Chris, it took you three and a half hours to join battle this time. You must be slowing in your old age.
On Mar 17, 2014, at 10:49 AM, Christopher Wilke <chriswi...@yahoo.com> wrote: > There is no historical evidence implying that plucked continuo players didn't > want or expect to be heard even in large groups. I wasnt talking in the past tense. The question was about now, in an ensemble with an electronic keyboard and three modern cellos played by cellists with no clue about period practice. The fact is that we can only guess at what the historical attitude was, and risk being simple-minded if we assume there was only one historical attitude. In any event, the question isnt whether the lute is heard, but how it is heard. The second cellist doesnt sit around worrying about whether hell be heard separately from the other two cellists, and if he plays so as draw attention to himself, the conductor wont ask him back. An ensemble is an ensemble, and you have to think about the ensemble sound, not your own. > On the contrary, Weiss writes, "I have adapted one of my instruments for > accompaniment in the orchestra and church. It has the size, length, power and > resonance of the veritable theorbo and has the same effect, only the tuning > is different... [The archlute and theorbo] are ordinarily played with the > nails and produce in close proximity a coarse, harsh sound. > Period performers didn't select powerful, resonant instruments which they > then played with nails, producing an intentionally penetrating tone color, > only to become a subordinate "part of the mix. Its precisely the sort of sound Id want if I wanted to blend with a harpsichord. It might also be the sort of sound Id want if I were the sole continuo player, in which case Id be more concerned about whether my sound was distinct. Weiss was a star, the most highly-paid musician in the star-studded Dresden establishment, and he would have been in a featured position, probably doing a lot of sole continuo in the Dresden orchestra. > Certainly they were "heard as a distinct, identifiable sound. 1. Beware of certainty. 2. So if four theorbos are playing the continuo line, each of them should be heard as a distinct, identifiable sound? > Something is deeply flawed with an ideology ?!?!?!?!? > that allows one to actually feel comfortable writing, "it doesn't matter at > all what you play... chalk it up to practice time" in a serious musical > discussion. Serious musical discussion??? You havent been paying attention. Or youve never played an orchestra gig with clueless modern cellists and electronic keyboards. I have; and and trust me, were not having a serious musical discussion. BTW, the last time I did it, I was playing my Clive Titmuss Strato-baroque guitar. They heard me pretty distinctly, Im sure, but there were times when the group would sound better if I werent heard: for example, the only way to get a heirarchy of strong and weak beats was to play out on the strong beats and back off (or lay out) on the weak ones, because nobody else knew what a weak beat is. If what the audience heard was GUITAR/not guitar/GUITAR/not guitar instead of STRONG/weaK/STRONG/weak, I was just a distraction. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
