On 20 Dec 2008 at 14:59, John Howell wrote: > At 8:35 PM +0100 12/20/08, dc wrote: > >I'd editing a Charpentier piece with two viol (both marked "viole") > >parts, one in C3 and one in C4. What is the best for a modern > >edition? To keep the original clefs? Or use C3 for both parts? Or? > > C3, which is known by most solo viol players above the beginner > level, while C4 drives us nuts! (Similar but opposite for cellists.)
Let me second the dislike for tenor clef. As a viol player, I regularly play in bass clef, alto clef, treble clef 8 and treble clef at pitch. Tenor clef adds nothing at all in terms of range coverage. If it's actually for tenor viols, then tenor clef would make even less sense. > And in practical terms would make your parts playable on violas if > necessary. > > But this assumes that translating "viole" as "viola da gamba" and not > as "viola" (in the modern English sense) is correct. One quick check > would be whether the parts extend below small c (C3) in places. > Check especially the one originally in C4 clef, which would indicate > a lower range. Yes, there's been a lot of misinformation on this, in historical editions over the years, and a lot of older editions (e.g., DTD editions from the early 1900s) that just transcribed the stuff for modern strings and ignored the original. The ambiguity is inherent in the sources, as there was no hard and fast distinction in the use of the term, though one does find clarity in works like Theile's St. John Passion, which is for two violins (da braccia) and two viols (da gamba). But when the intended instrumentation is not mixed (or not even specific enough to matter), you're usually on your own figuring it out. Stylistically, there are parts that work better on violins but work fine on viols (such as the Schein Banchetto Musicale), and others that were written for viols but work decently on violins. For the lower parts, there's not much distinction to be made stylistically, though, as John suggests, a range that doesn't exceed the viola, for instance, would be a good indicator that it might have been written specifically to accommodate viola, or primarily intended for viola. My group has to go through this kind of thing all the time, particularly in German repertory. French repertory is less of an issue, as there wasn't so much usage of the full viol consort (even before the flowering of the solo repertory in the 25 years on either side of 1700). Given that it's Charpentier, I'd even wonder if the C4 part might be a violone part, i.e., meant for 16' performance, since I can't think of very much French vocal music of the period that I've encountered was written for two basses. But, of course, you'd have to look at the actual music to determine if that made any sense at all. -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
