======= 28-01-2009 19:21:00 =======
>
>"David Tayler" <vidan...@sbcglobal.net> schrieb:
>> Have you looked at the Principes de musique of Monteclair, because
>> that I think is one of the most important sources for ornamentation
>> practice,
>
>There's certainly no argument about the importance of Montéclair's book.
>1736 is a bit late, though, regarding composers of Mesangeau's
>generation (1638), don't you think?
I think such a late source as Montéclair, interesting as i may be, is rather
irrelevant in that case. Mersenne or the lute tutor for Mary Burwell (Boethius
Press facsimile)are certainly much more reliable sources of information if you
are into Mesangeau's music and the other lutenists of that period.
>
>> and then the airs avec doubles of Lambert for the brouderie
>> style you can feather in.
>
>That was a bit too colloquial for me, I'm afaid. What is brouderie, and
>what does feather in mean?
I have a feeling that the word intended was "broderie", i.e. the art of
embroidery in French. When applied to music I suppose David means the art of
making divisions and ornamenting a given musical text.
I believe "feather" is a technical term in rowing and in this case would mean
something like "dig". But I may be totally wrong of course ;-) !
>And how do airs de court by Michel Lambert (several volumes 1660-1710),
>father-in-law to Lully, elucidate, and relate to, ornaments in French
>baroque lute music (with French lute composers trying to differ from
>contemporary mainstream music-making as much as they could)?
A good read on that comparative appoach of lute and harpsichord music is David
Ledbetter's book "Harpsichord and Lute Music in Seventeenth Century France",
Indiana University Press, 1987. You probably know this one already.
>
>Mathias
Best wishes,
Jean-Marie
jmpoiri...@wanadoo.fr
http://poirierjm.free.fr
28-01-2009
N ¶è®ß¶¬+-±ç¥Ëbú+«b¢vÛiÿü0ÁË j»f¢ëayÛ¿Á·?ë^iÙ¢ø§uìa¶i
