1

Adam Sniezek
Final Paper
MUHL3772
5 April 2016
Two Johanns And The Anomalous Potentiality

To this day, it is unknown what temperament Johann Sebastian Bach used to tune his

keyboards. His monumental work, The Well-Tempered Clavier, was revolutionary at its time, in

that it contained Preludes and Fugues in all major and minor keys. This collection has made it

apparent that Bach needed to use a temperament that would have allowed him to do this. But it

has been blindly accepted that equal temperament was the temperament Bach had in mind when

composing The Well-Tempered Clavier. Bach did not use equal temperament, but rather a

concentric tuning influenced by Johann Georg Neidhardt.

Equal temperament is named such for the fact that it divides the ditonic (Pythagorean)

comma into twelve equal parts, or the 1/12 comma, making each semitone of the octave

equidistant apart. And although it is very theoretically and mathematically involved, equal

temperament does allow performers to perform in all keys with equal ease, or composers to

compose in the same manner. By the end of the eighteenth century, equal temperament was

known to be the predominate method of tuning.1 Bach composing a collection of pieces for

every key even towards the middle of the century suggests that Bach did use equal temperament,

or at least championed the rise of it. The idea still held up even a little over one hundred years

later, when in 1915, E.P. Lennox Atkins stated, “to no one more than Sebastian Bach do we owe

the idea of the necessity for equal temperament. If he did not actually conceive, he at least

1 Rudolf Rasch, “Tuning and Temperament,” in The Cambridge History of Western Music

Theory, ed. Thomas Christensen (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 220.
 2

endorsed, the daring notion of complete freedom and qualified excellence in all keys.”2 But it is

often suggested that Equal temperament was looked at more for its theoretical rather than

functional value. John O’Donnell states that, at the time of Bach, “finding accurate

measurements for equal temperament was something of an obsession for many, the language of

1/12 and 1/6 commas was commonplace.”3 Mark Lindley even suggests that the observed

differences between equal and slightly unequal temperaments were largely academic, rather than

being practical.4

There is little evidence about Bach himself pointing to him using a possible alternative to

equal temperament. Lindley asserts that Bach had no intention of using or never used “any

mathematical tuning scheme.”5 This would suggest that Bach did not use equal temperament but

rather something that was less theoretically involved, such as a concentric tuning. Not until

recently have people ventured past this idea. One such account, according to John Barnes,

ensures that “the remarks of C.P.E. Bach (in collaboration with Agricola) concerning his father’s

tuning method are rather vague, and have often been mistaken for a description of equal

temperament.”6 So although Bach was using a tuning system other than equal temperament, the

documents describing the tuning do not give much information on the matter pointing to an

alternative.

In eighteenth-century Germany, there were many proposals published about concentric

tunings, each in attempt to describe the best tuning. Favored by important theorists of the time,

2 E.P. Lennox Atkins, “Ear Training and the Standarisation of Equal Temperament,” Proceedings

of the Musical Association Session 41 (March 1915): 96.

3 John O’Donnell, “Bach's Temperament, Occam's Razor, and the Neidhardt Factor,” Early

Music 34, no. 4 (2006): 631.

4 Mark Lindley, “J.S. Bach’s Tunings,” The Musical Times 126, no. 1714 (1985): 723.
5 Ibid., 721.
6 John Barnes, “Bach's Keyboard Temperament: Internal Evidence from the Well Tempered

Clavier,” Early Music 7, no. 2 (1979): 236.

 3

along the likes of Andreas Werckmeister, Johann Georg Neidhardt, Andreas Sorge, and Friedrich

Wilhelm Marpurg, the proposals were based on the circle of fifths, in which some fifths were

tempered by certain amounts (1/12 and 1/6 commas) while others remained in their just form.

According to Rudolf Rasch, “the total tempering of the circle of fifths sums up to the ditonic

comma.”7 He later states that this style of tuning “coincides with the earlier concepts introduced

. . .under the term ‘good’ temperaments and as . . . well-temperaments.”8 So, The Well-Tempered

Clavier could have been mistaken merely by virtue of its name. However, it is apparent that

“well-tempered” does not allude to “equal-tempered,” but instead to a possible concentric tuning

proposed by a theorist of Bach’s time, notably a German one as mentioned above.

Concentric tunings are different from equal temperament in that each key center has a

differing quality. These tunings focused on tempering the central fifths, such that, according to

Rasch, “the most often occurring intervals were better (that is, less tempered) than the ones less

often used (those in “peripheral” keys with many sharps or flats)”, but in such a way that every

key was still functional.9 It is this idea that draws attention, according to Barnes, that “the

avoidance of bad major thirds, sounded as such . . . appears to be the principal constraint in the

use of a circular temperament.”10 He then claims that due to the nature of the temperament,

adherence to the deficiencies of it (e.g. avoiding bad major thirds), would suggest, in this case,

confirmation of Bach’s use of circular temperament.11 He later affirmed this idea by providing a

chart mapping out major thirds in each of the Preludes, confirming Bach’s tendency to write

7 Rasch, Cambridge History of Western Music Theory, 215.
8 Ibid.
9 Ibid.
10 Barnes, “Bach's Keyboard Temperament” 241.
11 Ibid.
 4

more major thirds in those preludes with fewer accidentals than those with many.12 It is thus

apparent that Bach, while avoiding major thirds in densely accidental Preludes, could have been

influenced by a concentric tuning when composing The Well-Tempered Clavier. Lindley offers

more on the subject, stating that “a tuner who can accommodate and heighten these contrasts

while keeping the extreme keys from sounding sour” will expel the argument that the work

“‘must be performed with an equal-tempered keyboard.’”13 So it is from this notion that the

specific nature of Bach’s tuning, if concentric, can be deduced.

Of the little information that does reference the tuning of Bach, two simple points are

particularly helpful in explaining the mystery tuning. Bach was known to tune very rapidly. It is

said that it never took him more than fifteen minutes to tune a harpsichord.14 So his

temperament, as stated before, would not have be mathematical, but rather something easy to

tune by ear. Additionally, according to O’Donnell, “no one was able to tune to Bach’s

satisfaction.”15 This would suggest that if someone else, even another theorist, were to tune

Bach’s harpsichord, Bach would still not favor the tuning over his own. And although this

sentiment would effectively mean that Bach did not explicitly use another individual’s tuning

system instead of his own, it does not dismiss the idea that Bach was influenced by someone

else’s tuning methods.

In 2005, Bradley Lehman brought forth an intriguing proposal to Bach’s temperament.

According to Lehman, this temperament “is easy to set quickly by ear [(15 minutes)], usable in

all keys, with pleasing progression of key differences, and it yields convincing performances of

12 Ibid., 242.
13 Lindley, “J.S. Bach’s Tunings,” 724.
14 Ibid., 723.
15 O’Donnell, “Bach's Temperament, Occam's Razor, and the Neidhardt Factor,” 630.
 5

the WTC”: all things previously mentioned.16 Lehman writes about the series of loops written

above the title of the work: five loops with double knots inside, three regular loops, and then

three with one knot inside. Lindley suggests, when read upside down, that each consecutive knot

represents a fifth in the octave, and that each, depending on if it is regular or has something

inside, coincides with a degree to which the ditonic comma is altered on that particular fifth.

According to Lehman, the layout is “five 1/6 comma 5ths F-C-G-D-A-E, then three pure 5ths E-

B-F#-C#, and finally three 1/12 comma 5ths C#-G#-D#-A#”: the last fifth being 1/12 comma

sharp.17 He points to the fact that, as Bach stated in 1725, that one can only write down the

rudiments of musical understanding, and that the rest must be explained though oral

instructions.18 Such a series of loops would then explain why there are little to no documents

concerning Bach’s temperament: because Bach had already written them down on the title page

of the collection. But that still does not explain where Bach got the idea for the temperament in

the first place, which can be explained by looking to the theorist Johann Georg Neidhardt.

It is actually unknown whether Bach and Neidhardt even met, but there is some

compelling evidence to suggest that maybe their paths did cross. Neidhardt himself was,

according to O’Donnell, “Bach’s exact contemporary,” stating that his “work in this area was

16 Bradley Lehman, “Bach’s Extraordinary Temperament: Our Rosetta Stone--1,” Early Music

33, no. 1 (2005): 3.

17 Ibid.
18 Ibid., 6.
 6

recognized by such writers as Mattheson, Mizler, and Adlung, all admirers of Bach.”19 Lindley

recalls an account of Bach’s son in law Johann Christoph Altnikol, who commented on

Zacharias Hildebrandt, who was paid to “tune harpsichords in two churches in Leipzig where

Bach was the Kapellmeister, [and] tuned in a Neidhardt-like way.”20 Additionally, the two

temperament books dealing with concentric tunings produced by Neidhardt were printed in 1724

and 1732, so Bach could have known them either through a personal connection or through

circulating manuscripts.21 Either way, it is apparent that even if they had never personally met,

Bach could have at least known of Neidhardt’s work through other means.

Out of all of the temperaments Neidhardt proposed, one in particular may have

influenced Bach: Neidhardt’s Third-Circle, No. 4. In this particular temperament, according to

J. Murray Barbour, “there are three fifths tempered by 1/12 comma and five by 1/6 comma; three

fifths are pure, and one is 1/12 comma sharp.”22 This temperament is the exact same in its

tempering of the ditonic comma as Lehman’s proposed temperament, only differing in the order

in which they are arranged. This means that Neidhardt could have very well influenced Bach’s

tuning method at the time. And since, as stated previously, “no one was able to tune to Bach’s

satisfaction,” the small differences between the two temperaments could suggest that Bach came

across this temperament, either from circulating manuscripts or by examining Hildebrandt’s

tuning at Leipzig, and found it to be decent. In such case, he could then proceed to alter it

slightly to suit his tastes and inscribe it on The Well-Tempered Clavier to offer his students a

19 O’Donnell, “Bach's Temperament, Occam's Razor, and the Neidhardt Factor,” 632.
20 Mark Lindley and Ibo Ortgies, “Bach-Style Keyboard Tuning,” Early Music 34, no. 4 (2006):

617.
21 O’Donnell, “Bach's Temperament, Occam's Razor, and the Neidhardt Factor,” 630.
22 J. Murray Barbour, Tuning and Temperament: A Historical Survey (East Lansing: Michigan

State College Press, 1951), 170.

simple way of remembering it, one in which they would have no need of further writing about

the matter: hence the sparse material on the subject today.

Whether or not Bach actually knew Neidhardt, or even attempted to describe his

temperament above the title of The Well-Tempered Clavier, the idea should still not be

discounted. And unless an historical document of some sort is uncovered one day revealing what

the temperament actually is, it will probably remain a mystery. And that is under the assumption

that Bach even had a specific temperament in mind, or even had a set one that he consistently

used. It is unknown whether Bach even had the means to subtract 1/6 and 1/12 commas from

each consecutive fifth. He could have just tuned to what sounded good to his ear, and not on the

basis of temperament at all. Similarly, it is still possible that Bach was influenced by Neidhardt,

but set his own tunings by ear anyway, maintaining only a rough approximation to Neidhardt’s

proposed tuning. But regardless of whether or not Neidhardt did influence Bach, it still remains

evident that Bach did not use equal temperament, but rather, a concentric tuning.
 8

Bibliography

Barbour, J. Murray. Tuning and Temperament: A Historical Survey. East Lansing: Michigan
State College Press, 1951.

Barnes, John. “Bach's Keyboard Temperament: Internal Evidence from the Well Tempered
Clavier.” Early Music 7, no. 2 (1979): 236-249.

Lehman, Bradley. “Bach’s Extraordinary Temperament: Our Rosetta Stone--1.” Early Music
33, no. 1 (2005): 3-23.

Lennox Atkins, E.P. “Ear Training and the Standarisation of Equal Temperament.” Proceedings
of the Musical Association Session 41 (March 1915): 91-111.

Lindley, Mark, and Ibo Ortgies. “Bach-Style Keyboard Tuning.” Early Music 34, no. 4 (2006):
613-624.

Lindley, Mark. “J.S. Bach’s Tunings.” The Musical Times 126, no. 1714 (1985): 721-726.

O’Donnell, John. “Bach's Temperament, Occam's Razor, and the Neidhardt Factor.” Early
Music 34, no. 4 (2006): 625-633.

Rasch, Rudolf. “Tuning and Temperament.” In The Cambridge History of Western Music
Theory, ed. Thomas Christensen, 193-222. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,
2002.