Greetings Chris et al., I'm working from flawed memory here on an issue that is only somewhat related, so please forgive me if I'm only almost right. I seem to recall Strizich assumed reentrant tuning on 5-course guitar (the A course in a strings only without bourdon) and expected modern guitarists to place a single a on their guitars (in place of the ordinary A) in his staff-notation setting of de Visee's guitar music. Unfortunately, I don't believe Strizich was always clear regarding where notes should be fingered: along a, g, or b. He also assumed an octave d-d', but I don't recall if he ever notated the upper note sounded along the d course. The result was a score that was not really readable on sight, but rather required a little preparation and planning to actually turn into music.
I seem to recall some other transcriptions offering higher octaves from octave-stung courses in parentheses in addition the fundamental as a normal note, and I know of some selective approaches to single-note octave selection (either higher or lower, even lower octaves where reentrant tuning could be expected) to arrive at contiguous line or logical counterpoint where the intended octave is unclear or shifts within a passage along an octave-strung course. Any other approaches or thoughts on their pros and cons? Best, Eugene At 06:05 PM 11/25/2008, Christopher Stetson wrote: > >>> Christopher Stetson 11/25/2008 5:59 PM >>> >Hi, > >Good question, Eugene. There is no indication of octave stringing >in any staff notation that I know of, just the fundamental note. I >never thought about it, since I played the tablature. I don't >think, however, that the practice in and of itself qualifies the >transcribers as "fundamentalists". > >I think that Dana hinted at what I always assumed was the >reason: the assumption among the Americans and the French appears >to have been that a scholarly researcher should be able to play the >music on the piano. There were only a few people who had John >Ward's demonstrated ability to realize all sorts of tablature >directly to the keyboard. The German and English editions seemed to >favor guitar transcriptions, if I recall correctly. > >It was, by the way, a real pain. I spent hours writing pieces out >by hand to avoid the page turns in all but the shortest pieces. It >could result in the preservation of the "Stetson Lute Book (ca. >1985)", though! > >Further there were, or at least it felt like there were, a lot fewer >lute enthusiasts back then, and we were less concerned with those >kinds of details. Even in the small venues I played, people would >still approach you after the concert and ask, "what's that >instrument you were playing?" > >Perhaps Arthur can clarify this? > >Best to all, and keep playing >Chris. > > >>> "Eugene C. Braig IV" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 11/25/2008 5:21 PM >>> >Out of curiosity, all ye to read from this edition or Arthur himself, >how do the grand staff versions handle octave basses? > >Thanks, >Eugene > > >At 03:29 AM 11/25/2008, David Tayler wrote: > >I play from the grand staff in Ness's edition, I first mark any > >differences to the tab, then cut and paste them--fewer page turns. > >The parts are very nicely realized in the transcription. > >dt > > > > > >At 06:39 PM 11/24/2008, you wrote: > > >Hi, all, > > >I just checked, and yes, Mr. Ness's old Francesco edition does have > > >grand staff, as do all of the old Corpus des Luthistes Francais > > >volumes from Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. (Ballard > > >1&2, Bocquet, Morlaye, etc.) > > >Good luck, Guy! > > >Best to all, and keep playing, > > >Chris. > > > > > > >>> "Guy Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 11/24/2008 5:10 PM >>> > > >There's a lot of guitar transcriptions out there, if guitar > staff is OK. If > > >you need grand staff, a couple that come immediately to mind are the > > >Kanazawa Holborne, and the Ness Francesco volumes (I think > Arthur included a > > >grand staff version with that edition, but I don't have a copy myself). > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: Herbert Ward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 2:01 PM > > >To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu > > >Subject: [LUTE] Material for sight reading. > > > > > > > > >What is a good way to get a quantity of sight-reading material > > >in the keys of C, F, and G? I need modern staff notation (not > > >tablature), like modern-day piano music. > > > >To get on or off this list see list information at >http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
