Maybe we are seeing here what some of Dowland's contemporary critics meant
when they remarked about Dowland's lousy counterpoint. Can it be that we
are assuming that Dowland would not write in such a manner, ignoring the
fact that indeed he did---on purpose?
----- Original Message -----
From: "David van Ooijen" <davidvanooi...@gmail.com>
To: "lute-cs.dartmouth.edu" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 12:20 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Dowland's "Lachrimae"
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:09 AM, David Tayler <vidan...@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
As printed in the Poulton edition, The fifths and direct octaves
cross the bar, from G to D in the lowest sounding voices to E flat to
B flat in the lowest sounding voices.
I see, consecutive fifths between what I regard as bass and middle
voice (altus/tenor) to bass and tenor, with the middle voice of the
first chord clearly going to the altus of the second chord. I think we
can agree to disagree on calling that a parallel fifth - we
definitively went to different counterpoint classes - but if your
ears perceive it such, so much the better for your ears. Mine are less
well-attuned, I must confess.
Your fix, replacing the b-flat by a g (second fret, fourth course) is
elegant - and not more difficult - but I must say I like the stepwise
motion of b-flat to c' to d' tenor line in the second measure, in
imitation of what is happening in the middle voice of measure one. As
you say, hearing counterpoint in lute writing can be a personal thing.
But adding the g might have the best of both worlds: warmer chord,
third to avoid attention to bare 5-8 sound, retaining stepwise tenor.
I will try it for a while.
Thanks for the clarification, anyway.
David
--
*******************************
David van Ooijen
davidvanooi...@gmail.com
www.davidvanooijen.nl
*******************************
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
signature database 4892 (20100224) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 4892 (20100224) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
