At 01:35 PM 12/8/2003 -0800, Howard Posner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>We have to remember that lute players, then as now, could read staff >notation, and played continuo from the first days of continuo, and often >played obbligato parts, like those by Bach, Handel and Vivaldi, from staff >notation. They did not have to write solo music in tablature, but chose to >do so because the system was useful. I have no argument with this historical account, except to say that it does not deal with the question at hand. Roman has argued that the free availability of facsimiles of lute tablatures will be useful in proselytizing the lute. The problem, taken from the point of view of the idea of increasing the size of the lute world, the subject line of this thread, is not what lute players do or can do, but what is the situation among those who are not yet lute players. The fact of the matter is that the greatest pool of potential lutenists are classical guitar players. For the most part, not only they cannot read tablature, they regard it, rightly or wrongly, as an inferior notational system and equate it with the TAB system used by acoustic guitarists. Even worse, most of their _teachers_, with very exceptions, are deathly against tablature. The other side of the coin is that of the almost 150,000 pieces available for the classical guitar from all periods, there are only 40-50 pieces that get to be played in concert and in recordings. Guitarists on the whole are driven by an herd instinct and if a given piece is not played or recorded by their favorite matinee idol, they do no touch it. So how do you make lutenists out of people whose only possible repertoire is what Angelo Gilardino once described as Aranbabazzolla (Aranjuez, Koyunbaba, Piazzolla)? You have to acquaint them with the music first. If they catch the bug, they would eventually graduate to the lute itself and learn to read tablature. Happened to most people here already this way, and it will happen again. It is not going to happen by posting facsimiles of lute tablature for free download. This is something that can be used only by people who are already in, and the claim that it will help in proselytizing is a disingenuous apologia. >Matanya's article on tablature transcription >(http://www.orphee.com/trans/trans.html#FN3REF) says the comments of Perrine >in 1697 and François Campion 1716 were "an indication of a general feelings >[sic] of malaise regarding tablature." This strikes me as too sweeping a >statement based on too little evidence. Tab was alive and well in the 18th >century, appearing even in Telemann's Getreue Music-Meister, a publication >not directed at lutenists, by a savvy marketer. May be you are right. May be I should have been more specific and say that these comments were "an indication of a general feelings [sic] of malaise regarding tablature" in France at the specific time frame of 1697 to 1716. And thank you for the [sic]. Fixed it. >There's no reason to think that every other house on the block >will ever have a lute in it, regardless of how much music is transcribed. >If modern notation were the key to mass appeal, there would be a billion >harpists in the world. That's an extreme view which does not address the immediate dilemma. I am sure you will agree that the question is not of a lute in every house, but a lute in every city. As Mr. Shoskes told us, some parts of the country, are completely devoid of any lute activity, and some parts of the world it has never been even heard of. As for the harp, it is in an entirely different ball game, since it is part of the orchestra. There will always be a call for harpists as long there are orchestras around. Besides, as Jon Murphy will tell you, it is a much more difficult instrument to play that any plucked fretted string instrument can possibly be. I know. I used to play the harp, and I even have one at home. >The phenomenal and continuing growth of the lute (measured by number of >players, concert ticket and CD sales, prominence of the better players, >sales of instruments) in the last few decades, and the way it has been >achieved, contradicts the notion that tablature has hindered that growth. Well, this is exactly the core of this thread: do we have any specific statistical data on this growth? or your perception of it is based on a personal impression? since you are a member of the board of the LSA, can you tell us how this growth is reflected in the society's membership? That is not to say that society membership is necessarily a reliable indicator of a general trend. I know some lutenists who will not be caught dead belonging to a society. But it will be a useful measure. >I'm sure nearly all of us came to the lute after hearing lute music played >from tablature Exactly my point. You came to the lute after hearing the music. You did not come to the lute because it was played from tablature, but because the sound got you by the you know what. So then you got a lute and learned to read tablature. >(I'm guessing two thirds were Bream converts) and found that >learning French tab was vastly easier than learning to drive a car or use a >computer. Certainly it's easier than learning an instrument or earning the >money to buy it and string it. No argument here. I learned to read tablature even without owning a lute, and I have done so already in the late 1950s. As I mentioned before, it was Diana Poulton who got me in touch with a lute maker named Hans Jordan and I ordered one from him. Never got it and life took another turn. But the issue here is not how easy it has been for you and me. The issue here is that this is not going to happen to others unless they get hooked, like you and me, by the music itself. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
