But our musicians nowadays have so utterly exploded the most noble of all the moods, which the ancients
greatly admired for its majesty, that hardly any among them
make the least account of enharmonic distances. And so
negligent and lazy are they grown, as to believe the enharmonic
[p. 131]
diesis to be too contemptible to fall under the apprehension of sense, and they therefore exterminate it out of
their compositions, deeming those to be triflers that have any
esteem for it or make use of the mood itself. For proof
of which they think they bring a most powerful argument,
which rather appears to be the dulness of their own senses;
as if whatever fled their apprehensions were to be rejected
as useless and of no value. And then again they urge that
its magnitude cannot be perceived through its concord, like
that of the semitone, tone, and other distances; not understanding, that at the same time they throw out the third,
fifth, and seventh, of which the one consists of three, the
other of five, and the last of seven dieses. And on the
same principle all the intervals that are odd should be rejected as useless, inasmuch as none of them is perceptible
through concord; and this would include all which by
means of even the smallest diesis are measured by odd
numbers. Whence it necessarily follows, that no division
of the tetrachord would be of use but that which is to be
measured by all even intervals, as in the syntonic diatonic,
and in the toniaean chromatic.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.