Dear moderators
I rest my case.
Yours in hope of maintaining a harmonious forum
Steve xxx
On concertina.. or? Which tunes might they be?
As far as Bb being A#, thats food for a separate discussion, just to say that they are not the same on the fiddle!
Your point about exercise is very valid and the technical gains from this kind of practice are substantial, but for me its mainly for the pleasure of playing these different fingerings. On my C fiddle I really enjoy the sound of the lower tone, its all that much richer, mellower and warmer, play C fingering on a C fiddle and Im then playing in Bb.
I did tune down to B once, then Id be playing in A with C fingering. Funnily enough I mainly play in A and D on guitar. I Play a 7 string Classical Guitar with a Low A and dropped D, with the capo on the top 6 strings at the 7th fret, so I have 4 octaves of A in one position . Great fun for drones and pipe tunes.
Sorry i didn’t reply earlier your post got lost amongst all the spam. lads give it a break eh? couldn’t you continue your chat off board, its not particularly funny or relevant now is it?
So would A be flat and G be sharp?
Oh, and would do you call Ab then?
… just to say that it’s equally true - and valid - to say that they are the same on fiddle.
Fair enough, we can agree that they are not necessarily the same on the fiddle ? I love the fact that there is no dividing line on the fiddle. I play cook in the kitchin on fiddle using F nat at a certain point instead of F# but on guitar, whistle and UP that just sounds weird to me so I use the F# throughout.
\
So would A be flat and G be sharp?
Oh, and would do you call Ab then?l <<
its all relative eh?
Er … yes, it’s all relative. And, btw, I play Cook in the Kitchen on whistle (and on fiddle) with an Fnat at that point you’re talking about. It sounds weird to me without it.
My point was that I play it differently depending on the instrument. Presumably its to do with the temperament.
I suppose you just half hole the F till it sounds harmonious? . I tried it on banjo and both sounded ok, but with guitar I play with a strong drone so if the note is not very in tune with the drone then perhaps thats why it sounds weird. What about chief O’Neills on the 2nd part F# or Fnat?
@Ben-
Fiddlerwill’s music clips are gone from the web, but I might have saved them somewhere. In the interest of decorum, I will not say why I saved them…I’ll have a look-see when I’m at my main machine, if you’re interested.
What do you mean? With your own definition, Eb can be a flat key as much as any other key. What octave are we talking about? Ever heard of a Eb low whistle? I heard these things are huge beasts 
Maybe on fiddle, but on violin A# and Bb are two different notes.
Again, not necessarily. Most of the time, they’re likely to be identical. They may even be identical in systems other than ET , Casals’ Spanish-influenced “expressive intonation” for instance, depending on the context.
There are hundreds of different tuning systems, JI only requires perfect fifths fourths and thirds, so there are actually many different Just intonations! So it depends on what tuning system players use as to how they approach enharmocity and harmony.
As far as Im aware Violin players aspire to JI where A#and Bb are different notes depending on there use and position melodically and Harmonically. . Ben presumably has some information to support his contention which, out of curiosity, Id be interested to hear about.
Casals ‘expressive intonation’ meant that with a leading note say G# to A in a common ’ cadential progression’ , the G# should be higher than ET, while with a Bb leading down to A, the Bb should be lower.that ET. This system supports melodic movement, but not Harmonic movement where the opposite would be required to harmonise vertically. So I cant see this system being used to suggest that String players play A# and Bb as the same note irrelevant of what role it takes within the context of the piece.
Im no expert here in this field, I merely rely on the work of various authors such as R Duffin, J Barbour, S Isacoff amongst others but I do find it a very interesting subject even if its not directly relevant to the thread its a lot more relevant than some of the postings! 
Violinists generally use pythagorean tuning for playing melody.
They may use just intonation for finding the lower note of a doublestop or various notes other than the melody in an ensemble (i.e., a string quartet).
Violinists very rarely play ET. About the only exception is, for instance, in a piano sonata, when the violin plays a sustained note in unison with the piano.
In pythagorean tuning, the most common form of violin intonation, there is a marked difference between A# and Bb.
http://violinmasterclass.com/intonation.php
According to Itzhak Perlman, in the DVD, Art of Violin, violinists of previous generations used to use more variety in intonation, but that today they all play the same way. The fellow in the link above (Dr. Sassmannhaus) was a student of Dorothy Delay, who was also Perlman’s teacher.
That is a very interesting and informative link, even for a non-violinist such as meself. Thanks for that.
I’ll have a go at that later. I guess you have to register or something, 'cos nothing happens when I click the link …
Anyway, whole treatises worth in this stuff, but a couple of quick points: I made two assumptions, one of which seems to have been right and the other wrong. I assumed that, when you were contrasting fiddle and violin, you meant classical playing when you referred to violin. It seems I was right in that assumption. I further assumed that you would mean the vast majority of classical violinists. It seems I was wrong in this, and you actually meant the very small sub-set of classical violin soloists. There are clearly different tuning issues for orchestral playing, but no need to go into that here, I would say.
Now, without getting too academic about it, although I haven’t been able to watch/read whatever it is on Perlman’s site about intonation yet, I would doubt that he means that violinists (even soloists) literally use Pythagorean tuning for their melody playing. I wonder if he might have meant that they tune the four strings in perfect fifths, which is true. But, if they went a step further than that to Pythagorean tuning, which according to my books on the subject was dismissed as unworkable literally millennia ago, all of their thirds would be out of tune. I can’t see how this would help …
Short answer, and it may end up coming down to proportions, is that it remains the case that A# is sometimes the same as Bb. I agree, sometimes, it might not be, depending on context (who’s playing, what piece they’re playing and composed by whom, what other instrumentation is used etc).
No Ben, you are wrong, he clearly talks about, and offers demonstrations of Pythagorean temperament in use. What books are they ben? Which Authors? Academic is good Ben dont be shy.
No such thing as “Pythagorean temperament”. As I say, I can’t read whatever it is he’s written at the moment, 'cos I can’t get into it, so I can’t really comment. However, if he uses the phrase “Pythagorean temperament” then he must be talking about something other than Pythagorean tuning, and I’d be interested to know what he meant by it. I’m in work at the moment, but if, when I come back to this later this evening, I continue to be unable to read the article (or whatever it is) I might come back for some help to get what Perlman actually says.
And, for me, no, I don’t think academic is good. It remains the case that most fiddlers and most violinists will play A# the same as Bb on occasions. I have never said that there are no occasions when they might be different. I believe, but don’t know for sure, that most violinists (ie orchestral ones) actually play in an approximation of ET, and always play differently named enharmonic notes the same. This, after all, is the basic premise for the book that you, Will, have quoted in the past “How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony” by Ross W Duffin. He makes it clear in that book that he’s not talking about keyboards (although he does try out, and then talk about, his preferred tuning on keyboards) - he talks mainly, in fact, about stringed instruments, and advocates (please correct me if I’m wrong here, as I have no access to the book at this moment) a sixth comma meantone system, under which A# would still be the same as Bb, since it is a 12-tone system (as opposed to a greater octave division).
I second that, one of the best I have been directed to, thanks highland-piper. Being geeky and having ears of uncertain clothyness I had the e-tuner running whilst listing - fascinating. (no need to log in but it took a moment for me to work out what to click on and to start the video)
http://www.medieval.org/emfaq/harmony/pyth5.html
http://www.tonmeister.ca/main/textbook/node267.html
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/music/pythag.html
http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/music/temperament/WhatFor.html
http://www.mab.jpn.org/data_lib/music_dic/temper_char_e.html
Perhaps all these folk are using ‘Pythagorean temperament’ and ‘Pythagorean tuning’ to refer to the same thing? but as I said I am no expert and would not feel well knowledgeable enough to criticise their use of the term.
Funny about that link, when I linked to it at the session.org a couple of years ago I was slagged rotten for it! Its good to see that there are more open minded individuals here.
Me for instance.