, specializing in vocal music of the 16th century.
56 The column-numbers are those of the Leipzig AmZ, more generally accessible than the Vienna
journal.

wrote Bassus generalis parts to two great collections: Schadaeus (1611), contain-
ing works by Palestrina, Gallus, HaBler, the Gabrielis, etc., and Lassus (1604, but
the Bassus generalis not published until 1625). In a prefatory note to Part II of the
Schadaeus, Vincentius comments that he has not used any transposition, but that
anyone at his pleasure, especially in pieces having a tenor clef [in the organ part],
may transpose [down] either a 4th or a 5th, and that the latter will be particularly
easy if the organist imagines a bass clef with a instead of the tenor clef.
Morley (1597, p. 165-166) and Glareanus (1547, p. 364) had condemned57
the transposition of pieces written in particularly high or low registers for special
expressive *or text-illustrative purpose, 'but Mendel (1948, p. 139-140) cited
both the Lamentations of Carpentras and Josquin's "Absalon, fili mi" as each
being notated at two different pitch-levels in -different 16th-century sources.
He also brought forward a number of examples of works by Palestrina, Lassus,
Anerio, and particularly Schiitz, for which a keyboard accompaniment or a
tablature was transposed a 4th or a 5th down. Fedethofer (1952) and Miller
(1960) added a number of 17th-century examples. Schonsleder (1631, p. 66ff.)
seems to have been the first to mention all four of the "high chiavette" (to use
the later terminology)-G2, C2, C3, F3 - as a set, in which he says he is "amazed
to see the majority of musicians customarily writing many of their songs, although
they know that if anyone wishes to sing them they will have to be transposed
downwards".
There are other indications that such transposition was implied. Mendel (1948,
p. 354 f.) showed that in Palestrina's Missa de beata Virgine a 4 (1567) the
overall ranges of the individual voices, if the sections notated in the chiavette
are read as notated, are a 14th for the bass and soprano, and a 13th for the
tenor. Within any individual section (where the clefs are unchanging), on the
other hand, no voice has a compass greater than a 12th. But if the chiavette
sections with a in the signature are transposed down a 4th, and those without
the flat down a 5th, the compasses of the soprano, tenor, and bass are all reduced.
This is suggestive rather than conclusive. Miller (1960, p. 85-90) gives more
striking examples of isimilar situations: in Landi's San Alessio (1634), where, if the
seven scenes notated in chiavette were sung as written, four of the six soprano
rbles would have a range of a double octave extending to "c31' (possible; but
probable?); and in the "Aeolian" piece in Le Jeune (1608), of which the first and
third sections are notated in the chiavette, while the middle section is in the
chiavi naturali with a signature-flat. The notated range of each of the parts except
the taille is about two octaves--larger than for any other piece in the collection--
and no other piece contains any clef- or signature-change between sections.
The overall ranges would be reduced by chiavette-transposition.
The reason why theorists' instructions and the practice of composers in some
of the examples cited involve a 4th or a 5th as transposition-interval is undoubt-
edly that they wished to avoid requiring the organist to supply more than one
57 For conflicting interpretations of Morley's discussion, see Mendel (1968, p. 137-139, 231-234) and
Hermelink (1956, and 1960 p. 90-93).

signature-accidental. Indeed, as late as 1636 Schiitz in the preface to his Musica-

lische Exequien finds it necessary to explain his use of even one signature-sharp:
"Den Bassum Continuum habe ich den S ingern zum Vorteil / und zu beriirung
deren auff der Orgel zu diesen Wercke mir geffilligen chorden eine Quarta nied-
riger transponiret, ohngeachtet mir nicht ohnwissend / daf3ad Quintam inferius,
es auff der Orgel natiirlicher kommen / damit auch vielleicht den ohngeiibten
Organisten eines theils besser gedienet gewesen were." His -only reason for
choosing the less convenient 4th instead of the 5th must have been his preference
for a higher pitch, and this implies that he expected some agreement in organ-
pitch among the users of the edition. Our table of German organ pitches suggests
that indeed they varied within fairly narrow limits in Schiitz's time and region,
and a glance at the Schiitz entry in Eitner's Quellenlexikon will show that copies of
his works circulated mainly there.
F. A. Gore Ouseley is quoted by Ellis (1880, under 567.3) as saying that the
notated vocal ranges of the church music of Orlando Gibbons (1583-1625)
were 2 to 3 semitones lower than those of his madrigals, and in publishing his 1873
collection of the church music Gore Ouseley transposed it consistently one tone
upward. Fellowes (1921, p. 72), arguing from T. Tomkins's pitch instructions (see
Section II.B.i.b. [3], below) and from a difference between the ranges of the
sacred and secular pieces in Tomkins (1622) as well, wrote: "Thus [in England]
the secular vocal pitch would have been much the same as it is now; the pitch
of Church music (involving that of organs) was more than a tone higher than
modern pitch; while virginals and other kindred instruments were tuned about
a minor third below the pitch of today." (The remark about virginals, etc., is
based on difficulties experienced in attempts to tune them up to modern pitch.)
But Fellowes-while like so many others he cited figures from Ellis complete
to one decimal place-was careful to say that "none of these [pitches] was 4defined
with exact precision" and "it is more than improbable that uniformity of standard
within these three classes was even approximately observed".
Andrews (1962) presents evidence that in Byrd's Psalms, Sonnets, and Songs
(1588) the presence of a baritone clef in the lowest part indicated transposition
down a 4th, and of a tenor clef down a 5th. Only if this convention had been
followed would the pieces Byrd lists as "those songs which are of the highest com-
passe" (all except one of which have a bass clef, and would accordingly not be
transposed down) be higher than the others. Andrews points also to the fact that
in a set of part-books he dates as from the second decade of the 17th century,
5 pieces that had had a bass clef in the 1588 collection are transposed up a 4th, and
2 from the Songs of Sundrie Natures (1589) are transposed up a 5th. "This
pitch untransposed," Andrews writes, "gives an extremely high tessitura for
the superius. It seems to suggest strongly that the chiavette with the tenor
clef for the lowest voice imply transposing a 5th (What remains un-
.down."
explained is why the copyist should have transposed the pieces up only to
have them transposed down again in performance.) Andrews assumes that the
pitch of Byrd's church music was a minor third higher than ours (the 10' organ

pipes for "Fi" discussed below sounding between our Gi and Ai). He shows
that if those of Byrd's Cantiones Sacrae (1589) that originally had a baritone or
a tenor clef for the lowest voice are transposed down a 4th or 5th (respectively)
in observance of the convention, and then back up a 3rd because of the originally
higher organ pitch-which brings them to a pitch one or two tones lower than
their original high notation-the result is "a remarkably uniform and practical
pitch distribution of the outer voices throughout the collection".
II.B.1.b.(3) Organ Transpositions of English Church Music

Caldwell (1970) infers from contrasting transpositions of the Te Deum in
settings by Burton and Blitheman (from the early and late 16th century) on the
one hand, and by Redford (first half) on the other, that they were written for
organs a 5th apart. He suggests that the 15th-century English organ began on
"F", sounding a minor 3rd higher than present-day F, and that the two manuals
of the early 17th-century instrument may have been an 8ve apart in sound but
only a 4th apart in keyboard pattern-one (beginning on "F" at this ihigh pitch,
and the other beginning on "C" but governing pipes an 8ve lower than those of
the "F" manual. He speculates further that by the time of Orlando Gibbons's
Double Voluntary what had formerly been the "F" manual at Westminster Abbey
had become a "c" manual. He notes "that the copyist (Cosyn) refers to the two
manuals as 'ten.' and 'base', and that the written pitch of the music designated
for the former does not go below 'c'".5s In advancing this (hypothesis, Cald-
well disclaims any "wish to convey the impression of invariable pitch-standards
when in fact considerable variety may have existed".
Clark (1974, p. 48), from examination of several 17th-century manuscript
organ-books containing transpositions of vocal works, concludes that "the organ-
ist playing a transposing organ [i.e., an organ whose 10' or 5' pipe was called
"C" or "c"] had to transpose choir accompaniments either up a 5th using a
registration based on a 10-foot stop, or down a fourth with a registration based
on a 5-foot stop [a choice between the two being necessary], in order to keep the
notes required within the keyboard compass. Sometimes he had to alternate
these transpositions within the same composition, or even use them simultane-
ously with one hand on each of the two manuals."
Caldwell does not consider the effect of clefs on transposition-practice. Clark
(1974, p. 41-43) lists several dozen compositions for which the organ accompa-
niments in several 17th-century manuscripts "are actually written a fourth under
choir pitch. These are the ones with the F-clef on the fifth, instead of the fourth,
line... The occasional direction 'play it as it stands'... in every case seems to
have the meaning 'this organ part is already transposed a 4th down' . . . The
58 Transposing keyboards are discussed in Mendel
(1949) and in Marcuse (1952), partly on the evidence
of existing harpsichords, but not of existing organs. Documentary evidence of two manuals a 4th
or a 5th apart on organs is lacking. And, as will be seen, the earliest evidence pertaining to the
pitch and compass of English organs (1613-1614) refers to the lowest note as "dowble Ce fa ut",
not as "F".

direction is even more clear in Morley's Verse Service (Christ Church Ms. 1001
. . .), where the direction is 'play it not fower notes Lower but as it standeth'
and in which . . . the verse sections are transposed a 4th down and the chorus
sections ... a fifth up." Since Clark does not list the original clefs of the com-
positions he discusses, it is difficult to 'know exactly how the transpositions relate
to them.
Indeed the whole question of clefs and transposition in English church music
of the 16th and 17th centuries needs to be thoroughly examined59 before it will
be possible to make secure general statements about the pitch(es) at which it
was performed. So far, Gore Ouseley, Fellowes, Andrews, Caldwell, and Clark
all agree on the hypothesis that English choir music of the 16th and 17th
centuries was for the most part sung at a higher pitch than its notation would
call for today, their estimates of the difference ranging from 2 to 3 (or [Clark:]
even 5) semitones.
(Solo organ music of this period, on the other hand, would have been played as
written. On 10' or 5' "C" organs, it would have sounded 4 to 5 semitones lower than
if so played on today's organ; on 10' or 5' "F" organs [if such there were], it would
have sounded a major 6th to a minor 7th lower, or 2 to 3 semitones higher, than on
today's. Doubtless each organ manuscriptwas written with a particularorgan in mind,
which may account for varying compasses and transpositions.) Clark says: "David
Willcocks, the organist and choirmaster at King's College, Cambridge, indicated to
me (in 1963) that occasionally he prefers a transpositionof [choir music by] as much
as a 4th, which would extend the originalupwardrange of a boy sopranofrom d2 to g2."
But it may be that boys nowadays are called upon for higher tones than in Tudor
times, the range of singers generally (particularlytenors and female sopranos) having
been extended upwards particularlyin opera and under its influence.
Writing about the organ built by Thomas Dallam in Worcester Cathedral in
1614 for Thomas Tomkins, his son Nathaniel Tomkins (in 1665) says that it had
"2 open diapasons of pure and massy metal double F fa ut of the quire pitch &
according to Guido Aretine's scale (or as some term it double C fa ut according to
ye keys and musics) . . .". This seems to mean that "F" in "quire pitch" was gov-
erned by the "C" key of the organ, nominally a 4th lower, so that the pitch-stan-
dard of the organ was a 4th higher tihan"quire pitch"60 (Steele [who inadvertently
wrote "lower" where he meant "higher"], 1958, p. 148). Tomkins goes on to
say that the lowest tone came from "an open pipe 10 foot long. ye diameter 7
inches and an half. (at St. Pauls Lond. ye diameter was 8 inches)".'61 A century
earlier, the organ built by A. Duddington for Alhalowe Barking, "next ye Tower
of London", was also to have a 10-foot pipe for "dowble ce-fa-ut" (Hopkins,
59 The task is not made easier by the fact that Tudor Church Music does not indicate the original clefs.
so While it is strange that Tomkins should refer to the organist's name for the key only in a parenthesis
and with the words "or as some term it", Freeman (1925, p. 66) quotes "a contemporary description",
now in the Worcester Library (Treasurer's Accounts d. 248) as beginning: "2 open diapasons of metall
CC fa ut a pipe of 10 foot long", without mention of any "F".
61 The English foot (the same as the American) has not changed at least since the reign of Henry VII
(1457-1509), and probably since Saxon times (Chisholm, 1877, p. 53; Owen, 1966, p. 131-132).

1877, p. 56-57). The 10' pipe would probably have produced about 50 Hz, a pitch
slightly higher than our G1.62
So Tomkins probably meant "Fi" (not "F") of the "quire pitch", which would
make the organ standard a 5th lower, not a 4th higher. "Of the same . . . dimen-
sion of pipes was ye organ at St. John's Coll in Oxford built within 7 years after
by ye same workman old Tho: Dallam" (N. Tomkins, 1665). The organ at St.
Paul's (presumably one built by Robert Dallam, who left England permanently
in 1642) and the -one at Eton College, built by Thomas Dallam in 1613-1614,
would have been at virtually the same pitdh, as would that by Thomas Harris
at Worcester in 1666 (Freeman, 1925, p. 159 and 1926, p. 69)--if all these pipes
were governed by "C" keys.63
In a printed note appearing in one copy of T. Tomkins's Musica Deo Sacra,
Pars Organica (1668),64 there appears the instruction " sit tonus fistulae
apertae longitudine duorum pedum et semissis; sive 30 digitorum geometricorum"

(Fellowes, 1971, p. 72), along with a corresponding note about tempo (p. 89 f.).
While the note about pitch at first seems like an instruction for organ-builders,
there would have been little purpose in printing such an instruction in a book
of anthems. Further consideration of the precise wording makes it more probably
a performance instruction (like the note about tempo): not "Let the length of
the pipe for -be 21/2 feet", but: "Let be the pitch of a 21/2' pipe",
_
which perhaps should be paraphrased as: "When my father wrote
.10-
in this book, he meant the pitch produced by a 21/2' pipe, whatever that may be
called on your organ". 65 On T. Tomkins's own organ, as well as on Dallam's a
century earlier, it would have been called "C", but the instruction means that
he has notated the anthems at what his son, at least, considered "quire pitch". 66
Clark (1974, p. 36) reports that he "found a Principal pipe with a speaking
length of 10 feet and a diameter of 71/2 inches precisely the measurements given
by N. Tomkins for Worcester... The pipe sounds our Gi..." Clark doubts that
10' was the actual length "from the mouth to the top of the pipe. But if a tuning
slot was then cut into the pipe, the pitch would rise accordingly. Therefore it is
62 See footnote 66.

63 Hopkins (1880, p. 593) speculates that Harris's Worcester organ began on Fl.
64 The work was published in 1668 by his son, Nathaniel, but it had apparently been completed by
1649, since Charles I, who was beheaded in that year, is mentioned on the title-page.
6 If this interpretation is correct, it is not true that, as a footnote in Stevens
(1957, p. 33) states,
N. Tomkins's note "shows that the pitch of a n o r g a n [emphasis added] was a minor third h i g h e r
than nowadays", since it is not the organ but the choir whose pitch is being indicated. Stevens cites
Tomkins's letter of 1665, quoted above, as saying that "the lowest note of the Worcester organ
sounded a 10-ft. pipe (FFF)". As shown in footnote 60 above, the name of this pitch on the organ
was not "F" but "C", which Stevens does not even mention.
66 Gore Ouseley estimated the 21/2'
pitch as "a somewhat sharp G" (i. e., "g"). Ellis (1880), to whom
he communicated this estimate (see Ellis's entry under 474. 1), considered it to be "slightly incorrect...
Tomkins's F was the modern concert F sharp". Since Ellis lists London concert pitches of 1877--1879
as about a1 = 455 Hz, his "concert" f # would have been about 191. He does not say how he arrived
at this estimate. Using the methods of Ingerslev & Frobenius (1947), our calculations for the 10'
pipe yield 50.1 Hz and for the 21/2', 200.4, about a quarter-tone above our g.

not impossible that the 10-foot length could have been reduced to result in
a pitch of a second or even a minor third higher than Gi." But it seems improbable
that in times when materials were costly an organ-builder would have made
the biggest pipes so much longer than necessary. Therefore the estimate of G1
to At~ as the pitch -of the Worcester "C" is most likely. 67
While the 4th and 5th were the most common transposition intervals, the
discussion above shows that organists in the late 16th and early 17th centuries
were gradually becoming used to more difficult intervals. These included trans-
position down by a minor 3rd, which Kiesewetter had suggested for modern
performances. The view that this was also the interval regularly implied by the
high chiavette in the later 16th and early 17th centuries was generally accepted
until very recently, and was elaborately presented as late as 1960 by Hermelink.
Actually, the 3-sharp signature for the minor-3rd transposition was the most
complex of those suggested, and then only for a small minority of skilled organists
capable of using it to suit the characteristics of their choirs and their instru-
ments. 68
What is too easy to forget, in all such discussion, is that before the days of
pitch-standardization, the word "transposition" must be understood to have
had a somewhat different sense from the one we normally give it. Where only
voices are involved, it can refer only to differences between the pitches at
which different pieces (or modes, or psalm-tones) were sung at a particular
time and place. Where an organ or other instrument participates, "transposition"
refers only to the sounding of notes called for in the notation by positions
of the fingers, feet, or lips other than those regularly associated with those
notes on the instrument concerned. (A still sense, of course, is that in
,different"in D" -or a horn "in
which the transposing instrument--e. g., a trumpet F"-,
rather than the player, does the "transposing". This way of referring to "trans-
posing instruments" did not become common until the adoption of a standard
pitch made it clear which instruments were transposing.)
67 If the 10' organ had as its lowest pipe "C" (= "F" of quire pitch), and sounded at about our G1,
then choir music played on it without transposition sounded a 4th lower or a 5th higher than if
played on today's organs from the same notation. Why was the lowest pipe called "C" if it was
"F" for the choir? Caldwell believes that "the normal late 15th-century organ descended to written
F". There is considerable evidence that this was true on the Continent in the late 15th and early
16th centuries (see Vente, 1942, passim, and Mendel, 1948, Part II, p. 210--219), but no comparable
evidence for England. Schlick (1511, Bl. ii-iiij) explains its advantages for plainsong. But why did
Duddington's organ of 1519, like Dallam's of 1614, begin on "C"? And why were organs of either
compass built at pitches that so frequently required transpositions in the accompaniment of vocal
music?
Wulstan (1967) deals in answers, not questions. He cuts through, perhaps somewhat too widely,
the confusion that arises from the evidence on English practice here described. He provides practical
guidance for modern singers and organists. But in order to put problems behind him, he relies on
broad assumptions, about the relation of modem to older singing techniques and other matters, that
may not be as secure as he makes them appear. His generous application of common sense to bothersome
complexities- clearly based on much knowledge and thought as it is--must appeal to those who
prefer not to entertain doubts and "get on with it".
68 Meier (1974, p. 73) writes: "H6here Schliisselung... weist auf h6here, tiefere Schliisselung auf
tiefere Lage (wobei selbstverstiindlich nicht eine physikalisch genaue Intonation etwa von 'a' oder 'ein-
gestrichena' gemeint ist)." Clearly, this is sometimes true, but, just as clearly, not always.

A. Mendel: Musicsince1500
Pitchin Western 67
II. B. 2. Exceptionally Low, High, and Wide Ranges

The fact that the gamut ("G--e2") is too small a compass to locate precisely
in the pitch-continuum has been noted above. Presumably there were always
choirs who could sing more than its 20 staff-idegrees. Tinctoris (1476/1875, p. 93
to 102; GoussS IV, p. 36-40) gives instructions and examples for transposing the
modes, so that Modes I and 2 may have as their "irregular" finals "g", "c", and
even "C" (Mode 2 then descending to "Gi"). The examples for the last-named
use the Gamma ut clef on the 4th staff-line, so that the "Gi" appears in the
first space below the 5-line staff. He gives similar instructions for the other
6 modes. In a somewhat later treatise he says that always on the lowest contra-
tenor parts, and often on others, instruments sound beautiful: "Imos tamen con-
tratenores semper: ac sepe reliquos: tibicinibus adjuncti tubicines: ea tuba
quam superius tromponem ab Italis: et saque-boute a gallicis appellari diximus:
melodiosissime clangunt" (Tinctoris, 1487). Thus Tinctoris acknowledges a whole
octave below the lowest note of the traditional gamut, and seems to suggest
that this goes below the effective range of singers, but he does not state what
he considers the lower limit f-or voices, and so gives us no way of establishing
the pitch or pitches he 'had in mind, if any.
Other writers were more conservative. Aaron does not explicitly state the
limits of vocal writing. But in the Toscanello (1539, Cap. XVIII) he gives a table
of final cadences for all 4 parts, in which the lowest note is "F" and the highest
"d2"', while in the Institutio Harmonica (1516, Lib. III, Cap. XXIV) he lists the
notes on which (the top voice of) a composition should begin, and here the
highest note is "e211, so we may take it that he wishes to confine vocal writing
approximately between "F" and "e2", which are not to be exceeded except very
rarely and "non alia quam novitatis culusdam causa". It is, of course, no accident
that the clef-combination that was becoming most common about this time
was Cl, C3, C4, F4, which accommodates precisely this range without the use
of leger-lines - the avoidance of which was the principal purpose of the use of
different clefs.69 The standardization of this clef-combination and the one a
3rd higher ("high chiavette") reflected the prevailing norms of vocal compass.
But no doubt the influence worked in the other direction as well: when Vicen-
tino (1555, f. 80) recommends the compasses shown on page 68, one may wonder
whether he is not perhaps being excessively influenced by the neatness of
the picture they present, particularly when he says that these ranges will be con-
venient "si alle voce buone, come a quelle non troppo gagliarde & potenti . . ."
Zarlino (1558, Quarta parte, Cap. 31), too, says that for any motet or madrigal,
or any other sort of song, "si debbe cercare, che le parti cantino commodamente;
& che non trapassino la Decima, overo la Undecima chorda ne i loro estreme..."
60 Whereas the average modem musician finds it easier to read several leger-lines above or below
the two most common clefs, earlier musicians preferred a variety of clefs and confinement of the notation
mainly to the 11 degrees that can be written on a staff without leger-lines.

Effmpiodei Teremini
delsopramo. delconalto.
Termini
delTnore.
Termini TerminidclBafo.
om
Vicentino's recommended overall compass, like the one implied by Aaron, comes
to 21 degrees. Zarlino is even more restrictive: "Debbe adunque fare il Composi-
tore, che computando la estrema chorda grave del Basso della cantilena con la
estrema acuta del Soprano, non trapassi la Decimanona chorda, ancora che non
sarebbe molto incommodo, quando si arivasse alla Ventesima; ma non piuz
oltra.. ." Morley (1597, p. 55-56) is more realistic: the compasses he gives for
the individual voices, both "in the high key [chiavette]" and "in the low key or for
Meanes[chiavi naturali]," embrace mostly a 10th, some an 11th; the overall range
in the higher clefs is 21 degrees, and in the lower, 20. But he writes: ". .. you must
not suffer any part to goe without the compasse of his rules [staff-lines], except
one note at the most above or below, without it be upon an extremity for the
ditties [text's] sake, or in notes taken for Diapasons [octaves] in the base." 70
From about 1600 on, the influence of virtuoso singers like the famous ladies
of Ferrara, and of the opera, was increasingly felt, and vocal ranges described
became wider. But the ranges of exceptional singers do not throw much light
on pitch problems. It will be best to leave the "theorists" for the moment and
return to the 15th century to consider the practice of composers.
Adam of Fulda (1490, GerbertS, p. 342b, 350a) attributed to Dufay (c. 1400
to 1474) the extension of the system by several notes at each end. Besseler (1950,
p. 27ff.) connects that statement with a group of chansons and motets that he
dates as before 1430, which have a contratenor notated on 6 lines and serving
in the principal cadences as bass, and ending most often 2 octaves below the
top voice. With them he associates a voice added, he thinks by Dufay, to a 3-part
chanson by Pierre Fontaine, which descends to D, and is labelled "Contratenor
trompette".71 In a 3-part song-motet by Binchois, Gloria, laus, et honor, which
Besseler assigns to the same period, the overall compass is "D--bb". In all these j
70 Concerning the "Diapasons in the base" it would be well to keep in mind the instrumental participa-
tion (in what we tend to think of as vocal music) that Tinctoris mentions more than a century earlier in
the passage quoted above, as well as the fact that following Byrd's "Epistle to the Reader" in the 1588
collection, where he speaks of "expressing of these songs either by voices or instruments", the formnula
"Apt for the viols and voices" or a variant of it "appeared on the title-page of almost every [English]
madrigal Set" after 1600 (Fellowes, 1921, p. 77ff.).
71 It is to the Contratenor parts of these pieces that Besseler applies the term Bourdon.

pieces the low Contratenors have no text. This, together with their wide compasses
and prevalence of melodic leaps and broken triads, convinces Besseler that they
are instrumental parts. Other 15th-century pieces that include exceptionally low
notes are (with their overall compasses): Busnois, Joye me fuit, "D" (20 degrees);
Hayne van Ghizeghem, A la Audienche, "D" (21 degrees); Ockeghem, Intemerata
Dei mater, "C" (20 degrees); P. de la Rue, Missae Assumpta est Maria, L'Homme
arme, and Conceptio tua, "C" (21 degrees, according to F. J. Carey*).
Glareanus (1547, Lib. III, Cap. 24, p. 364) comments on how, in Josquin's
De Profundis a 4, the solemn mood of the words is brought home to the listener,
"ut sane modos illos e nativo loco, quemadmodum fere in his fieri alias solet,
in superiora non dimoverit". The motet is notated in C2, C4, F3, and F5, and
has the compass "D-c2" (21 degrees). Glareanus's praise of the fact that the
modes of the motet (which Glareanus called Dorian and Phrygian) are not
transposed upwards "as they often are", may be a warning against transposition
of music written in "low chiavette", as it has been interpreted (Ehrmann, 1924). 72
The chiavette-transposition question is raised, too, by the P. de la Rue Missa
pro defunctis (c. 1515?) for 4 to 5 voices notated in some sections in extraordinarily
low registers (and clefs). The overall compass of the lowest voice is "Bl--a",
and of the highest "e--d2" (each a 14th), while the widest compass of any voice
within a single section is an 11th. The solo intonations are transposed down-
ward-some an 8ve, some a 9th, some a 12th [!], at least as compared with the
notation of the modern chant-books. Blume (La Rue, 1931, p. 3) writes: "Da-
durch reichen Introitus, Kyrie, und Agnus in eine praktisch unausfiihrbare Lage
(Baisse bis Kontra B!), ohne daf eine Chiavette vorltige." The term chiavette,
it is true, would be a double anachronism: it seems not to have been applied
to late-16th-century standardizations of clef-combinations until long after the
fact. But if either the higher-cleffed sections were transposed down or the lower
transposed up, the overall compasses notated for the La Rue Discantus, Tenor,
and Bassus would be reduced to more usual widths.
In Ockeghem's Missa Fors seulement, the Kyrie and Gloria are notated in C2,
C4, C4, F4, and G (F) 3 clefs; the Credo, in C1, C2, C4, C4, and F4. The overall
range of the top voice is "g-e2", of the Tenor "A-f 1", and of the Bassus "C-b",
while the widest range of any voice in a single clef is an 11th. Again, despite
the remark of Plamenac (Ockeghem, 1947, p. xxx) that "there is no suggestion of
'chiavette' ", the suggestion is there.
But it may be misleading. The second voice in the Kyrie and Gloria is called
"Contratenor" (C4); in the Credo the second voice is called "Secundus puer"
(C2). The fourth voice is called: in the Kyrie, "Bassus" (F4); in the Gloria,
"Vagans" (F4); and in the Credo, "Tenor" (C4). (The compasses are about
a 4th higher in the Credo than in the preceding sections.) Here we have the explicit
72
Josquin's Absalon, fili mi descends in the Bassus to "Bbl", like La Rue's Missa pro defunctis.
But none of the voices has a range of more than an 11th, and the highest note in the Superius is
"ab1", making an overall compass for the motet of 21 degrees. This low notation, undoubtedly inspired
by the mournful text, occurs in The British Library ms. Royal 8 G VII, which dates from the reign
of Henry VIII (i. e., 1509-1547). In two German prints of 1540 and 1559 the piece is transposed up a 9th.

indication that different sections of the same Mass were intended for different
singers. The placing of the intonations in the bass in the La Rue Missa pro
defunctis also suggests that the low registers of this work may have to do with
the presence of at least one exceptional singer, whose unusual range it was
intended to exploit. Praetorius II (1618, p. 17) mentions that Lasso's choir in
Munich included "drey Bassisten, zwene Briider die Fischer und eines Bawren
Sohn Grasser genand, ... welche das F nachm Chor Thon zu rechnen (und nach
dem Cammer Thon das Es von 13. Fupen ist) gar starck und mit v6lliger Sti~i
erreichen, in der H8h aber nicht weiter, als big ins f. g. oder a. kommen k6nnen.
Wie dann auch einer zu Rom, mit Namen Caesaron, mit dergleichen Sti~ und
stiircke gefunden worden." 73
The variety of clefs in Obrecht's Missa Caput (the lowest voice has F3 throughout,
but each of the other voices employs three different clefs in the course of the Mass)
and the very wide compasses (both the top and the bottom voices have overall com-
passes of a 14th [15th?] as notated) suggest similarpossibilities. Like Barbireau'sMissa
Virgo parens Christi (a. 1491), Obrecht's Caput has an overall compass of "G-g2".
Busnois's Victimae paschali, too, extends up to "g2,",which Van den Borren (1941,
p. 245) calls "chose extremementrare Licette poque", but its lowest voice goes down
only to "c". In a careful examination of 288 madrigals, comprising 16 books-2 by
Rore, 4 each by Lassus and Palestrina, and 6 by Marenzio-,and 130 5- and 6-part
motets by Palestrina,Miller (1960) found that only Lasso's 6-part Deus in adjutorium
(1582) has an overall compass of more than 3 octaves: "F-a2", 24 degrees.G. Gabrieli's
Lieto godea (1587) also ascends to "a2",but descends only to "A"; the widest range
in any single 6-part piece in Vecchi's Veglie di Siena (1604) is of 23 degrees ("G-a2"
and "A-bb2").
Thus the occurrence of exceptionally high or exceptionally low notes in notation
may, but does not necessarily, imply pitch-standards exceptional in the opposite
direction, though it illustrates enlargement of at least the concept of musical
space (Lowinsky, 1941). Implied transposition may account for such notation
unless:
(1) the overall range or the range of a single voice is exceptionally wide, and
(2) this exceptional range occurs within the confines of a single piece, or single
section of a multi-sectional piece; or
(3) a source of the piece contains an explicit direction not to transpose. 74
But even when all these conditions are fulfilled, we cannot be sure that the
exceptional ranges give evidence concerning the pitch at which they were sung,
because the parts concerned may have been written for exceptional voices, or,
in the period before the participation of particular instruments or voice-types
was normally specified, for instruments.
7s The presence of the brothers Vischer and of Graser is confirmed in the Munich archives (though
without mention of their vocal compasses; Boetticher, 1958, passim).
74 Such directions occur most often, if not always, in organ accompaniments or alternatim movements
that already represent transpositions of the original notation of a vocal piece, as is stated in the
quotations above from Clark (1974).

With the rise of virtuoso singing and the opera, vocal ranges became wider,
and the space within which they might be shifted up and down correspondingly
more limited, as is partially illustrated75 by the following table of compasses
compiled fromPraetorius II (1618, p. 20),Schiitz, Kleine geistliche Concerte (1636),
and Doni (1640, fac. 157). Praetorius sets out the compasses of four vocal cat-
egories on a 20-line staff. To these we have added what he says about the excep-
tional basses in Lasso's choir and about the "gemeine Bassisten in Schulen". The
compasses tabulated for Schiitz take into account the chiavette-transpositions that
he explicitly calls for.
Unlike the compasses cited for the 15th and 16th centuries, these require no
allowance for the possible substitution of instruments. When Schiitz and Prae-
torius have instrumental participation in mind they specify what instruments
they wish, and the Kleine geistliche Concerte are written only for voices and
organ continuo accompaniment. Doni, too, lives in an age and an environment
in which vocal and instrumental parts are clearly distinguished.
On the other hand, all three men may have had solo singers in
min•d-Schiitz,
in these pieces, doubtless mainly so. (Table on p. 72.)
When the overall ranges of the three are compared,

Praetorius Schiitz Doni
*4
Doni's is noticeably higher, particularly at the top. This would suggest that his
pitch-standard was lower, but again the explanation could be that the voices he
was describing really were higher.
In early opera, instruments do, of course, participate, but such performance
parts as survive have not been reported on in detail. In the first quarter of the
17th century, madrigals continue to be written, at first mainly for voices. But
gradually there is increasing participation of instruments, and the madrigal gives
way to the cantata, motet, and anthem, featuring solo as well as ensemble and
choral singing with instrumental accompaniment. Where opera is concerned, it
was not only pitch that changed from town to town, but also casts, and the very
contents of the works themselves. New arias were written in place of old,76 and
old arias were transposed up or down to suit different singers-a practice which
continued far into the 19th century and is not altogether extinct even today.
75 And expressly stated in Praetorius III (1619, p. 82).

76 See, for example, Freeman
(1968, p. 356-385), Powers (1968, p. 259-324), Gossett (1970), and Schmidt
(1975).

PraetoriusII (1618) p. 17, 20 ,,Eunuchus,
Fischer, ,,Bassista" ,,gemeine ,,Tenorista" ,,Altista" Falsettista
Grasser Bassisten" Discantista"
f 0
ll(n
I -o *-4-*
MEE
Schlitz,KleinegeistlicheConcerte,1636: widest individualcompasses
Schiitz,KleinegeistlicheConcerte,1636: overallcompassof eachvoice*
* Thevoicesare not named,so strictlyspeakingthese arethe overallcompassesof all pieceswrittenin the indicat
Doni (1640) fac. 157

Voci gravi Voci mezzane
=
I-*--i .....
.!-- 18n"i)

II.C. Some Pitches in the 18th Century

Bach's overall compasses were in general no wider than Schiitz's. But in his
practices and those of his predecessor, Kuhnau, we have other possible clues to
the pitches at which they performed. Those practices, already described in
Section I. B., may be summed up as follows:
Chor-Ton:
Kuhnau before c. 1701 and Bach in Miihlhausen and Weimar: organ, strings,
voices, trumpets
Kuhnau after c. 1701 and Bach in Leipzig: organ, trombones, and (usually)
trumpets
Cammer-Ton, higher variety, a whole-tone lower than Chor-Ton:
Kuhnau before c. 1701 and Bach in Miihlhausen and (sometimes) Weimar: wood-
winds
Kuhnau after c. 1701 and Bach in Leipzig (regularly): woodwinds, strings, voices
Cammer-Ton, lower variety, a semitone lower still:
Bach in Weimar (more frequently): woodwinds
Bach in Leipzig: woodwinds, strings, and voices on only two known occasions;
this pitch called by Bach "tief Cammerthon".
Until the late 18th century, the pitch of German organs was normally called
Chor-Ton, as is indicated, for example, by the fact that Adlung (1768), in his
many specifications of organs, mentions their pitch only when they were (evidently
by exception) at Cammer-Ton. Clearly, it was common for there to be two levels
of Cammer-Ton. These were sometimes 'differentiated, by referring to the lower
one with the adjective "tief" or otherwise, as in the instances referred to in foot-
notes 8 and 38. From the fact that there was no such common differentiation
of different levels for Chor-Ton, it would seem that that term referred to a more
nearly standardized pitch; but one must remember Adlung's statement, quoted
in Section I. B, above, that one cannot say 'how high Chor-Ton is "because of
the [prevailing] variety".77
Our table of (North-)German organ pitches, in Section II. A.1.h lists almost
equal numbers of 17th-18th-century organs I semitone higher and 2 semitones
higher than a1 = 440. Are we to infer that there existed two varieties of Cammer-
Ton below the lower of these pitches, as well as below the 'higher-i.e., that
in Bach's time there were woodwinds a tone below the higher Chorton, a minor
3rd below it, and a major 3rd below it as well (i. e., a minor 3rd below the lower
variety) ?
Related to this question, though not directly answering it, is the testimony
of Quantz (1752, XVII, vii, ? 6-7) and Agricola (1757, p. 45 f.). This may be
summarized7s as follows (here each of the dividing lines represents the interval
of approximately a semitone):
77 As explained in Section I. B, the terms Chor-Ton, Cornet-Ton, and

Trompeten-Ton, all applying to
organs, seem to have often referred to the same pitch, but sometimes to different pitches.
78 It is quoted at some length in Mendel (1955, p. 469-471).

Quantz: Agricola:
,,Der unangenehmeChorton",as evidenced "Der gewbihnlicheChor- oder Trompeten-
by "old organs". "The other instruments, ton"
such as violins, bass fiddles, trombones,
recorders, shawms, bombardts, trumpets,
clarinets, etc., were also arrangedaccord-
ingly . .. Venetian pitch is at the pre-
sent time really the highest, and almost
like our old Chorton."
"In Lombardy,and especiallyin Venice...

harpsichords and other instruments...
barely (fast nur) a half-tone lower than
the ordinaryChor- oder Trompetenton"
"A-Kammerton... a minor 3rd lower than "A-Kammerton:which makes the a of the

the old Chorton." Chorton instruments sound the same as
the c of the Kammertonones"
Rome and Paris "20 odd years ago" Rome "very low,... almost the same as
former French pitch; [the latter] ... a
major 3rd lower than Chorton... a half-
tone lower than A-Kammerton,which has
been introduced in many places in Ger-
many"
Both Quantz and Agricola write as if Chor-Ton were the name of a single
pitch-standard, so that we must conclude that at least in Northern Germany one
of the two high organ-pitches listed in our table of German organss80was more
common than the other. Conspicuous in our summary of what the two men tell
us are: (1) the slight disagreement on North-Italian pitches; (2) the blank space
between the second and third dividing lines; and (3) the term "A-Kammerton":
(1) The %disagreementis minor. Agricola's phrase "fast nur einen halben
Ton tiefer" is not altogether clear, but seems to mean that the Lombard and
Venetian pitch is somewhat less than a semitone below Chor-Ton. Quantz's
phrase "unserm alten Chortone fast iihnlich" is even less definite, but suggests
a still smaller interval. 81 Doni (1640, p. 181) says Venetian pitch is a semitone
79 "darnach eingerichtet" is somewhat ambiguous; it seems to mean tuned to the same pitch, but
it could mean that some of the instruments transposed accordingly.
Its
8soOur table (in Section II. A. 1. h) cannot claim to be comprehensive or even representative.
contents consist of the data we have been able to gather, but distressingly few organ descriptions
and specifications include information about pitch. Fock (1974) is a rare exception, but this causes
our table to be dominated by instruments built or rebuilt by Schnitger, and specifically by those of
which the history is well enough documented to permit conclusions about their original pitch.
81 Quantz had been in Italy for more than two years in 1724-1727. Agricola's sojourn was more
recent (1751) but shorter. Quantz, as flutist, may have had more occasion to note the precise pitch-
differences from place to place than Agricola, who was organist, singer, and conductor.

higher than Lombard pitch, but this is a century earlier, and Doni's scheme of five
Italian pitches each separated from its neighbor by a semitone is, as suggested
in Section I. A. above, suspiciously neat.
(2) and (3). The care both men took to identify the pitch as "A-Kammerton"
implies an intention to differentiate it from another Cammer-Ton, namely, the
one a semitone higher, which they would have thought of as "B[i.e., B ]-Kammer-
ton", the pitch one whole-tone below Chor-Ton. This higher Cammer-Ton would
belong in the space between the second and third dividing-lines.
Is it possible to locate the pitches listed in this summary fairly closely in the
frequency continuum? Quantz says: "Ich halte ... den deutschen sogenannten
A-Kammerton, welcher eine kleine Terze tiefer ist, als der Chorton, fuir den
besten." He does not advocate the "ganz tiefen franzasischen Kammerton, ob er
gleich fiir die Fltte traversiere, den Hoboe, den Basson, und einige andere Instru-
mente der vortheilhafteste ist.. ."; so his "A-Kammerton" is higher than French
chamber pitch. Agricola is more specific (which need not mean that he is more
accurate, or even as accurate): he says "former French pitch" is a semitone
lower than A-Kammerton, and a major 3rd lower than Chorton, "so daf3 das c
auf der Trompete mit dem e der andern Instrumente fast i-berein k6mmt" (cf.
footnotes 5, 6, and 10).
In France, as elsewhere, different pitch-standards existed side by side. It is
true that Dom B&dos(1766, p. 432) writes: "Le Ton de Chapelle est fixe en France;
c'est le plus a la portie des voix et tous les instruments de musique." But accord-
ing to Rousseau (1768, p. 516): "Dans les Eglises il y a le Ton du Chceur pour
le Plain-Chant. Il y a pour la Musique [i.e., concerted music] Ton de Chapelle
& Ton d'Opera. Ce dernier n'a rien de fixe; mais en France il est ordinairement
plus bas que l'autre." Laborde (1780, I, p. 328) says: "... le ton que l'on prend
actuellement dans toutes sortes de Musique, & particulibrement au Concert
Spirituel, etant beaucoup plus haut que le diapazon, dont on se servait lorsqu'on
a commence t faire usage du Basson, il faut ndcessairement que la longueur
cet instrument soit diminude en proportion . . . Dans les Eglises Cathedrales .de
ordinairement, le ton de l'orgue est fort bas, comme 6tait anciennement celui de
des Innocens, et comme sont encore ceux de la Sainte-Chapelle de Paris
l'lglise
et de la Chapelle du Roi a' Versailles..."
While there are disagreements here, it is clear that any pitch lower than that
of the Versailles chapel in 1789 and of numerous other French organs, about
We are not informed about whether or to what degree either man or both had what is called "absolute
pitch", which in any case must have meant something slightly different before the days of an
international standard from what it does now. There is no reason to doubt that some musicians,
then as now, had the unerring pitch-memory that is the basis of "absolute pitch". (Mattheson, 1721,
p. 21, complains that the profusion of musical examples all written in the key of C makes him tired
"Denn ich schreibe keine Note / die ich nicht in Gedancken mit singe / und zwar in ihrem rechten
Ton.") But this pitch-memory must have been attached to one of a number of current standards.
Its possessor must have been accustomed to allowing for the fact that, for example, the frequency
he had originally (from the first musical instrument he had known) learned to call "a" was called
"bb" in terms of some other instruments, and "a'" or "g" in terms of still others.

a tone below a1 = 440 (see the table in Section II. A. 1. h, above), was looked upon
as exceptional even by Frenchmen. References to "ton de chapelle" are frequent,
but there are few to "ton de chambre", or to the relations of the two (or more)
"standards". A memorandum drawn up in 1679 for the disposition of the Ver-
sailles chapel organ provides for two stops a semitone higher than the rest of
the organ.82 While this provision was never carried out (Hardouin, 1963, p. 2)
it indicates that in 1679 the ton de chambre of the instruments which these stops
were intended to accompany was a semitone higher than the ton de chapelle.
The organ was not built at once, and only a few years later, perhaps under the
influence of Delalande, the two standards were merged, organ pitches being
raised by the builder Alexandre Thierry. (But it is not likely that this standard-
ization was effected throughout France.) A century later, the chapel organ was
substantially rebuilt by F.-H. Clicquot, who lowered the pitch, apparently to
that reported by Cavaillk-Coll and Ellis (a1 = 396). It was rebuilt again in 1817 by
P. F. Dallery, who was not in the habit of changing the pitch of the organs he
rebuilt (Hardouin*). (See also footnote 92.) Von Huene and Haynes put the
lowest woodwind instruments they list at about this Versailles pitch of 1789.
Muffat (1698/1895, p. 24), in the passage excerpted on the opening page of
this article, says that "die Lullisten" (Muffat's French version calls them simply
"les Frangais") use a pitch that is a whole-tone lower than Cornet-Ton, or even
a minor 3rd lower "pour les operas". The ambiguities of this statement have been
pointed out in footnote 10. But no matter how it is read it can hardly indicate
a pitch lower than the low reference-point of Quantz and Agricola83. It seems,
then, that:
"al" of their Chor-Ton would have been about our bl
-----~--- - -E
["a'" of their Cammer-Ton,higher variety would have been about our a1]
"a1"of their Cammer-Ton,lower variety (A-Kammerton)

would have been about our a
"a'" of their "formerFrenchpitch" would have been about our gl
82 The text of the memorandum appears to provide for two identical pairs of stops - one on the
grand orgue and one on the positif-- the first pair a whole-tone and the second pair a semitone higher
than the rest of the organ. The memorandum is printed in Dufourcq (1934, p. 286-287), where the
indicated stops are inadvertently referred to as lower instead of higher. According to Hardouin*,
later documents show that the appearance of two pairs of stops in the original memorandum is mislead-
ing: the second entry merely corrects the first.
83 A solitary and striking pair of exceptions to this lowest pitch are the Rottenburgh flutes mentioned
at the end of Section II. A. 1. b, above.

In the space between the first and second dividing-lines, then, would belong
the lower of the two 'high organ-pitches listed in our table for Germany in
Section II.A.1.h, at about our
bb•.84
Since (1) there were two varieties of Chor-Ton; (2) there seem to have been
no specific names for distinguishing the two, though we may be reasonably
sure that when Chor-Ton and Trompeten- or Cornet-Ton were used inter-
changeably for the same organs, as Kuhnau used them for those of Leipzig,
and Agricola did for his higher reference-point, they meant the higher of the
two varieties; (3) neither Chor-Ton nor Cammer-Ton is reliably described in
terms of frequency but only by its relation to the other-it may seem that we
cannot know which Chor-Ton is meant when Cammer-Ton and tief Cammer-
Ton (or A-Kammerton) are defined as being respectively a tone and a minor 3rd
below it. But if the lower Chor-Ton had been meant, and if, as seems likely,
its "a1" were about our bW1,the "A-Kammerton" of Quantz and Agricola would
be the same as the low French pitch, and both men agree in saying that this is not
true. So we need hardly consider the possibility of two whole sets of pitches,
one set a semitone higher than the other.
Diirr (1950, p. 56-59; 1951, 1977, p. 61-64) and Mendel (1955, p. 352-354),
from a comparison of the Chor-Ton voice-ranges of the Weimar cantatas with the
Cammer-Ton ranges of the Leipzig works, and of Bach's treatment of the former
when he repeated them in Leipzig, both concluded that the Chor-Ton of the
accompanying organs was about the same in both places. This would mean
that the Leipzig Cammer-Ton was about the same as the higher of the two levels
of Cammer-Ton used in Weimar. A working hypothesis would be that the
Chor-Ton in both places was about the same as the one Quantz and Agricola
used as their high reference-point.85
There are other indications that the scheme on p. 76 is about right: Bach's
marking of "tief Cammerthon" in the string and woodwind parts, and provision
of a continuo part transposed down a minor 3rd, for the 1724 Leipzig performance
of the Stiirmthal cantata, BWV 194 (see footnote 8, above), doubtless has to
do with the fact that the voice-parts as notated lie exceptionally high. Various
explanations are possible.
84 Tagliavini (1974, p. 128)
says of the fact that the original pitch of the organ of San Giuseppe in
Brescia, built in 1581, was about a semitone above a1 = 440: "Questo strumento ? dunque accordato
secondo quel corista lombardo che ancora dopo la meth?del XVIII secolo 7. F. Agricola (1757) indicava
come di mezzo tono piz?grave del Chor-Ton tedesco . ." Confirmation of Quantz's and Agricola's
accounts of the relation between Chor-Ton and Roman pitch (if there was indeed one Roman pitch)
is contained in a document of 1675. Philipp Wilhelm, Count Palatine, had instructed his Capell-
meister, G. B. Mocchi, then sojourning in Rome, to engage a Contralto and a Bass for his court at
Neuburg. Einstein (1907-1908, p. 369) quotes from Mocchi's reply (apparently in Einstein's trans-
lation): ".... Den Contralto werd ich mit Sorgfalt es mug ein Mezzosoprano sein, weil
die deutschen Orgeln fast zwei Tine h6her gestimmtauswithlen:
sind als die r6mischen."
65 The idea of Spitta
(I, 1873, p. 380, 794) that the Weimar organ was a semitone higher is based only
on consideration of those cantatas in which the woodwinds are notated a minor third higher than
the organ, strings, and voices, ignoring those in which the interval was only a whole tone. The
organ-disposition to which he refers on p. 380 is that which resulted from a rebuilding that took place
after Bach's departure from Weimar (see Jauernig, 1950, p. 71-78).

Spitta II (1880, p. 772) thought that for the 1724 performance Bach for some
reason had only "tief Cammerthon" oboes at his disposal, but "Als er spliter die-
selbe Cantate nochmals auffiihrte, waren Oboen im hohen Kammerton vorhanden,
deshalb schrieb er86 nun eine neue Generalbassstimme sorgfiiltigst in As dur. . ."
(All the other parts are in Bb.) Two facts throw doubt on this explanation: (1) The
assumed unavailability of oboes in the normal Cammer-Ton would have been
unique in Bach's Leipzig years. (2) If only "tief Cammerthon" oboes were avail-
able, there is no good reason why Bach should have written the quoted words on
their parts.
Another explanation is that Bach had exceptionally high voices to work with
in Stairmthal--and perhaps in Cathen as well, for which the original version of
this work was written. (The voice-parts of Cantatas 134a and 173a, also compos-
ed for Cbthen, lie similarly high; those of the Caithen version of Cantata 194 do
not survive.) The Basso ascends to "g'" and the Soprano to "c311".Apparently
for the same Leipzig performance for which Bach made the other exceptional
provisions, he changed the bass recitatives No. 2 and No. 11 so that they did
not take the bass above "el", though he let the "gl"s in three other movements
stand. In a 1726 Leipzig repetition, apparently, he omitted the opening chorus
(with its "c31"for soprano) and several other movements, leaving only the "g,11
in No. 2 (which he may have told the bass to change). For this second performance
he had a continuo written in "Ab". (Perhaps there had been intonation difficulties
with the "tief Cammerthon" oboes in 1724.)
Mendel (1955, p. 346-347) suggested a third explanation--that the St6rmthal
organ had perhaps been at the lower Chor-Ton pitch, about a semitone above
a' = 440-i.e., about a' = 466. This explanation assumes that the Stirmthal
organ-part, which does not survive, had been notated one tone below the oboe-
and string-parts. These latter would then have been played at "tief Cammerthon",
as in the 1724 Leipzig performance. It later developed that the organ still exists,
and Hermann Eule, the organ-builder who had restored it in 1934, wrote* that
he considered its original pitch to have been a1 = 464 (Mendel, 1955, p. 478).
This would mean that the "tief Cammerthon" was about the same pitch as
what we have hypothetically assigned to the A-Kammerton of Quantz and
Agricola.
Similarly lending support to our tentative scheme are some important Ham-
burg organs. That of the Jacobi-Kirche, built in 1693 by A. Schnitger, was
apparently (and still is) about a whole-tone above today's pitch. That 'of the
Katharinen-Kirche, built in the 16th century and several times rebuilt, seems
to have been in the 18th century at about the same pitch as the Jacobi organ
(Ellis, 1880, entry for 480.8). The Jacobi organ had one stop, an 8' Gedackt,
presumably for use in concerted music with other instruments, which was tuned
a minor 3rd lower than the rest of the instrument. The entire organ of the
Michaelis-Kirche, built in 1762 by J. G. Hildebrandt, was at about this low pitch,
" Actually,the part is not in Bach'shand.

as were the three Dresden organs by G. Silbermann-two of them built while

Quantz was playing in the orchestras of the town and Court -of Dresden-and
the Schnitger organ built in 1706 in the Eosander Chapel in Berlin-Charlotten-
burg.
The low pitch of the 8' Gedackt of the Jacobi organ was referred to in
both Niedt-Mattheson (1721, p. 176) and Adlung-Agricola (I, 1768, p. 193) as
Cammer-Ton, as was that of the Dresden Catholic Court Chapel organ in the
latter work. It seems altogether likely that this was the pitch called by both
Agricola and Quantz A-Kammerton, and recommended by the latter-about
a semitone below a1 = 440; that the Chor-Ton of Hamburg, Leipzig, and Weimar
was about a minor 3rd higher (i. e., a1 = c. 494); and that the Cammer-Ton at
which Bach's woodwinds, strings and voices in Leipzig normally performed
was about the same as today's pitch.87 This would mean that his choral works
written in Weimar sounded about a tone higher than the organ-, string-, and
voice-parts would sound if performed today as notated. It would also mean that
when Bach played the organ in Weimar, Hamburg, or Leipzig, if in addition to
improvising he played any of the works we know, they sounded about a tone
higher-while when he played in Dresden they sounded a semitone lower-
than they do today.
A useful test of a hypothesis is to assume alternatives to it. To accept N. Har-
noncourt's estimate* of Bach's Cammer-Ton as a1 = 421 or von Huene's as
a1 = 415, one would have to believe that his "tief-Cammerthon" a1 was no
higher than 397 Hz - very close to the lowest pitch von Huene* reports for
baroque recorders or flutes. This would leave little room for the "very low French
pitch": not nearly the semitone that Agricola speaks of. If, on the other hand,
Bach's Cammer-Ton had been higher than a1 = 440, his Chor-Ton would have
been higher than 494, and we have no evidence of German organs higher than
that in the 18th century.88
It may be that the Cammer-Ton of Salzburg at the time of Mozart was a little
lower than the "A-Kammerton" of Quantz and Agricola some 20 years earlier.
This would be a possible inference from some fairly indirect evidence: For
accompanying vocal music in the Salzburg Cathedral in Mozart's time, only
the small organs in balconies at the four corners of the crossing of nave and
transepts were used. None of these survive. But the big organ, originally the
work of the same organ-builder (Egedacher), was restored after World War II,
and H. Oettl, who participated in the restoration, is cited by G. Walterskirchen *
as saying that its pitch was then lowered by shifting the pipes one place to the
right, so that the original pipe for "g#'" is now governed by the key for a1. The
pitch of this pipe before the restoration was about 430 Hz, which would have
made its "a1" about 454. (The same is true of the Salzburg Kajetaner-Kirche.)
87 This would be the same situation as in Zwolle in 1721 (see the table of Netherlands organ-pitches
in Section II. A. 1. h, above).
88 It should hardly need repeating that by such figures we mean "plus or minus less than a quarter-
tone".

If the pitch had not changed since Mozart's day, and if the balcony organs had
been at the same pitch as the big organ, then Mozart's Salzburg church music
would have been sung at a pitch about a quarter-tone higher than our present-
day standard. (This would fit approximately in the space between Chor-Ton and
Cammer-Ton, higher variety, in the table to which footnote 84 refers.) The
pitch of his secular music written for Salzburg would have been about aI = 404 -
three-quarters of a tone lower than aI = 440.
The only reference to pitch in Eibl's index to the Mozart correspondence is in
a postscript to Leopold's letter to Hagenauer dated 27 November 1764:"Hr. Vogt
bitte ich nebst meiner Empfehlung zu sagen . .. daf in paris und hier [London]
die violin sehr Starck bezogen, und die E wie schwache A sind . . . hingegen ist,
sonderlich in paris der thon oder die Stimmung nieder und sehr tief." Now, the
lowest Paris pitch for which there seems any substantial evidence is a' = c. 392,
which is about a quarter tone below 404. (The exception is the pair of Rotten-
burg flutes belonging to F. Brueggen, mentioned in Section II.a.l.b, above, q.v.)
Since Leopold Mozart is struck by the "low and very deep" pitch of Paris,
the Salzburg Cammer-Ton the was used to can hardly have been much lower
than a' = 404. Reichardt (1776) comments on the strings of the Berlin .orchestra
in terms similar to those Leopold uses about Paris and London: "Der Bezug des
Instruments mug sich nach der Stimmung des Orchesters richten. Bey einem
Orchester was tief steht, wie z. B. das Berlinische, mug der Bezug viel s-tirker seyn,
als bey einem andern, das Wiener Stimmung hat: der Unterschied ist wichtig."
Vienna orchestra pitch was, then, significantly higher than that of Berlin in the
time of Frederick the Great, pupil of Quantz.
These quotations are reminders that in Mozart's travels abroad he must have
had to perform at various pitches. It is likely that in his vocal works, at least,
he took account of them, since, as was customary, he wrote arias "nach ... Wille
und Wunsch [der Singer]" and only after having acquainted himself with the
singers' voices and abilities, "urn das Kleid recht an den Leib zu messen", as
Leopold wrote from Milan on 10 and 24 November, 1770.
III. Tuning-Forks
From Bach's time, or only slightly later, we begin to have the testimony of
tuning-forks, though not, unf-ortunately, from Germany. The tuning-fork is
said to have been invented by John Shore, Sergeant Trumpeter of the King,
in 1711.89 Unlike any of the producers of pitch90 considered above, it is so little
89 This does not prevent Ellis (1880) from quoting Gore Ouseley as having written: "I have seen a fork
of the period [O. Gibbons's, d. 1625], said to have belonged to Adrian Batten [organist of St. Paul's
Cathedral in 1624, d. 1637?7]. . ."
90 The nearest approach to a convenient carrier of fixed pitch, before the tuning fork, was the pitch-pipe--
a flue-pipe, stopped with a piston with which its sounding length could be varied. Ellis (1880), in his entry
under 425.2, describes two pitch-pipes belonging to a bell foundry in Padua, each of which must have
been about a foot long. Ellis found them very inaccurate. Tans'ur (1772, p. 71) describes one that he
hid built: a wooden pipe "whose Diameter is just one inch, (Both ways)," -with which he says he finds
"that 4 inches and 1/4th of Cubic Air, contain'd in the Tube . . . sounds the note C Solfaut,
Concert or Opera-Pitch, for a Vocal Performance . . ." In the New Musical Dictionary that forms

affected by temperature and other external influences that for most musical
purposes its pitch may be considered fixed. But a century and a quarter passed
before its frequency could be measured accurately, by the method described in
Scheibler (1834)--a method used by Ellis along with other later methods whose
precision was also more than adequate for these purposes.
This precision does not extend, of course, to other sound-producers to which
forks have been tuned. A fork that has been made to match "the" pitch of an
oboe tells us what was judged on a particular occasion to be the pitch of that
oboe, but it has been seen in Section II. A. I. c, above, that different players may
play the same oboe at different pitches. For an organ, which may have thousands
of pipes, the fork has been matched to the frequency of one pipe at a particular
pressure and temperature. The degree of judgment that has been exercised in
the choice of the pipe to which the fork has been tuned, the degree to which
other notes on that instrument were perfectly in tune with it, the system of
temperament by which the meaning of "in tune" was determined, and the
circumstances under which the judgment was made are usually unknown. It will
be seen that there are other reasons for caution in determining the significance
of a tuning-fork. Is the evidence for its provenance compelling? Was it the
only fork of the man or institution whose name is connected with it? What was
it used for- chamber music, opera, orchestral music, works for church choirs,...?
Ellis (1880, under 422.5) describes a fork that is frequently cited: "The
box containing it bears this inscription: 'This Pitchfork was the property of
the Immortal Handel, and left by him at the Foundling Hospital, when the
Messiah was performed in 1751:-Ancient Concert, whole tone higher; Abbey,
half-tone higher; Temple and St. Paul's organs exactly with this pitch. Presented
to Rd. Clarke by I: Brownlow, the D: Sec: 1835. Invented by M. Shore, Serj.
Trumpeter, time of H. Purcell.' This fork was bought by Rev. G. T. Driffield,
rector of Bow near London, at the sale of the effects of Mr. Clarke ,. .. [It] was
received by the secretary, John Brownlow, from his predecessor, who was in
office from 1795 to 1849. Mr. Brownlow . . . says that ... he did not remember the
story of Handel's leaving it in the orchestra and imagined that it might be
'apocryphal'."
While doubtless this fork was connected with the organ that Handel presented
to the Foundling Hospital at the first performance of Messiah on May 1, 1750,
it may not deserve the quasi-scriptural authority that has often been accorded it.
(Indeed, it has become one of the principal foundations of the idea that there
was what Ellis boldly calls the "Mean Pitch of Europe for Two Centuries":
a' between 415 and 428.7.) Doubtless its function was to guide tuners of the
Hospital organ, but its known history does not begin until 76 years after Handel's
his Book V he describes the tuning-fork (under the entry "Intonator, or Resonator") and says forks
give "a true Standard-Pitch, more than any tubical or stringed Instrument whatsoever; by reason,
they are not so liable to the Effects of the Weather; and are more portable". Rousseau (1768,
p. 516) says of the pitch-pipe "Cet Instrument, que quelquesuns appellent aussi Choriste
donne toujours a-peu-pres le mime Son sous la mime division. Mais cet ai-peu-prs . empeche qu'on
. . de la
ne puisse s'assurer d'un Son fixe qui soit toujours le meme. Peut- tre, depuis qu'il existe Musique,
n'a-t-on jamais concert6 deux fois sur le mime Ton."

death, and Brownlow's statement is not clear as to whether he questions its

having belonged to Handel at all. Even if it did, there is no reason to suppose
that everywhere Handel performed-in opera, oratorio, church and chamber
performances-one pitch prevailed. Indeed, the inscription itself mentions other
pitches."9
Great authority has also been attached to a "Fork of Herr Stein, of Vienna,
pianoforte maker to Mozart" listed under 421.6 by Ellis. J. A. Stein was, how-
ever, not of Vienna but of Augsburg, where Mozart visited him during his stay
there in September--October 1777. On August 20, 1763, his father had written
to Lorenz Hagenauer: "Ich habe ein artiges Clavierl [clavichord] vom H. Stein
in Augspurg gekauft, welches uns wegen dem Exercitio auf der Reise grosse
Dienste thut." But there seems to -be no record of his having ever had any other
Stein instruments, so that Ellis's calling Stein "pianoforte maker to Mozart"
seems mistaken, and his statement that "This was the pitch to which Mozart's
clavichords and pianos were tuned, and this was in fact Mozart's pitch", un-
grounded. The expression "Mozart's pitch" has no single meaning (cf. footnote 21).
Still another fork has acquired what may be more authority than it deserves.
Pascal Taskin, harpsichord-maker and tuner to the French Court, -owned in 1783
a fork that had been tuned to the oboe of Antoine Sallentin, of the Opera and
Chapelle du Roi. Whether Sallentin played the same oboe both in the Opera
and in the Chapelle is not known-nor whether Taskin tuned any -or all92 of his
instruments to this fork, whose pitch was a1 = 409. (In this register, a semitone
equals a difference of about 25 Hz. and a whole-tone about twice that.)
To acknowledge that the authority of these forks attached to the names of
three important 18th-century musicians is doubtful is not, however, to imply
that pitches about a semitone below a' = 440 were not common in the 18th
century. They seem to have included the "A-Kammerton" of Quantz and Agricola.
A number of organs in England and Germany, beginning about 1720, were at
about this level, as were a good many baroque woodwind instruments (see
Sections II. A. 1. a-c and h, above). But it is not true, despite a widespread belief,
that there was a "Mean Pitch of Europe for Two Centuries". There are about 64
entries under this heading of Ellis's, but careful reading of what he says about
each reveals that the evidence is strong for -only about one-fourth of them.
91 W. S. Rockstro (1883) describes a pitch-pipe which Handel "constantly carried with him", and
says that "a friend, on whose accuracy we can depend, compared it, in 1880, with the organ at Glou-
cester Cathedral, the pitch of which is just too low for the wind instruments to tune to, and found it 'a
mere shade below that'." This organ was built in 1665 by Thomas Harris, but completely rebuilt by Henry
Willis in 1847. Freeman (1924, p. 5) gives its disposition, but not its pitch.
92 The tendency to grasp at a single frequency somehow associated with an instrument-builder
of
earlier times is a tendency to project our habit of thinking in terms of a single standard back on
times when nothing of the sort existed. A glance at the table of German organ pitches in Section II. A.
1. h, above, and at footnote 23 will show that the same instrument-builders constructed instruments
at different pitches for different places, uses, and buyers.
On the other hand: At the time Thierry was raising organ pitches in order to achieve agreement
between chamber and chapel, the canons of the Versailles church of Notre Dame specified that the
organs should be tuned "a environ un '/4 de ton plus hault qu'elles ne sont et non plus". If their original
pitch was about the same as that of 1789 (a' = 396), this rise would have brought them to just about
409. But this is speculation.

It was through Naike (1862) that Ellis learned about the "Mozart" fork of
Stein. This publication is a plea by Naike the singing-teacher for a pitch lower
than the diapason normal (a1 = 435) recently instituted by official decree in
France. In support of his plea, Naike devotes a few brief pages to the history of
orchestral pitch(es) and appends a Tabellarische Ulbersicht-or rather, two such
tabular summaries: one for France and Italy, and one for Germany [and Austria]
and England.9s In each table he lists several dozen performances and a few
instruments, in chronological order, and for 37 of these he gives a frequency-
number-with the not altogether clear implication that the performances listed
between those so distinguished were at or near the pitch last indicated. Ellis
had been in touch with Niike's widow, and perhaps even with Naike himself;
at any rate, Frau Niike sent him "several of the valuable forks which [Naike]
had collected", and Ellis found his measurements of them "extremely accurate".
Naike's small monograph would be valuable if one knew how he had obtained
his information (cf. the second paragraph of Section III, above). For each of
the French and Italian pitches he names his "Beobachter", while for most of
the German ones he lists himself in that capacity. Since (writing in 1862)94 he
names himself as "Beobachter" for the Bach Matthiius-Passion performance of
1729, and for a Paris performance of 1764 he names Lissajous (born in 1822), it is
clear that by "Beobachter" he means only the person who has observed some
sort of later evidence of the pitch indicated. It would be interesting to know
what he relied on for the frequencies for the Matthifus-Passion performance or
the performances of the numerous Beethoven works he lists, but he does not
explain. In the absence of such explanation, Ellis apparently did not credit these;
at any rate, he rightly did not include them in his own table. Perhaps he included
only those frequencies for which Frau Naike had lent him forks, preoccupied as
he was with the minute accuracy of the frequency-measurements rather than
with the provenance of the forks. Among those he included was the erroneous
frequency for the Cathedral of Freiberg (see footnote 27 above), and some of
the other frequencies that Ellis accepted from Niike must be viewed with
suspicion.
Niike relied heavily on Schindler (1855), a good part of which he reproduced
as an annex to his own article. Schindler writes of a "Normal-Stimmverhiiltnis,
wie es bis zum Jahre 1816 in ganz Deutschland ohne Differenz bestanden hat".
Enough evidence has been presented in the present article about the variety
of pitches prevailing simultaneously in the 18th century to make this reference
alone an impeachment of his reliability as a historian. He further states that
this allegedly uniform pitch was in the first decade of the 19th century higher
than it had been in the last quarter of the 18th. The notion of a uniform pitch "in
ganz Deutschland" (including Austria) rising everywhere uniformly is evidence
of Schindler's naivetd.
9S To them he gives the misleading sub-headings: "Rimische Stimmung" for the former and "Lom-
bardische Stimmung" for the latter.
94 The search for his birth-date has been unsuccessful.

But he does present some data that must be credited. In 1816, he says, the
military band of the EmperorAlexander, in attendance at the Congress of Vienna,
appeared with all new instruments. And when in June of that year it was asked
to participate in a performance of Stadler's Die Befreiung von Jerusalem, the
new instruments were too high in pitch to mix with the old, and the collaboration
had to be abandoned. With the invention of key- and valve-mechanisms, Schind-
ler says, the new trumpets and horns caused orchestral pitch to continue to rise,
though in 1824 it was still less than a quarter-tone higher than in 1804. But
eventually'-that is at some time prior to 1855, the publication date of Schind-
ler's discussion-it rose until it was "nahe um einen Halbton" higher than in 1804.
In his own time, Schindler says, German musicians who visit Paris are struck
by the full tone of the French orchestras. He attributes this to the lower pitch
of Paris, which permits the use of thicker strings on their instruments.
The lowest Paris pitch Ellis lists for the 1850's is 437.4, to which he gives
little credence, and the others are all between 440.5 and 449. Schindler had lived
from 1813 till 1832 in Vienna, then in Miinster, and from 1848 on in Frank-
furt am Main. His discussion appeared in the Niederrheinische Musikzeitung,
published in Cologne. We have no data on pitch from western Germany in the
1850's to suggest what Schindler's standard of comparison was when he calls
Paris pitch "lower". For Vienna of the 1850's, Ellis cites a fork "kindly tuned
for me by Messrs. Streicher, pianoforte makers of Vienna, the celebrated 'sharp
Vienna pitch', in use before the introduction of the French Diapason Normal
[i. e., before 1859]", whose frequency was 456.1--about a quarter-tone above
the mean of the contemporaneous Paris pitches. The German pitch that Schind-
ler finds lamentably high was perhaps somewhere between the pitches of Paris
and Vienna-say, a1 = c. 450."Nahe um einen Halbton" lower than this would
be, say, a1 = 425-430, which is perhaps the pitch Schindler has in mind for
about 1804. (He was born in 1798, so he can hardly have known this of his own
knowledge.) He claims that "the" pitch of the late 18th century was lower than
this (he does not say how much lower).
We might expect him, as an intimate of Beethoven's in the years 1816-1828,
to know about the pitches in use by Beethoven, but his only comment on this
subject is disappointingly confused. He says the high tessitura of the Missa
Solemnis (1823) indicates that Beethoven, by this time quite deaf, had an earlier
(lower) pitch in mind when he wrote it. There is nothing in any of Beethoven's
earlier works that is not easy to sing, he says, "even at the present [1855] pitch".
If this proved anything, it would prove, of course, that the Missa Solemnis was
written for a lower pitch than the earlier works. (On Vienna opera pitches in
1820, see footnote 96.)
The available evidence of 19th-century tuning forks may be fairly represented
by the following table:

Table II
The Evidence of Tuning-Forks
Note: This table is based almost entirely on Ellis (1880, Table I, p. 315-333).
The reasons for this choice are two: (1) Ellis's Table I is by far the richest source of
pertinent information; (2) for each entry he gives explanatory information (without
which the mere frequency-number can be misleading); thus the reader can easily find
in one place the explanations he needs. Ellis's Table is arranged in ascending order
of frequency; the figures after the decimal points are included here only to identify
the entries.
Key to abbreviations of Ellis's sources:

C = Report of the French Commission that established the Diapason normal of
a1 = 435 in 1859. 5
D = C. Delezenne, "Sur le Ton des Orchestres et des Orgues", in: Memoires de la
Societe des Sciences a Lille, Deuxibme serie, 1854
F = De la Fage (1859)
L = J. A. Lissajous (see Ellis, 1880, p. 316)
M = H. McLeod, co-inventor of an optical method for measuring frequencies
N = Naike (1862)
S = Scheibler (1834)
As regards precision in measuring the frequencies, Delezenne, Lissajous, McLeod, and
Scheibler seem most reliable, but, unfortunately, precision in measurement is not
the most important element for the purposes of this paper. Matters of date and prove-
nance were less critically examined by all of these men, including even Ellis. The present
table includes only those items for which the evidence seems fairly reliable. No
comparable collection of pitches later than 1880 seems to have been made.
Opera
(Cf. footnote 103)
Date Place Provenance Pitch Ellis's

Source
a. 1812 Eutin, etc. F. A. von Weber (1740 424.1 N

(traveling theater) to 1812)
1815-1821 Dresden C. M. von Weber's time 423.2 N
(1817-1826)
182096 Paris Theatre Feydeau 423 M and C
(Opera comique)
" The Commission's report
recommending the Diapason Normal and the ministerial decree establishing
it were published in Le Moniteur Universel, journal officiel de l'Empire franCais, Paris 1859, No. 56
(25 February 1859); translation reprinted from the Musical World in Journal of the Society of Arts 7
(1859), p. 492--498. The translation is accurate except for the use of the word "diapason" for the
French homonym in both the latter's senses (pitch and tuning-fork) and "tone" for "ton" meaning
pitch.
9 Kiesewetter (1820, col. 346) writes: "Ich bin nicht in der
Verfassung, unsere hier in Wien der-
mahl iiblichen Stimmungen (denn wir haben schon allein dreyerley Theater-Stimmungen) zu messen;
allein es ist kein Zweifel, dass unsere tiefste Stimm-Gabel, das ist, jene des Hof-Theaters, etwa einen


Source
1824 Paris Opera (Pitch "lowered 425.8 F

for Mme. Branchu")
1826 Dresden K. G. Reissiger, Weber's 435.0 N
successor in Dresden
1829 Paris Opera 434 F
Paris Piano (for rehearsal) 425.5 F
Paris Opera, orchestra 440 F
1834 Paris Theatre italien 435.2 S
c. 1834 Berlin Opera orchestra 441.8 S
Paris Opera 434 S
Vienna 440.3 S
Vienna 445.1 S
Vienna 439.4 S
1836-1839 Paris Opera ("verified by 441 D
Meyerbeer at the rehearsal
of the Huguenots")
1855 Paris Opera 449 L
1856 Paris Opera 446.2 L- F
1857 Berlin 448.4 L-* F
Naples San Carlo 444.9 L- F
1858 Madrid Theatre Royal 444.5 L- F
Paris Opera 448.0 L--C
1859 Carlsruhe 435 C
Brussels Theatre 430 C 97
Turin 444.8 C
Dresden 441 C
Munich 448.1 C
[Paris Intended standard 435.0 C]
("Diapason normal")
1862 Vienna Opera (during 466.0 N
performance)
Vienna Opera (piano of Kapell- 454 N
meister Esser)
Vienna Opera (piano of Kapell- 445 N
meister Proch)
Dresden Theater 437.8 Fiirstenau
1867 Milan La Scala 451.7 F
halben Ton h6her steht, als z. B. in Leipzig, von woher ich 1801 eine Flate mit 5 Mittelstiicken mit-
gebracht hatte, deren ich hier als unbrauchbarmich habe entiiussern miissen. Unsere Stimm-Gabel ist,
wie ich mich iiberzeugt habe, h6her als die schon hinaufgetriebene Pariser, und vielleicht mit jener
zu Petersburg auf einer HAhe." Kiesewetter believed that "the pitch" of St. Petersburg had risen from
c = 118 in 1739 to c = 136--138 in about 1820. (These pitches are equivalent, in equal temperament,
to at = 397, 458, and 464, but the data on which they are based are mostly not reliable; see Ellis,
1880, entries under 392.2 and 418.0). The Paris opera pitch was measured (again not wholly reliably)
in 1819 as a' = 434 and in 1822 as 431.7 (see the correspondingentries in Ellis, 1880). So Kiesewetter seems
to be saying that in Vienna in 1820 it was higher than 432.
97 Ellis mistakenly gives this as 442.5, calculated by him as a quarter-tone below 455.5, the pitch
reported by the French Commission as that of the fork sent to them by Bender, the royal music
director in Brussels, giving the pitch of the military band there. But the Commission's report states
that Bender said his theater pitch was a semitone lower than that of the band, not a quarter-tone.

A. Mendel:Pitchin WesternMusicsince1500 87

Source
1869 Dresden Opera 438.9 (Ellis)

1878 London Covent Garden (organ- 441.2 (Ellis)
tuning pitch)
Dresden Opera 439.4 (Ellis)
Vienna Opera (organ-tuning 446.8 Ullman
pitch)
Hamburg Opera 448 Schmahl
1879 London Covent Garden (organ- 445.6 (Ellis)
tuning pitch)
London Covent Garden (during 449.7 Hipkins
performance)
1883 Boston Opera (acc. to Van Loo, 435
1962)
1899 London Covent Garden (acc. to 440
Hipkins, 1911)
Orchestras
1813 London Philharmonic Society, 423.3 or (Ellis)

fork of Broadwood's 423.7
tuner Peppercorn
c. 1820 London "Fork approved of by Sir 433 (Ellis)
George Smart", one of
Philharmonic conductors
1828 London "Sir George Smart's own 433.2 (Ellis)
Philharmonic fork"
a. 1834 Paris Conservatoire, concerts 435.2 S
1834 Vienna Opera orchestra? Range 433.7-
of Scheibler's measure- 445
ments acc. to De la
Fage & Ellis
Vienna Streicher's fork 443.2 S-*D
1846-1854 London Philharmonic Society 452.5 (Ellis)
under Sir Michael Costa
a. 1859 Vienna "Sharp Vienna pitch" 456.1 Streicher
1869 Leipzig Gewandhaus orchestra 448.2 (Ellis)
1874 London Philharmonic 454.7 Hipkins
1877 London Wagner Festival at 455.1 Hipkins
Albert Hall,
conducted partly by
Wagner
a. 1878 London Fork of Bishop & Son, 451.7 (Ellis)
marked "C Philharmonic"
(c2 = 537.2)
1896 London Philharmonic 439.0 (Lloyd, 1949) 98
1897 London Strauss's Band, open air 457.5
acc. to Hipkins (1911)


Source
1899 Hipkins (1911) gives the following pitches:

Leipzig 435.0
Berlin 438.0
New York 438.6
Boston 438.8
London 439.0
St. Petersburg 439.4
Meiningen 439.5
and Bayreuth
Stuttgart 440
Vienna 440
Paris 442.4
1953 Europe 437-
449.5
(acc. to Van Loo, 1962; cf. footnote 103)
Pianos
c. 1800 London John Broadwood & Sons 422.7 (Ellis)

c. 1826 London John Broadwood & Sons 427.5 (Ellis)
1826 London John Broadwood & Sons 428.4 (Ellis)
1839 Bologna Piano-tuneremployedby 425.8 F
A. de la Fage
1846-1874 London Broadwood'shighest pitch 452.5 (Ellis)
1846-1879 London Broadwood'smediumpitch 445.9 & (Ellis)
446.2
1874-1880 London Broadwood'shighest pitch 454.7 (Ellis)
or later
1879 London Firmof Erard 455.3 (Ellis)
London Firmof Steinway 454.7 (Ellis)
New York Steinway & Sons 457.2 (Ellis)
1892 "PianoManufacturers' 435
Association"98
(acc. to Van Loo, 1962)
s" Van Loo does not specify which such association. One had been founded in London in 1890 (Dolge,
1911, p. 409). The National Piano Manufacturers' Association of America was organized only in 1897,
according to Dolge. But a Piano Manufacturers' Association of New York was in existence before that,
and Hipkins (1896, p. 342) said that it had accepted "A 435 at 200 C... for an international standard".
Lloyd (1949, p. 85) says "the new Philharmonic pitch, giving C = 522 c/s and A 439, was adopted in
1899 by the pianoforte manufacturers". It was not until 1895-1896 that the Philharmonic Society in
London changed from a1 = 452 to al = 439, according to quotations Lloyd prints from the resolutions
of the Society.

IV. Absolute Standards Proposed in Terms of Frequencies

Sauveur (1700 ... 1713), who found a way to determine frequencies (though
not a very precise one) thought in 1700 that a pipe 5 pieds de roi in length gave
100 vibrations per second, which he proposed as a standard. In 1713 he corrected
this to 102, and stated that it was the pitch of the "A" of the clavecin, which
would make a1 = 408. He then proposed c1 = 256 (= 28) as a standard (a1 = 430.7
in equal temperament, or 426.7 as 5/3 of 256). This purely theoretical pitch has
often been used by physicists and mathematicians, and is sometimes referred
to as "philosophical pitch". But Sauveur's proposals had no significant influence
on musical practice.
Not until 1834 was there a concerted effort made to adopt a standard pitch.
In the same year in which J. H. Scheibler published Der physikalische und musi-
kalische Tonmesser, 1834, he proposed to a congress of physicists in Stuttgart
the adoption of a1 = 440. He says (p. 53) that he selected this pitch as "the mean
of the variation of Vienna grand pianos by temperature" (Ellis, 1880). His re-
commendation was approved by the congress, but it, too, had little effect on
practice.
In 1858, the French government appointed a commission to investigate the
possibility of establishing a uniform pitch. Its members included officials,
physicists, and the composers Auber, Berlioz, Meyerbeer, Rossini, and Thomas,
with Halevy as Rapporteur. In its report of February 1, 1859, it recommended
the adoption of a1 = 435 as the standard pitch (Diapason Normal) to be used in
all musical establishments authorized by the state,99 and this recommendation
was adopted by ministerial deciee of February 16, 1859 (see footnote 95).
Unlike previous attempts at setting a standard, this one became widely and
internationally (though gradually) influential. An international conference at
Vienna in 1885 adopted it.1oo Neither England nor the United States had been
represented at that conference, but in 1896 the London Philharmonic Society
adopted the pitch a1 = 439, on the mistaken assumption that the French Diapason
Normal was intended to be dependent on temperature (Lloyd, 1949, p. 84-85).
90 The decree appbinting the commission and the one establishing the Diapason Normal are reprinted
in Lloyd (1949, p. 78-79). Lloyd is at great pains to explain that the pitch recommended was independent
of temperature. The recommendation in the report was that a standard fork should be made giving 435
vibrations at 150 centigrade. However appropriate the specification of temperature was for scientific
purposes, for musical purposes it was unnecessary. Variation of the tuning-fork's frequency with
temperature is musically insignificant- Lloyd puts it at 1 vibration in 16,000 for each degree Fahrenheit.
Nevertheless, it was for the fork, and not for the pitch-standard itself, that the temperaturewas specified.
Wind instruments- particularly organs, which, because of the popularity of the oratorio in England,
were an especially important consideration there--rise perceptibly in pitch with a rise in temperature.
It is for this reason that London Philharmonic pitch was set in 1896 at =
a1 439, under the misap-
prehension that the Diapason normal would have required the organ to be tuned to 435 at 150 centigrade,
which would have resulted in its being at about 439 at 200 (= 680 Fahrenheit), the temperature at
which performances were thought to take place. (See Hipkins, 1896, p. 342. Hipkins shared this
misunderstanding of the French decree.)
100 Its proceedings were published as Beschliasse und Protokolle der Internationalen Stimmton-Con-
ferenz in Wien, 1885, by the K. k. Ministerium fiir Cultur und Unterricht, Vienna 1885. Ellis published
a complete translation of the resolutions and an abstract of the discussions that led to them in the
Journal of the Society of Arts 34 (1886), p. 439-445.

The United States "semi-officially" 101 adopted the new London Philharmonic
pitch in the same year. In 1917, the American Federation of Musicians adopted
a1 = 440 (Young, 1955).
In 1939, a London conference of the International Federation of the National
Standardizing Associations (ISA) adopted a1 = 440 as the mean frequency of
measurements taken in that year. This decision was confirmed by a recommen-
dation of the Council of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO),
meeting in Stockholm in 1955, from which none of the 33 member nations
dissented (Van Loo, 1962, p. 263).
Official or semi-official adoption of this standard does not mean that it is the
pitch at which all music-making takes place today. Broadcasting and sound-
recording do have a normative influence. But several factors make for considerable
variation:
(1) The taste for increased brilliance and carrying-power of tone causes many
performers and most orchestras to tune to a pitch higher than the "official"
standard. 102
(2) The pitch of an orchestra that tunes to a given standard varies by several
vibrations per second in the course of a performance, for various reasons. 103
(3) The widespread belief that "the old pitch" or "the pitch of the 18th
century" was about a semitone below today's standard causes many perform-
ers specializing in the music of earlier periods to tune to a1 = 415, a1 = 421,
and other pitches in this neighborhood. Performances at such pitches do not
usually take place in the largest halls, so that "carrying power" of the tone is
not a major consideration, and of course in recording it is irrelevant.
V. Some Conclusions
Before the invention of the tuning-fork, at the beginning of the 18th century,
there was no means of carrying a precisely fixed pitch from one place to another.
101 The term is that used by Van Loo (1962, p. 263), who does not explain it.
102 The oboist of the Boston Symphony Orchestra tunes to an electronically produced a1 = 442, and
the orchestra's pianos are tuned to that frequency (M. Steinberg *, 1977). The Los Angeles Philharmonic
in 1962 also tuned to this frequency (Backus, 1969).
10s Informal measurements made during the Boston orchestra's performances have shown variation
between 440 and 446. Extremely thorough and careful measurements of Paris opera and concert perform-
ances have been reported by Leipp and Castellengo (1977), who recorded complete performances of
Berlioz's Damnation de Faust and Rossini's Barbier de Seville in 1964 and 1965, at the Opera and
Opera Comique respectively. Of the Berlioz work they made two complete recordings: one when the
outside temperature was above 350 C (= 950 F) and one when it was about -50 C (= 230 F). They sum
up their findings as follows: "Pour une temperature moyenne de 220 C [= 71.60 F], le diapason
moyen etait de 445,8 Hz avec des fluctuations normales de + 4,2 Hz et de - 3,8 Hz (soit une
dispersion de 442 A 450 Hz environ). Ceci correspond, h 200 C [= 680 F], a 443-444 ? 4 Hz .. ."
For Le Barbier de Seville: "II faisait . . . trks chaud (de 28 a 300 C [= 82,4--860 F] pris du haut-
boiste); le diapason moyen itait de 447,2 Hz, ce qui est normal; la dispersion etait de + 5 et
-3 Hz. . ... Des releves dans divers concerts ont toujours conduit sensiblement aux mimes resultats;
si l'on tient compte de la temperature, on peut affirmer que le diapason moyen, A Paris, pour 200 C,
tourne autour de 443-444 Hz et que les fluctuations, avec de bons musiciens, sont de ? 5 Hz environ".
Similar studies by Leipp and Castellengo of Brussels and London performances have yielded similar
results.
Ward (1970) and Daehn (1971) list a number of studies on related subjects in their bibliographies.

The tuning-forkapparentlydid not come into widespreaduse (especiallyoutside

England)for nearlya centuryafterits invention.
It has been seen, however, that even in the same church,where all the instru-
ments could have been tuned to the organ, they frequently were not. This was
for the same reason that the modem orchestrauses Bband A clarinets:because
their timbre is preferredto that of clarinetsin C. Why, then, was not the -organ
tuned to the same pitch as the woodwinds? In the first place, because many old
organs still in use had been built at a high pitch, to suit the choir (in modal
music), as the name Chor-Ton implies. When fashions changed and they fre-
quently or regularlyjoined with woodwind instruments,to lower them a second
or a minor third would 'have been an expensive business, involving the dis-
carding of the highest two or three pipes of each stop and the building of
two or three very large (and correspondinglyexpensive) pipes for the lowest
notes of each. Furthermore,the organ-builder'sart and trade were of ancient
lineage, and their traditionstenaciously clung to. But eventually, as the organ's
predominantposition yielded to that of the orchestra,their pitch-traditionswere
broken and organs were built at the same Cammer-Tonas the woodwinds.
Fora long time, however,the need for uniformitycontinuedto be less urgently
felt than it is today. One reason is that music-makingwas a far more local affair
before the development of modern means of travel and communication.
Another is that focuses of musical interest change over the centuries.Before
about 1600, most music was primarilyvocal, at least in concept. When it was
actually so in performance,the pitch was undoubtedly set from case to case
for the convenienceof the singers involved, or by compromisewith any partici-
pating instrumentalists.String-playerscould tune up or down for the occasion.
If a major adjustmentwas necessary, they could use thicker or thinner strings,
or bigger or smaller viols. Organs were tuned, with the singers' ranges in view,
mainly to make transpositioneasy or unnecessary- earlierfor plain-chant,later
for mensural music. Wind instrumentswere made in various sizes- or, as we
would say, in various keys. In this period, music was an affair of church or
chamber,or "vor derTafel und in conviviiszur fr lichkeit",as PraetoriusII (1618,
p. 17) remindsus.
From about 1600 on, instrumentsplayed an increasinglyimportantrole, and
the opera became a new focus of interest. Originally a private entertainmentof
the aristocracy,it soon began to cater to a paying public as well. Eventually,it
was joined in this by the public concert, and in the 19th century the audiences
for both opera and concert expanded rapidly. Emphasis gradually shifted to
the soloist and the orchestra.Both opera and concertemployed travelingvirtuosi,
and this made the varying pitches of different places an increasinglyconspicuous
inconvenience.
As society became more secularized, the place of the organ in musical life
became less central. As audiences grew in size and mass production developed,
the piano gradually replaced the harpsichord and became the most widely used

keyboard instrument. One result of these developments is that when one speaks
today of pitch one thinks not first of the organ, but rather of the oboe giving
the pitch to the orchestra, and the piano to its partners in chamber music or
to the orchestra in piano concertos. Another is that low pitches could not hold
their own in large halls against the greater brilliance and carrying power of higher
ones.
While our subject does not lend itself to grand generalizations, a few general
statements can be made:
(1) To ascertain for what pitch a given composition was written one must know
at least its date, its place, and its function-whether for church, chamber, opera,
or concert. (Place and function are at least as important as date.) Such complete
knowledge is rarely available. When it is, fidelity to the performance practice
of earlier times does not demand that their music sound at, the pitch that to the
modern musician seems called for by the original notation. It may, in fact,
demand quite the contrary. 104
(2) To ascertain what the pitch of an old wind-instrument was considered to
be in its own time, one must know what its natural scale was called, and in terms
of what relative standard.
(3) While the wider the compass of a vocal work or part the narrower the
absolute limits within which it can be placed, those limits can never be stated
precisely on this basis alone.
(4) Notions that the tendency of pitch-standards has been continuously upward,
or that over long periods and throughout European musical culture one pitch pre-
vailed (with minor variations) -whether it be called "Millennial Church Pitch"105
or the "Mean Pitch of Europe for Two Centuries"10 - are false. (By adding up
all the "known" pitches and dividing the total by the number of them, one
could arrive at their arithmetic mean. But the number of pitches we can claim
to know is too small, and their distribution as to date, place, and function too
uneven, for such a figure to have any significance.)
(5) Van Loo (1962, p. 262-263), with due caution, has ventured the following
summary: "... apres un grand disordre, les valeurs se resserrent autour de
440 [recte 442-444] Hz. Si vers 1750 les ecarts sont de l'ordre de 50 Hz en
moins et 30 en plus, en 1850 ces ecarts se resserrent a 20 Hz en moins et 20 en
plus, et en 1950 '~5 Hz en moins et 10 en plus . . .". [To this may be added that
about 1500-1600 the limits would have been about 100 Hz lower and about 85
higher.]
104Thus, when modem instruments are used, it may demand key-signatures undreamed of when the
music was composed. Some works originally notated without any key-signature would require 5 sharps
or 5 flats. To transpose them thus will constitute accurate realization of this aspect of their original
sound, however "unhistorical" the transposed signatures may look. In addition, it must be remembered
that transposition- consciously by the keyboard-player or by *the use of mechanical transposing
devices- was common in the era of primarily vocal music. Cf. particularly Section II. B.1, above.
106 Thomas & Rhodes (1971, p. 73); cf.
Meeds (1975, p. 42).
106 Ellis (1880, p. 318).

(6) Most statements about the history of pitch go back directly or indirectly
to Ellis (1880), and make what they assert seem far more certain than a careful
reading of Ellis warrants.
If confusion resulting from the number and variegation of the data presented
here and by Ellis causes the reader to take a guarded view of every statement about
"the" pitch of a given instrument, or place, or date, or century, it will have served
a good purpose.
A postscript to this article appears on p. 328.
Die Bachforschungseit etwa 1965

Ergebnisse - Probleme - Aufgaben
WALTER BLANKENBURG (SCHLUCHTERN)
1. Vorbemerkungen
Der folgende Bericht kniipft an des Verfassers Abhandlung Zwalf Jahre Bach-
forschung an, die im Jahre 1965 in den Acta musicologica XXXVII, III/IV, S. 95
bis 158 (zit. AMI) erschien. Die urspriinglich geplante Wiederanwendung der
damaligen Gliederung erwies sich in Anbetracht der Verlagerung der Forschungs-
aufgaben als nicht maglich. Gelegentlich wird auf vor 1965 erschienene Arbeiten,
die s. Zt. nicht besprochen worden waren, zuriickgegriffen. Umgekehrt mu8 aber
auch dieses Mal wieder die Unmbiglichkeiteiner Aufarbeitung der gesamten, waih-
rend der letzten ca. zwbilf Jahre erschienenen Bachliteratur betont werden. Die von
Rosemarie Nestle besorgte Zusammenstellung des Bachschrifttums umfaut allein
fiir die Jahre 1963-1967 715 Titel (BI 1973, S. 91-150) und die fiir 1968-1972
sogar 884 Titel (BI 1976, S. 95-168). Das Setzen von Schwerpunkten ist daher
unumgainglich, soll ein solcher Bericht nicht ins Uferlose oder in verwirrende
Details fiihren. Christfried Lenz hat in der Einleitung seiner Heidelberger Disser-
tation Studien zur Satztechnik Bachs (1970) verstaindlicherweise bedauert, daiB
in meiner friiheren Abhandlung ,dieses Forschungsgebiet weder als Kategorie
aufgefiihrt, noch die einschldigigen Arbeiten iiberhaupt erwiihnt" seien. Auch in
der vorliegenden Fortsetzung mutte zunaichst darauf verzichtet werden, nicht,
weil die Probleme von Bachs Satztechnik weniger wichtig erscheinen, sondern
weil auch hier von anderen Schwerpunkten ausgegangen wird. Erst im spaiter
folgenden zweiten Teil soll Bachs Satztechnik stairkere Beriicksichtigung finden.
Doch wird dem Einwand von Chr. Lenz in den Literaturzusammenstellungen
schon jetzt Rechnung getragen werden. Eine allgemeine Orientierung iiber die
Entwicklung der Bachforschung der jiingsten Zeit hat A. Diirr 1976 auf dem
51. Bachfest der NBG in Berlin unter dem Thema ,Das Bachbild im 20. Jahrhun-
dert" (verbiffentlicht in: Bachfest - Vortrdige 1976, S. 18-36) gegeben. Voran-
gegangen war ihr der Aufsatz Neue Bachforschung (Universitas 21, 1966, S. 469
bis 475).

328
Communications
Professor H. Colin Slim, author and editor of A Gift of Madrigals and Motets (Chicago,
1972), 2 vols, is pleased to announce to all persons who presently own these volumes
or who intend to do so, that he will be glad to send a supplement entitled "Ten Altus
Parts at Oscott College, Sutton Coldfield" (the original altus parts to A Gift) if they
would write him and request a copy at the Department of Music, University of Califor-
nia, Irvine, USA 92717. This supplement will be sent free of charge.
A committee has been formed for the preparation of a critical edition of the works
of Jean-Baptiste Lully to be published by Broude Brothers Limited. The committee is
presently engaged in drawing up the editorial guidelines which will govern the preparation
of the edition. Editing will begin with the works not included in the Lully edition begun
by Henry Prunieres. The committee proposes to address itself first to the shorter dra-
matic works. Inquiries from interested persons able to contribute to the edition are in-
vited. Correspondence should be addressed to the editorial committee's secretary, Pro-
fessor Carl Schmidt, and mailed to him in care of the Publisher. Members of the Editorial
Committee are:
Carl Schmidt, Secretary (Bryn Mawr College), James Anthony (University of Arizona),
Albert Cohen (Stanford University), Lowell Lindgren (Harvard University), Meredith
Ellis Little (University of Arizona), Joyce Newman (University of Utah), Joshua Rifkin
(Brandeis University), Herbert Schneider (Johannes Gutenberg-Universittit), Erich
Schwandt (University of Victoria), Peter Wolf (S.U.N.Y., Stony Brook), Neal Zaslaw
(Cornell University).
Postscript
Howard Mayer Brown has called my attention to a passage in S. Ganassi's Regola Rubertina
(Venice1542) that is relevant to the question of 16th-century transposition, discussed in Section
II.B.l.a. (2) above, and to Reichardt's remarks late in the 18th century about different string-
gauges for different pitches, quoted in Section II. C. In Chapter XI, Ganassi tells how Gombert
used to choose the pitch-level for vocal works according to their voice-compasses. Ganassi
suggests that adjustments be made for consorts of viols by the choice of thicker or
thinner strings,.similar
or by moving the bridge so as to lengthen or shorten the sounding length of
the strings. Petri (1782, p. 385) speaks about tuning strings down a tone from Chor-Ton to
Cammer-Ton. ArthurMendel


Pitch in Western Music Since 1500 A Re Examination

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pitch in Western Music Since 1500 A Re Examination

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pitch in Western Music since 1500.

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

I. A. The Relativity of Early Pitch-Standards .............. . 11

II. The Evidence Concerning Absolute Pitches before 1834 ......... 17

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

Schlick (1511) ................... 37

C. Some Pitches in the 18th Century ..... . . . ........... 73

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

III. Tuning-Forks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . 80

IV. Absolute Standards Proposed in Terms of Frequencies ......... 89

Key to abbreviations not explained in MGG:

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

W. Apel, Gregorian Chant (Bloomington, Ind. 1958, 1973).

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

Idem, ed., Niedtens musicalischer Handleitung andrer Theil (Hamburg 1721).

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

D. Speer, Grundrichtiger . . . Unterricht der mus. Kunst (Ulm 1687).

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

I. A. The Relativity of Early Pitch-Standards

Early rough measurements of frequencies were made by Mersenne, Sauveur,

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

frequency-measurements become sufficiently accurate for most purposes. Before

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

Ton, Chor-Ton, quire pitch, ton de chapelle, corista, Cammer-Ton, ton de

I. B. The Relative Standards

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

schen Weimarer] Praxis zu entsprechen: Vokalstimmen, Streicher, Trompeten,

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

II. The Evidence Concerning Absolute Pitches before 1834

11 The impugning of one of those techniques by Mendel (1948, p. 578-590) is mistaken.

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

principally (sometimes without acknowledgment, or at second hand) on Ellis.

II. A. Surviving Instruments. 1. Wind Instruments

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

II. A. L.a. Recorders

55.0 el Vienna C. 154, 155, 158

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

II. A. i. b. Transverse Flutes

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

A flute that had belonged to Quantz, in the London collection of C. Zoeller,

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

corresponding to the 16th-century recorder. Haynes says that of 100 instruments

II. A. 1.d. Clarinets

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

Period (acc. No.

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

Concerning the pitch of cornetti (Zincken) R. Weber (1975, p. 9) says: "It is

II. A.1. g. Trombones

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

F. W. Galpin (1906, p. 22) gives the specifications of a trombone made by Jorg

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

c. 1550 Klosterneuburg, Stiftskirche Jonas Scherer Krauss (196

* The footnotes to this Table will be found on

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM

1519 London, Alhalowe Barking22 A. Duddyngton Hopkins-Ri

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.41 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:04:16 PM