Yes. First and foremost, tablature was created to serve as a short
   score of polyphonic music and printed or manuscript tablatures of
   polyphonic music were meant to serve as a reservoir of information.
   While the ideal is to play every note, I firmly believe that lutenists
   always made adjustments, as you have described, for practical purposes.

   The idea of 16th-century lute tablatures being compared to a form such
   as the preludes by Villa-Lobos, in terms of notes that must be
   conquered through disciplined technique, is an absurdity imposed upon
   historical music by 20th century guitarists who took up the lute.  The
   point of 16th-century tablatures was to gain an understanding of the
   musical intent in the score and the greatest technical challenge is to
   realize the polyphony to the best of one's ability.

   I have read V. Galilei's Fronimo forward and backwards, and his remarks
   about not making concessions in intabulating polyphony for the sake of
   fingering are an admonition to avoid altering the content of the piece
   to reduce fingering difficulties because a tablature score is meant to
   represent the music.  Overcome the difficulties or not, but don't
   change the polyphony.

   Molinaro was an organist and his tablatures show what is possible but
   are certainly influenced by his conscious or unconscious reference to
   keyboard practice.  Terzi was a freak if he could play all those notes
   in his intabulations while observing the tactus. Not bloody likely.
   He's probably laughing at us from another world.

   If there is one thing I have absorbed over thirty years of lute-playing
   and creating countless intabulations of sixteenth century polyphony,
   the score is a reservoir of information.  It was always meant to be so.

   RA
     __________________________________________________________________

   From: lute-...@new-old-mail.cs.dartmouth.edu
   <lute-...@new-old-mail.cs.dartmouth.edu> on behalf of Guilherme Barroso
   <guilhermesbarr...@gmail.com>
   Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2020 9:15 PM
   To: yuval.dvo...@posteo.de <yuval.dvo...@posteo.de>
   Cc: LuteList <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>;
   lute-...@new-old-mail.cs.dartmouth.edu
   <lute-...@new-old-mail.cs.dartmouth.edu>
   Subject: [LUTE] Re: About vocal intabulations

      Yes, indeed.
      For me, it makes more and more sense to view these intabulations as
   a
      way to show the whole vocal piece and not something to be performed
      exactly as written.
      About the Barrés with any other finger then the first. Has  anyone
      seen a historical source discuss this? I don't  recall seeing one.
      Em ter., 28 de abr. de 2020 Ã s 23:04, <[1]yuval.dvo...@posteo.de>
      escreveu:
        This is really quite an extreme example! But maybe with a
   different
        technique it would be possible e.g. to play the first chord?
        Sometimes,
        I have the impression that they used also Barrés with the second
   or
        third finger, which would (theoretically) make it possible to play
        the
        first chord. Just today I found an similar chord in a piece by
        Hurel,
        which would need a barré with the second or fourth finger. I'll
        hopefully get my new renaissance lute this or next week (7courses,
        85cm), I'm very curious to try it! :-)   and then still we have to
        consider a world without 1. printed full scores and 2. recordings.
        So,
        in order to study a piece of music, you would have to perform - or
        read
        it - just by yourself. Maybe this was really kind of "full score"
        for
        them - you can use it to study the music and counterpoint, and if
        you
        actually want to perfor it you still can decide to omit some
   notes.
        Am 28.04.2020 21:25 schrieb Guilherme Barroso:
        > Dear Yuval,
        >
        > Thanks a lot for your answer.
        >
        > I have a 7c course 60cm lute and it does not get much easier at
        some
        > places. Of course with your lute, even worse.
        >
        > But there are some parts that even with a small lute, it is just
        not
        > possible.
        >
        > I attach in this email an example from Barbetta's publication
   from
        > 1582. In the marked passage, already the first chord is not
        possible
        > to play (this chord appears often in this publication and also
   in
        > Terzi's books), the next two bars are not better. even if you
   find
        a
        > way to do it by some kind of arpeggio, how make it sound
   musical?
        >
        > Em ter., 28 de abr. de 2020 Ã s 20:50,
   <[2]yuval.dvo...@posteo.de>
        > escreveu:
        >
        >> Dear Guilherme,
        >>
        >> it's interesting what Philippe writes about Il Fronimo, it
   would
        be
        >> nice
        >> to talk with him about all this stuff. I met him some weeks
   ago,
        >> and
        >> he's the only guy I know who isn't lutenist at all and can read
        all
        >> kind
        >> of tablature fluently - quite crazy!
        >> To respond to your question I can only offer a view on my
        personal
        >> experience as well as some thoughts about it: From my practical
        >> experience I had to ask myself exactly these questions when
        Martina
        >> and
        >> me were recording our CD with diminutions. She played them on
        >> traverso -
        >> so I could just play the madrigals without the canto, which
        worked
        >> quite
        >> well - but also with violone, and for this I had to play all
   the
        >> voices.
        >> Since at this time I had only a fairly big lute (10 courses,
        67cm),
        >> I
        >> decided to step away from perfectly playing all voicing with a
        >> perfect
        >> voiceleading, and instead making an arrangement which kept the
        >> madrigals
        >> recognizable, but at the same time quitting some tones of the
        inner
        >>
        >> voices and making the intabulations/arrangements more idiomatic
        for
        >> the
        >> lute, because above all I though it was more important to get a
        >> good
        >> phrasing and to make good music instead of hurting my hand. If
        >> you're
        >> interested in the choices I made, you can find some of the
   pieces
        >> we
        >> recorded on youtube.
        >> Regarding the amount of instructions about making owns
        >> intabulations,
        >> Philippe's argument seems not at all unlikely for me. But at
   the
        >> same
        >> time I'm asking myself about the differences in taste then and
        now
        >> (maybe for them it was most important to render the madrigal
        >> exactly? At
        >> the end, they lived in a sphere where only polyphonic music
        >> existed, so
        >> maybe they would have heard the mistakes made by making the
        >> intabulations more suitable for the lute?), and also about
   which
        >> role
        >> the size of the lute plays. Did you try to play the
   "unplayable"
        >> parts
        >> on a smaller lute? You could just use an capo in your second or
        >> third
        >> fret, just to try how it feels with a small instrument.
        >>
        >> All the best,
        >> Yuval
        >>
        >> Am 28.04.2020 15:12 schrieb Guilherme Barroso:
        >>> Dear Lute collective,
        >>> For some time i've been thinking about some aspects about the
        >>> intabulation of vocal pieces and i would like to know your
        >> ideas.
        >>> When we look to the gigantic repertoire of vocal intabulations
        >> to
        >>> the
        >>> lute we encounter several pieces that are incredibly difficult
        >> to
        >>> play.
        >>> Intabulations done by Molinaro, Terzi, Barbetta, for example,
        >> some
        >>> times present passages that are not only very demanding
        >> technically
        >>> but also with impossible chord positions. Canguilhem, in his
        >> book
        >>> about Galilei's Fronimo treatise, says that the main goal of
        >>> Galilei's
        >>> intabulations was to study the counterpoint and composition,
        >> not to
        >>> be
        >>> played. He even compares Galilei's intabulation of Vestiva i
        >> Colli
        >>> for
        >>> solo lute (where the madrigal is complete with all the voices)
        >> and
        >>> another version for lute and bass solo (where the lute part is
        >>> extremely simplified with supression of voices). The lute and
        >> voice
        >>> version for sure was intended to be performed while the other
        >> might
        >>> be
        >>> intended to be studied. The act of intabulating would be the
        >> same
        >>> as
        >>> making a score for study purposes.
        >>> There are a lot of intabulations in the repertoire that are
        >> more
        >>> concerned in maintaining all the voices of the original work
        >> then
        >>> making some concessions to adapt it better to the instrument.
        >>> Of course, we are dealing with a huge repertoire from several
        >>> composers
        >>> and several places with specific differences. Le Roy, for
        >> example,
        >>> is
        >>> more willing to make changes to adapt to the instrument, he
        >> says
        >>> that
        >>> the "playability and beauty should come first".
        >>> But even very complex intabulations were clearly meant to be
        >> played,
        >>> like the Terzi intabulations of vocal pieces that present a
        >>> "Contrapunto" from another lute. Terzi intabulations clearly
        >> prefer
        >>> to
        >>> maintain the original vocal piece in the intabulation in spite
        >> of
        >>> the
        >>> diffculty to play.
        >>> What do you think about this?
        >>> When you play this repertoire, do you try to keep all notes?
        >> Do you
        >>> omit certain notes to make it more playful? Do you make
        >> decision
        >>> based
        >>> on the musical flow?
        >>> I am very curious to hear your ideas.
        >>> All the best,
        >>> --
        >>> Guilherme Barroso
        >>> [1][3]www.guilherme-barroso.com [1]
        >>>
        >>> --
        >>>
        >>> References
        >>>
        >>> 1. [4]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ [2]
        >>>
        >>>
        >>> To get on or off this list see list information at
        >>> [5]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html [3]
        >
        > --
        >
        > Guilherme Barroso
        > [6]www.guilherme-barroso.com [1]
        >
        >
        >
        > Links:
        > ------
        > [1] [7]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com
        > [2] [8]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/
        > [3] [9]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
      --
      Guilherme Barroso
      [10]www.guilherme-barroso.com
      --
   References
      1. [1]mailto:yuval.dvo...@posteo.de
      2. [2]mailto:yuval.dvo...@posteo.de
      3. [3]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/
      4. [4]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/
      5. [5]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
      6. [6]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/
      7. [7]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/
      8. [8]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/
      9. [9]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
     10. [10]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/

   --

References

   1. mailto:yuval.dvo...@posteo.de
   2. mailto:yuval.dvo...@posteo.de
   3. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/
   4. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/
   5. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   6. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/
   7. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/
   8. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/
   9. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
  10. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/

Reply via email to