No disrespect intended Joseph, but you might read my message again more carefully.
If you want to know what my experience with guitar is you can take a look at http://www.stuartleblanc.org/music.htm -----Original Message----- From: Mayes, Joseph [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 2:28 PM To: Stuart LeBlanc; lute net Subject: RE: mesmerization 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 --
