squiggle_clavichord

From: Andreas Sparschuh (2007-09-13)
Subject: J.S.Bach's:  A  @@ E @@ H @@ F#@C#@G#@D#  @@@  b @@@ F@@@ C @@@ G @@@ D~A =400Hz

!squiggle_clavichord.scl
!
A559:600E1796:1797H448:449F#C#G#D#1702:1701b852:851F1916:1917C1436:1437G200:201A
!
 12
!
504/479 ! C#
536/479 ! D
567/479 ! D#
599/479 ! E
639/479 ! F
672/479 ! F#
718/479 ! G
756/479 ! G#
800/479 ! A sounds best @ intended "absolute-pitch" a4=400cps
851/479 ! b
898/479 ! H
2/1
!

but on less flexible harpsichords alike for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Mietke
's 
"...as official maker to the court. He delivered a harpsichord to the
court at Cöthen in 1719 on the recommendation of Johann Sebastian
Bach, which was probably the instrument for which Bach composed
Brandenburg concerto no.5 as a show-piece..."

i do approve that refinement instead to the above coarser clavichord
case, due to different acustics that such "a show-piece" demands from
the instrument as moderate modification 
(yielding less sharp 3rds in the b area):

!squiggle_harpsichord.scl
!
A559:600E1796:1797H448:449F#C#G#568:567Eb428:427b640.5:641.5F766.4:767.4C1436:1437G200:201A
!
 12
!
504/479 ! C#
536/479 ! D
568/479 ! Eb instead once D# 567 due to change in enharmonic dim-6th
599/479 ! E
1279/958 ! F 639.5 = 1297/2
672/479 ! F#
718/479 ! G
756/479 ! G#
800/479 ! A
854/479 ! b that's barely 851 in the clavichord version
898/479 ! H
2/1
!

that both different sounding solutions,
correspond each to the desired instrument type.
They do replace without substitution all my former releases.

Have a lot of fun in trying out to play in that;

Quests:
Are there any suggestions to improve that both versions?
Which one of that 2 do you like/prefer more?

sincerely
A.S.

From: Andreas Sparschuh (2007-09-13)
Subject: J.S.Bach's:  A  @@ E @@ H @@ F#@C#@G#@D#  @@@  b @@@ F@@@ C @@@ G @@@ D~A =400Hz

!squiggle_clavichord.scl
!
A559:600E1796:1797H448:449F#C#G#D#1702:1701b852:851F1916:1917C1436:1437G200:201A
!
 12
!
504/479 ! C#
536/479 ! D
567/479 ! D#
599/479 ! E
639/479 ! F
672/479 ! F#
718/479 ! G
756/479 ! G#
800/479 ! A sounds best @ intended "absolute-pitch" a4=400cps
851/479 ! b
898/479 ! H
2/1
!

but on less flexible harpsichords alike for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Mietke
's 
"...as official maker to the court. He delivered a harpsichord to the
court at Cöthen in 1719 on the recommendation of Johann Sebastian
Bach, which was probably the instrument for which Bach composed
Brandenburg concerto no.5 as a show-piece..."

i do approve that refinement instead to the above coarser clavichord
case, due to different acustics that such "a show-piece" demands from
the instrument as moderate modification 
(yielding less sharp 3rds in the b area):

!squiggle_harpsichord.scl
!
A559:600E1796:1797H448:449F#C#G#568:567Eb428:427b640.5:641.5F766.4:767.4C1436:1437G200:201A
!
 12
!
504/479 ! C#
536/479 ! D
568/479 ! Eb instead once D# 567 due to change in enharmonic dim-6th
599/479 ! E
1279/958 ! F 639.5 = 1297/2
672/479 ! F#
718/479 ! G
756/479 ! G#
800/479 ! A
854/479 ! b that's barely 851 in the clavichord version
898/479 ! H
2/1
!

that both different sounding solutions,
correspond each to the desired instrument type.
They do replace without substitution all my former releases.

Have a lot of fun in trying out to play in that;

Quests:
Are there any suggestions to improve that both versions?
Which one of that 2 do you like/prefer more?

sincerely
A.S.