"those who dance are thought mad by those who don't hear the music" Anon
On 2/17/09 11:29 AM, "Guy Smith" <guy_m_sm...@comcast.net> wrote: > When we remember we are all mad, the mysteries disappear and life stands > explained. > > Mark Twain > > -----Original Message----- > From: David Rastall [mailto:dlu...@verizon.net] > Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:10 AM > To: William Brohinsky > Cc: hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk; lutelist Net; howard posner > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Theorbo by Nic. Nic. B. van der Waals for sale > > On Feb 17, 2009, at 10:32 AM, William Brohinsky wrote: > >> Is it somehow illegal to play music for long theorbos on short >> theorbos? If you wish to play the music of Kapsberger or Piccininni, >> but cannot afford to buy (or cannot manage to borrow) a theorbo longer >> than some criteria (which hasn't really been stated, but is obviously >> longer than the 92mm/67mm instrument I played last semester), you are >> daft. Either you don't tune double-reentrant (thus satisfying Martyn >> and screwing up voice leading, which is daft) or you do (which, by >> Martyn's definition is daft.) >> >> The obvious conclusion is that any theorbo player who isn't rich and >> wishes to play music written for double-reentrant theorbo is daft. >> >> So, by logical extension, being poor and wanting to play some of the >> most beautiful music (or quirky, or whatever happens to attract you to >> the music) means you are daft. >> >> But then, isn't a fundamental criterion for playing a 5' or 6' long, >> delicate instrument with enough strings to pass for a small harp, as >> long as it doesn't involve passing through a door, being daft? >> >> So I guess I don't see the purpose in this particular set of >> decision criteria. > > Daft old world, isn't it? And, according to Martyn's historical > pretensions, daft new one too. ;-) > > Davidr > dlu...@verizon.net > > > > > -- > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > >
