Well, normally I would consider this as too far out to engender a 
reply...But...
 
Let's see if understand the point: You'er saying that if the lute were 
to be included in every piece of music in which it could be included, 
that that would be an enormous repertoire. I'll have to agree. It would. 
(sort of like saying, "If the lute's repertoire was much larger, it 
would be much larger.")
 
The guitar does suffer from only being included in duos with the flute, 
violin, viola, 'cello, voice, piano, string quartet, and orchestra - to 
name but some - so I guess you're right on both counts. (please read the 
tone as slightly bewildered sarcasm)
 
I think you may be in dangerous territory - the proverbial "glass house" 
- to call the guitar community incestuous.
 
I don't know what your experience or knowledge of the guitar is, or why 
you seem to feel the necessity of putting down one instrument in order 
to bring up another. Can't we all just get along?
 
The original question involved the relative size of the repertoires - 
not some emaginary scenario where the one would be much larger.
 
A friend sent me an e mail after reading some of the posts on this 
subject, to inform me that in his library of 19th C. guitar music there 
were over 100,000 pieces. He figures he has about half. That's just one 
century out of several that contain guitar music.
 
Douglas Alton Smith states that there are about 20,000 renaissance lute 
pieces and about the same number in the baroque. (History of the Lute, 
Pg 301)
 
This doesn.t sound like anywhere near the "much larger rep." that I keep 
hearing about.
 
Joseph Mayes

________________________________

From: Stuart LeBlanc [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sat 4/2/2005 12:15 PM
To: lute net
Subject: RE: mesmerization




Well, consider this: apropos the recent discussion of the relative sizes 
of the
lute and guitar repertoires, what if you include ensemble music?  Given 
that you
could include a lute in most anything involving instruments prior to 
1750, the
guitar repertoire is comparitively tiny.

This points to the often observed fact that guitarists are unique among
"classical musicians" in that the repertoire is almost entirely solo, 
where it
is not solo it is almost entirely some multiple of guitars, and if this 
isn't
bad enough most performances are presented by guitar organizations for 
audiences
of guitar players.  I forget who wrote it or where (might have been 
Soundboard),
but I recall this situation being referred to as "the incestuous world 
of the
guitar."

There certainly has been a lot of recent effort from a few conscientious 
players
to get good composers to write for guitar and other instruments, but 
there is a
pretty big gap to fill before guitarists have a ensemble repertoire 
comparable
to that of the piano trio, and which is easier to perform than e.g. Le 
marteau
sans maitre.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mayes, Joseph [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 10:16 AM
To: Stuart LeBlanc; lute net
Subject: RE: mesmerization


Gosh! Stuart

That's hard to argue with - unless one were to point out that the same
would hold true for any other (splinter)group of musicians - say lute
players

Joseph Mayes

________________________________

From: Stuart LeBlanc [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sat 4/2/2005 5:39 AM
To: lute net
Subject: RE: mesmerization




To the extent that guitarists only compare themselves to other
guitarists, they will have no bona fides as musicians.

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Thames [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 8:53 PM
To: lute net; Stuart LeBlanc
Subject: Re: mesmerization


I had dinner this evening with a couple of guitarist's from Houston.
They recently saw a concert in Houston of the Brazilian guitar quartet. 
I asked
them how it was.
   They were quite pived that they showed up on stage with music.
    She said it was really no fun sitting there all night watching four 
guys
with their nose's buried in their music, and never looked up once at the
audience, the whole time. Ouch!
Michael Thames
www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stuart LeBlanc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "lute net" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 1:28 PM
Subject: RE: mesmerization


>
> In fact Beethoven called his pieces "sonatas for piano and violin" and 
they
are
> considered to be solo vehicles for both instruments.  So according to 
the
logic
> of some people, both the pianist and violinist should play from memory 
if they
> wish to achieve artistic credibility.
>
> A program by Kronos Quartet which I attended a while back began with a 
piece
> performed from memory.  It began with the room completely dark, and as 
a slow
> melody emerged from the cello, a spotlight gradually revealed the 
player with
> her shock of fair hair against an all-black set.  The other players in 
turn
made
> their entrances both theatrically and musically, beginning their parts
backstage
> and continuing to play while walking to their respective seats on the 
stage.
It
> was all effectively done, and some of the audience thought they had 
witnessed
> something very profound, probably the same ones who rave about organ 
recitals
> with lightshow.  I suppose they are also the same ones who equate 
memorized
> music with "the soul of the artist" or some such.
>
> Another interesting program I heard was a duo recital by Eliot Fisk 
and Manuel
> Barrueco.  They some things from the score, some from memory.  
Opinions tended
> to fall strongly into one of two mutually exclusive groups, which were 
either
> 1)Eliot Fisk is a vibrant performer who knows how to engage an 
audience, or
> 2)Manuel Barrueco is a consummate artist who knows how to make music 
on the
> guitar.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Howard Posner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 10:16 AM
> To: lute net
> Subject: Re: mesmerization
>
>
> Michael Thames wrote:
>
> > try repeating the words, solo,,,, solo,,, solo,,, this
> > may help.
>
> It doesn't, though the absence of plurals with apostrophes is 
heartening.
> Is a violinist playing a Beethoven sonata playing "solo"?  If he is, 
does he
> lack "professional stage presence" if he has the music in front of 
him?
> What about the pianist playing with him?  Does he lack "professional 
stage
> presence" if he plays with music in front of him, as he almost 
certainly
> will?  What if it's a trio?  I've never seen a string quartet play 
without
> music in front of them.  A "soloist" will often play a concerto with 
music
> in front of him, particularly with period-instrument ensembles.
>
> So no, repetition of a mantra is no more helpful here than mindless
> repetition usually is.  I don't know if you've ever thought about 
where, in
> the continuum from one musician alone on a stage to 100 musicians on a
> stage, the musician playing from music no longer lacks "professional 
stage
> presence" if he has the music in front of him.  But your personal 
answer to
> that question is probably of use only to you.  It wouldn't interest 
me,
> because I don't share your view that it's unprofessional for musician 
to
> read music in concert.
>
> BTW, I would hope to avoid a concert where someone was sightreading.  
That
> would be unprofessional.  And I can't imagine a musician "site 
reading." I
> suppose web browsers and surveyors do that.
>
> HP



To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html



--

Reply via email to