>At a guess I'd have to say that when a person who studies >Renaissance and
Medieval music calls a thing modern, >200 easily falls into that category.
It's not an insult, just a >fact of the thing being only 200 vs. 400 or more
years >old. Historians also often tend to call anything younger >than the
English Renaissance "modern".
>Regards,
I see your point, BTW right now I'm listening to some " relatively
modern", Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, and Weiss, not to mention a little modern
guitar music by Sor.
>Craig
Michael Thames
www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Lutelist" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 11:57 AM
Subject: Re: French Lutenist about to release a worldwide first- the Book of
Perrine
> Michael wrote:
> >
> > Thomas, I usually see your logic, and agree with almost all of your
> >comments. However to call a system of guitar notation that has been
around,
> >for 200 years, and used by the foremost guitar composers of the past and
> >present, a " relatively modern invention" your sense of the passage of
time
> >is allot different than mine, what kind of sweetener are you using in you
> >coffee thesedays? I'd like to try some too!
>
> At a guess I'd have to say that when a person who studies Renaissance and
Medieval music calls a thing modern, 200 easily falls into that category.
It's not an insult, just a fact of the thing being only 200 vs. 400 or more
years old. Historians also often tend to call anything younger than the
English Renaissance "modern".
>
> Regards,
> Craig
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> $0 Web hosting with up to 200MB web space, 1000 MB Transfer
> 10 Personalized POP and Web E-mail Accounts, and much more.
> Signup at www.doteasy.com
>
>
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at
> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>
