> So I wonder why, from folio 48r to 60 the tab use a low course, some notes
> below the fifth line of the tab, often (if not all time ? I have to look
> again) open string, and it is not used any more from folio 61 to the end
of tab ?
> For me this last part of tab is perhaps intended for guitar as the title
named both
> instrument, guitar and mandora. (seems the scribe is not the same...)
You are right, the open 6th course is exclusively used on fol. 4860r. And
there may be two distinct scribes (discernible by their respective capital
M).
Furthermore, you may distinguish three portions. The pieces on fol. 4860
have no numbers or other order. Fol. 60v 76r contain eight "parties" with
numbers, followed by a long row of 56 numbered pieces on fol. 76v96r.
That doesn't allow, however, for the conclusion that the portion on fol.
60v96r is intended for the guitar, as there is a duet for two mandoras in
the 5th partita on fol. 70v 71r.
Mathias
> > > Indeed I noticed the gallichon tuning, and wrote: "Interestingly one
> > > tuning on fol 6 is given as for the 'Calledono' which I presume
> > > refers to the gallichon thus once again showing an interchange in
> > > usage between the mandora and gallichon - though the tuning given is
> > > not one I recognise from other sources".
>
> Apologies, now I see what you mean. That's on fol. 3r (= p. 5). The word
actually
> reads "Callezono". There are three tunings. The first two of them are
intended
> for the 5c callichon, whereas the third tuning is for the 6string viol, as
indicated
> above the system ("Accord pro sex chordis / Aliter Viola di Gamb[a]").
>
> The first tuning is a - e - c - G - D. That is a standard callichon tuning
IIRC what
> Pietro Prosser wrote about it. The second tuning is somewhat faulty in
that the
> names do not match the pitches. There is a bass clef prescribed. The notes
are b
> - f - c - F - C. Yet the names written besides the upper three notes are
g, d, a.
> They would match in the treble clef, but not with the bass clef. Wrong
notes and
> correct names? I don't think so. I should think that the correct
alternative
> callichon tuning is bb - f - c - F
> - C.
>
> The third tuning is that of a standard bass viol (in D). That might give a
clue as for
> the solo music for the viol (fol. 33v 47v).
>
> Fol. 5r 33r is a bass part for the accompaniment of arias to be sung.
> Among them, I stumbled upon the air Sommes nous pas trop heureux by Lully
> (9v).
>
> Fol. 48 96 contain solo music for the mandora, closing with a long set
of
> variations on Les Folies d'Espagne.
>
> On fol. 96 is a chart with alfabeto, followed by an air for the guitar
("Man weiß
> bey dießer zeit von keinem Freund" = no friends around, these days).
>
> The rest consists of duets for the viol as treble (betrayed by some dyads)
and
> possibly the callichon as bass instruments, including a set of
arrangements of
> tunes from Lully's opera Belloferon.
>
> Apparently, the guitar and the mandora were considered different not only
> regarding their respective shapes, but also in terms of playing technique
and its
> notation. There is no alfabeto (and, inferentially, no strumming) in the
mandora
> parts of the ms.
>
> Mathias
>
>
>
> > Hm, on fol. 6r I see a gavotte and a somewhat strange scale with
> > wrong
> pitch
> > names (suppose its a tool for transposing from sight). And on fol. 6v
> > I
> see a
> > Schmidt Courent. No charts on fol. 16, 26, 36, 46, 56, 66, 76, 86.
> > There are alfabeto and tuning instructions on fol. 96, but they are
> intended for
> > the guitar, and the tuning is not a new one but a different way of
> > tuning,
> i.e. in
> > octaves and fifths (with a mistake in measure 1, as 1a + 3f equals a
> > major
> third).
> >
> > On p. 24v seq, the headline that I can see reads Fundamentales
> > Concentus
> in
> > Callizon, i.e. either chords in root position or basic chords on
> > the
> Callichon.
> > Considering fol. 25r, I prefer the latter.
>
>
>
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at
> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>
>
