Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 9/4/07, David W. Fenton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You can't apply the practices of one place to another unless there > were demonstrated connections (like shared background of teachers, > and a Kapellmeister or two shuttling back and forth between them). > There was no "European" or "German" practice -- just a whole lot of > little islands. Well the connections DO exist in the examples I cited: Telemann, Graupner, and Fasch, all were candidates for the kantorate in Leipzig. all had been deeply involved with the musical life of Leipzig, they went to school and graduated in Leipzig. All three of them personally knew Kuhnau. In fact, one of the audition pieces Graupner wrote was a Magnificat very much in the "Kuhnau" style. Fasch started a 2nd collegium in Leipzig, and later studied 16 weeks with Graupner in Darmstadt. Pisendel also studied for sometime in Darmstadt before he ended up in Dresden; Telemann worked with the Darmstadt kapelle for about 10 years while he was a music director in nearby Frankfurt, and knew Bach as well. Fasch also asked Mattheson for his help in having the leading composers of Germany become involved with a "music inter-library" loan, where scores and cantata cycles would be traded and performed. Lucky for posterity this happened, because almost all of Fasch's materials stored at Zerbst were lost or bombed into dust during World War 2. So no, these examples I cited aren't solitary islands of composers unaware of performance habits and normative styles. If anything. they were quite connected with each other on many levels. Thanks Kim Patrick Clow ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 04.09.2007 David W. Fenton wrote: It's the dogmatic limitation that has always annoyed the hell out of me, not the assertion that the pieces were performed one on a part in their original performances. You haven't read it, have you? I mean Joshua's theories, not what others have said about them. Or at least Parrot's book. > Actually the onus is on providing proof that 12-20 member choirs were > the norm in early 18th century Germany. That's a ridiculous straw man -- it's not even close to what anyone is suggesting in this discussion. Oh, I think it is exactly the correct question. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 04.09.2007 David W. Fenton wrote: Which doesn't tell us whether or not Bach would object to having 8-12 singers, only that in many situations, the parts clearly indicate one- on-a-part performance. We weren't talking about what Bach wanted or objected to. That is something which is mostly speculation anyway. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 04.09.2007 David W. Fenton wrote: And the number of parts in the Dresden set doesn't tell you anything - No, and I never said that. It is the number of _voices_ available in Dresden which makes the whole thing interesting. What I don't understand is why so many people seem to believe they can argue against Rifkin, yet none of them ever reads what he writes. There are so many rumours as to what his theories are based on that noone ever talks about the real evidence. Go read it. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 05.09.2007 David W. Fenton wrote: And I have no objection to that. I only object to those who argue that it *must* be performed that way, and that's where Rifkin was at a while back. He's since softened his stance for political purposes, but I still think he's very dogmatic about the whole thing, in a way that ignores the range of possibilities in favor of restricting performance only to that which can be demonstrated. > > That's nonsense. All Joshua ever claimed was you cannot call it an authentic performance if you completely ignore the forces for which it was written and with which it was performed. That's what the discussion with Ton Koopman was about. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 05.09.2007 David W. Fenton wrote: I'm only pointing out the weaknesses in interpretation of evidence that come from making claims about what was never there based on what is now there. Yes, but the whole theory is based on _much_ _much_ more than that. Only you haven't read it. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 04.09.2007 David W. Fenton wrote: We know Bach performed his cantatas, but do we know that the Dresden B Minor Mass parts were used in a performance? I thought that there is no known performance until CPE's Berlin one quite some time after his father's death. > The point about Dresden is that there evidently wasn't a choir, but only single singers, in exactly the force needed for the parts of the B minor sent to Dresden. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 05.09.2007 Aaron Rabushka wrote: Really? You never heard the story about how he twitted Silbermann (sp?) by playing in A-flat on a non-well-tempered organ? well tempered is not equal tempered so you may have to rephrase your question. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 05.09.2007 David W. Fenton wrote: Who made this claim? Nobody in this discussion, so far as I can recall, but perhaps you could provide an attributed quotation where someone made that claim. Well, perhaps not directly, but John was indeed refering to the famous document, which some people including John believe to talk about the existing choir forces. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Piano notation question
Certainly you're right about the possibility of artistic expression of defined rhythms. We'd be in trouble if not. Even if this guy figures out how to do what he wants, I wonder what the pianist will do when he or she gets to that spot. "Huh?" comes to mind. Maybe if I could see it...hint hint...to see what it would look like in context, and, by the way, how the composer's intentions would be communicated to the pianist. Seems to me you have to bridge the duck syndrome (waddles like a rolled chord, quacks like a rolled chord...) --Richard On Sep 4, 2007, at 11:10 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote: You know, it's not like there is only one way of playing a notated rhythm, even a specifically notated one meant to be played accurately. Written rhythms are in no way inherently less "musical" than a roll -- unless the player in question has no rhythmic authority and no emotional connection to rhythm. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] (OT) was alto as tenor?
At 11:38 PM -0400 9/4/07, Aaron Rabushka wrote: OK--without getting into the minutiae of this or that intonation system (something I am ill-equipped to do), I've often heard that Bach had to fight to get the one he wanted, that would sound good in any key. No need to get into the details. Yes, some theorists talked about equal temperament as early as the 16th century. Yes, fretted instruments have trouble NOT playing in equal since each fret has to tune 6 notes on 6 different strings. But there is simply no evidence that Bach or any other high level musician in the mid-18th century would have wanted, adopted, or been able to stand the bad intonation of equal temperament. The closest we can come to that nowadays is to attend a couple of weeks of something like the Oberlin Baroque Performance Institute during the summer, where you are immersed in the world of in-tune playing and well temperaments, and then experience the shock to your ears when you reenter the world of equal temperament. I've done it! It's VERY educational. As to the 24 (or actually the 48), at least some of the experts on the HarpsichordList are convinced that Bach was showing how skilled he was by writing playable music in every key BY AVOIDING THE BAD INTERVALS IN THAT KEY. Musicians expected every key to sound different, which is one reason, I believe, that they tended to publish Opuses in sets of six or twelve in different keys. And this approach lasted longer than most people would think. I have a photocopy of an American Bandmaster's Manual from the 1810s that includes a drawing of a violin fingerboard, showing very clearly that a C# (for example) is lower on the fingerboard and therefore lower in pitch than a Db. John -- John R. Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
At 11:00 PM -0400 9/4/07, Aaron Rabushka wrote: Really? You never heard the story about how he twitted Silbermann (sp?) by playing in A-flat on a non-well-tempered organ? Nope, but please tell us! My understanding (from MUCH discussion on the HarpsichordList) is that any organ that wasn't well-tempered was probably meantone, but definitely not equal. John > > And another Bach question: how often did he want equal temperament and > have to settle for anything but? That's a very easy one: Never. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com > David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ > -- John R. Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Piano notation question
You know, it's not like there is only one way of playing a notated rhythm, even a specifically notated one meant to be played accurately. Written rhythms are in no way inherently less "musical" than a roll -- unless the player in question has no rhythmic authority and no emotional connection to rhythm. Cheers, - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 04 Sep 2007, at 9:30 PM, Richard Huggins wrote: On Sep 3, 2007, at 7:15 PM, Chuck Israels wrote: It seems ridiculously picky to notate the value of each note using voices, or layers, and I may be being overly picky even with this notation. How is this done in piano music. No one addressed this part of your question, but as for me--a pianist of 50+ years--I'd say you are indeed being mighty picky. If you want certain, specific rhythms, seems to me you find a place for them within the beat structure of the measures involved. And then you'll get those "certain, specific rhythms." What you won't get, though, is the musicality of a roll. An artistic pianist can do those in a way that would almost defy capturing them in notation but which would be musical. That's why there's a need for that rolled-chord symbol in the first place. I guess I don't get what it is you're after that beats the randomness, but artistic randomness, of a rolled chord as played by the pianist. --Richard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] "Masterworks of the New Era" and ERM Media
I've never heard of this group, but I do have several selections (including a trombone concerto) on Vienna Modern Masters. What kinda of deal are they cutting you? (Feel free to bring this off-list if you so desire.). Aaron J. Rabushka [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.waymark.net/arabushk - Original Message - From: "Ralph Whitfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Finale List" Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2007 11:12 PM Subject: [Finale] "Masterworks of the New Era" and ERM Media > Dear fellow Finale-ites... > > My apologies for cross pointing for those who may see this multiple times. > > I noticed an add in one of my ASCAP magazines for this group and sent > off for information and now I'm asking around about them. > > I'm debating whether to submit a work that is ca. 11 minutes long and > with their price schedule it's going to be kinda costly. > > Has anyone on the list had any dealing with them? > Has anyone had any of their works recorded, etc. with them? > Were you happy? > Did you feel that you got your monies worth? > Did you feel that the exposure, if any, that you got from the project > was comparable to the price? > > Thanks in advance. > > Ralph > > -- > Ralph W. Whitfield, Jr. > Bass Trombonist - Gadsden Symphony Orchestra > www.rainbowbrassmusic.com > "Trombonist by Nature, Engineer by Necessity." > > > ___ > Finale mailing list > Finale@shsu.edu > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
At 6:14 PM -0500 9/4/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And another Bach question: how often did he want equal temperament and have to settle for anything but? In my opinion (which seems to be under attack at the moment), NEVER to the former, and also to the latter. He was perfectly capable of tuning and probably knew exactly what he preferred. And that goes for organ as well as clavier, although the tuning lasts a whole lot longer. John -- John R. Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
OK--without getting into the minutiae of this or that intonation system (something I am ill-equipped to do), I've often heard that Bach had to fight to get the one he wanted, that would sound good in any key. Aaron J. Rabushka [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.waymark.net/arabushk - Original Message - From: "David W. Fenton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2007 11:31 PM Subject: Re: [Finale] alto as tenor? > On 4 Sep 2007 at 23:00, Aaron Rabushka wrote: > > > Really? You never heard the story about how he twitted Silbermann (sp?) by > > playing in A-flat on a non-well-tempered organ? > > You said "equal temperament" not "well-tempered." They are not even > close to being the same thing. > > -- > David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com > David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ > > > ___ > Finale mailing list > Finale@shsu.edu > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Piano notation question
Yes--there are times when even a control freak like me has learned to leave some things to the players! Aaron J. Rabushka [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.waymark.net/arabushk - Original Message - From: "Chuck Israels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2007 11:09 PM Subject: Re: [Finale] Piano notation question > Hi Richard, > > There are many (maybe most) circumstances in which I would opt for > your way of leaving things to the instrumentalist, and I often do. > In this instance, the "roll" is part of the forward motion of the > piece, and I want the rhythm I want. > > Chuck > > > On Sep 4, 2007, at 6:30 PM, Richard Huggins wrote: > > > On Sep 3, 2007, at 7:15 PM, Chuck Israels wrote: > > > >> It seems ridiculously picky to notate the value of each note > >> using voices, or layers, and I may be being overly picky even with > >> this notation. How is this done in piano music. > > > > > > No one addressed this part of your question, but as for me--a > > pianist of 50+ years--I'd say you are indeed being mighty picky. If > > you want certain, specific rhythms, seems to me you find a place > > for them within the beat structure of the measures involved. And > > then you'll get those "certain, specific rhythms." > > > > What you won't get, though, is the musicality of a roll. An > > artistic pianist can do those in a way that would almost defy > > capturing them in notation but which would be musical. That's why > > there's a need for that rolled-chord symbol in the first place. > > > > I guess I don't get what it is you're after that beats the > > randomness, but artistic randomness, of a rolled chord as played by > > the pianist. > > > > --Richard > > > > > > ___ > > Finale mailing list > > Finale@shsu.edu > > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > > Chuck Israels > 230 North Garden Terrace > Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 > phone (360) 671-3402 > fax (360) 676-6055 > www.chuckisraels.com > > ___ > Finale mailing list > Finale@shsu.edu > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 4 Sep 2007 at 23:00, Aaron Rabushka wrote: > Really? You never heard the story about how he twitted Silbermann (sp?) by > playing in A-flat on a non-well-tempered organ? You said "equal temperament" not "well-tempered." They are not even close to being the same thing. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] "Masterworks of the New Era" and ERM Media
Dear fellow Finale-ites... My apologies for cross pointing for those who may see this multiple times. I noticed an add in one of my ASCAP magazines for this group and sent off for information and now I'm asking around about them. I'm debating whether to submit a work that is ca. 11 minutes long and with their price schedule it's going to be kinda costly. Has anyone on the list had any dealing with them? Has anyone had any of their works recorded, etc. with them? Were you happy? Did you feel that you got your monies worth? Did you feel that the exposure, if any, that you got from the project was comparable to the price? Thanks in advance. Ralph -- Ralph W. Whitfield, Jr. Bass Trombonist - Gadsden Symphony Orchestra www.rainbowbrassmusic.com "Trombonist by Nature, Engineer by Necessity." ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
Really? You never heard the story about how he twitted Silbermann (sp?) by playing in A-flat on a non-well-tempered organ? Aaron J. Rabushka [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.waymark.net/arabushk - Original Message - From: "David W. Fenton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2007 10:06 PM Subject: Re: [Finale] alto as tenor? > On 4 Sep 2007 at 18:14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > And another Bach question: how often did he want equal temperament and > > have to settle for anything but? > > That's a very easy one: > > Never. > > > > -- > David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com > David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ > > > ___ > Finale mailing list > Finale@shsu.edu > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Piano notation question
Hi Richard, There are many (maybe most) circumstances in which I would opt for your way of leaving things to the instrumentalist, and I often do. In this instance, the "roll" is part of the forward motion of the piece, and I want the rhythm I want. Chuck On Sep 4, 2007, at 6:30 PM, Richard Huggins wrote: On Sep 3, 2007, at 7:15 PM, Chuck Israels wrote: It seems ridiculously picky to notate the value of each note using voices, or layers, and I may be being overly picky even with this notation. How is this done in piano music. No one addressed this part of your question, but as for me--a pianist of 50+ years--I'd say you are indeed being mighty picky. If you want certain, specific rhythms, seems to me you find a place for them within the beat structure of the measures involved. And then you'll get those "certain, specific rhythms." What you won't get, though, is the musicality of a roll. An artistic pianist can do those in a way that would almost defy capturing them in notation but which would be musical. That's why there's a need for that rolled-chord symbol in the first place. I guess I don't get what it is you're after that beats the randomness, but artistic randomness, of a rolled chord as played by the pianist. --Richard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
This is not my area of expertise, but doesn't "gleichschwebende" mean equal temperament, rather than "wohltemperiertes," which is an unequal system? So would Bach really wish an equal system? Bruce Clausen - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2007 4:14 PM Subject: Re: [Finale] alto as tenor? And another Bach question: how often did he want equal temperament and have to settle for anything but? Aaron J. Rabushka [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.waymark.net/arabushk ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 4 Sep 2007 at 18:14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > And another Bach question: how often did he want equal temperament and > have to settle for anything but? That's a very easy one: Never. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Piano notation question
On Sep 3, 2007, at 7:15 PM, Chuck Israels wrote: It seems ridiculously picky to notate the value of each note using voices, or layers, and I may be being overly picky even with this notation. How is this done in piano music. No one addressed this part of your question, but as for me--a pianist of 50+ years--I'd say you are indeed being mighty picky. If you want certain, specific rhythms, seems to me you find a place for them within the beat structure of the measures involved. And then you'll get those "certain, specific rhythms." What you won't get, though, is the musicality of a roll. An artistic pianist can do those in a way that would almost defy capturing them in notation but which would be musical. That's why there's a need for that rolled-chord symbol in the first place. I guess I don't get what it is you're after that beats the randomness, but artistic randomness, of a rolled chord as played by the pianist. --Richard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
And another Bach question: how often did he want equal temperament and have to settle for anything but? Aaron J. Rabushka [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.waymark.net/arabushk ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
Not to mention that often composers have to settle for what someone else has and/or wants to give them. Example: my Psalm 19-derived motet was premiered with a vocal quartet and organ. That doesn't mean that it wouldn't work or that I wouldn't want to hear it with larger forces. As to how many copies got made is anybody's guess. Aaron J. Rabushka [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.waymark.net/arabushk ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 4 Sep 2007 at 17:49, Kim Patrick Clow wrote: > On 9/4/07, David W. Fenton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Because they were never used? Or because they got lost? Or because > > they didn't need them? > > > > By itself, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. > > Sure it is. When someone makes the claim 16 member choirs were > performing Bach's music, you need the evidence. Who made this claim? Nobody in this discussion, so far as I can recall, but perhaps you could provide an attributed quotation where someone made that claim. > I didn't mention it, > but Parrott also points out that in other genres of music from the > 18th century where multiple instruments would play, those parts DO > survive, so your explanations about the missing vocal parts doesn't > make any sense. Well, not in 100% of all instances. There are plenty of cases of incomplete sets of parts, and part sets with an inventory on the wrapper with numbers that no longer match the contents. This is the case with some of the "authentic" copies of Mozart's symphonies that came direct from Mozart's widow to the André's. > All of Graupner's music survives intact, yet most of > his cantatas only have one voice per part. Did you read the footnote > Parrott commented on about Graupner's audition cantatas for Leipzig? > Graupner wrote these pieces expressly for the Leipzig forces, more > proof for Rikin's theory. It's not "proof" -- it's only part of a body of evidence. And, here's a free clue: I'm not arguing that Bach didn't often perform his music one on a part. I'm only pointing out the weaknesses in interpretation of evidence that come from making claims about what was never there based on what is now there. > > > Besides Parrott's monograph gives a detailed listing (pgs 177-187) of > > > all surviving vocal parts from Bach's cantatas, and very few of them > > > have multiple copies, just single S/A/T/B parts. > > > > Which doesn't tell us whether or not Bach would object to having 8-12 > > singers, only that in many situations, the parts clearly indicate one- > > on-a-part performance. > > Which I think is what Parrott, Rifkin, and now Paul McCreesh are > advocating: let's hear the music the way Bach had it performed and > according to the documentary evidence. And I have no objection to that. I only object to those who argue that it *must* be performed that way, and that's where Rifkin was at a while back. He's since softened his stance for political purposes, but I still think he's very dogmatic about the whole thing, in a way that ignores the range of possibilities in favor of restricting performance only to that which can be demonstrated. > > It's always easy to mine treatises for all sorts of information. It's > > much more difficult to demonstrate that the remarks in those > > treatises: > > > > 1. represent anything other than recommendations or theories, and > > more important, > > > > 2. it's difficult to prove that the traditions represented in any > > particular treatise are connected with particular repertories. > > > > Praetorius is much, much earlier than Bach, of course. > > I mentioned Parrott quotes many other sources, including peers of Bach > (e.g. Mattheson). And there's no demonstrated connection there, either. Given the difficulties we have in interpreting Bach's own written words, I think it's foolish to think that other sources on the subject can do anything other than suggest what some other practices were in other locations and other periods. > > > Parrott cites many other quotes / sources showing that if there were > > > other singers, it was normative to copy out those parts. > > > > We know Bach performed his cantatas, but do we know that the Dresden > > B Minor Mass parts were used in a performance? I thought that there > > is no known performance until CPE's Berlin one quite some time after > > his father's death. > > No, the B Minor Mass was performed (or sections of it) in Dresden, I'm > not sure what difference versus a complete performance would make in > the performance materials of the sections that WERE played. I missed that, sorry -- it's been 15 years since I made my study of the B Minor Mass, and given the mess of details, I've forgotten a lot. > > > And what > > > about performance materials in Darmstadt and Frankfurt and Hamburg, > > > which have the same disposition, with one vocal part surviving, with > > > very few mutliple ones? Parrott raised the question and it's a valid > > > one, if there were multiple copies of vocal parts, if you add up Bach, > > > Telemann and Graupner's cantata output, we have about 3700 cantatas, > > > where there should be hundreds of copies of vocal parts. They just > > > don't exist. > > > > What survives is what survives, not what was. > > Exactly. No multiple parts for vocalists in three of the leading > centers of cantata composition in early 18th Germany. You can't apply the practices of one place to another un
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 9/4/07, David W. Fenton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Because they were never used? Or because they got lost? Or because > they didn't need them? > > By itself, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Sure it is. When someone makes the claim 16 member choirs were performing Bach's music, you need the evidence. I didn't mention it, but Parrott also points out that in other genres of music from the 18th century where multiple instruments would play, those parts DO survive, so your explanations about the missing vocal parts doesn't make any sense. All of Graupner's music survives intact, yet most of his cantatas only have one voice per part. Did you read the footnote Parrott commented on about Graupner's audition cantatas for Leipzig? Graupner wrote these pieces expressly for the Leipzig forces, more proof for Rikin's theory. > > > Besides Parrott's monograph gives a detailed listing (pgs 177-187) of > > all surviving vocal parts from Bach's cantatas, and very few of them > > have multiple copies, just single S/A/T/B parts. > > Which doesn't tell us whether or not Bach would object to having 8-12 > singers, only that in many situations, the parts clearly indicate one- > on-a-part performance. Which I think is what Parrott, Rifkin, and now Paul McCreesh are advocating: let's hear the music the way Bach had it performed and according to the documentary evidence. > It's always easy to mine treatises for all sorts of information. It's > much more difficult to demonstrate that the remarks in those > treatises: > > 1. represent anything other than recommendations or theories, and > more important, > > 2. it's difficult to prove that the traditions represented in any > particular treatise are connected with particular repertories. > > Praetorius is much, much earlier than Bach, of course. I mentioned Parrott quotes many other sources, including peers of Bach (e.g. Mattheson). > > Parrott cites many other quotes / sources showing that if there were > > other singers, it was normative to copy out those parts. > > We know Bach performed his cantatas, but do we know that the Dresden > B Minor Mass parts were used in a performance? I thought that there > is no known performance until CPE's Berlin one quite some time after > his father's death. No, the B Minor Mass was performed (or sections of it) in Dresden, I'm not sure what difference versus a complete performance would make in the performance materials of the sections that WERE played. > > And what > > about performance materials in Darmstadt and Frankfurt and Hamburg, > > which have the same disposition, with one vocal part surviving, with > > very few mutliple ones? Parrott raised the question and it's a valid > > one, if there were multiple copies of vocal parts, if you add up Bach, > > Telemann and Graupner's cantata output, we have about 3700 cantatas, > > where there should be hundreds of copies of vocal parts. They just > > don't exist. > > What survives is what survives, not what was. Exactly. No multiple parts for vocalists in three of the leading centers of cantata composition in early 18th Germany. I'm not even bringing up Stolzel or Fasch, who were highly regarded as composers of cantatas. I've seen several Stolzel cantata manuscripts-- they are exactly like Graupner: one voice per part. Yet multiple instrument parts survive (Sonderhausen apparently had better instrumental forces than Bach in Leipzig). > And what was is not necessarily strictly limiting for what would have > been considered appropriate performance forces. But you don't know that. That's making an argument from thin air. Then in another sentence you completely discount what musicians and theorists of the period DO suggest as appropriate! > It's the dogmatic limitation that has always annoyed the hell out of > me, not the assertion that the pieces were performed one on a part in > their original performances. Actually the dogmatic types are Ton Koopman and Christoph Wolff. I saw a video clip recently where they are discussing the Bach/Buxtehude connection (these videos are still available on Ton Koopman's website BTW). They seemed pretty snarky and snide in dismissing Rifkin's theory. Koopman makes some pretty cheap pot shots at Joshua Rifkin and Andrew Parrott in his written rebuttals too, which I found rather disappointing considering how much I admire Koopman. > > Actually the onus is on providing proof that 12-20 member choirs were > > the norm in early 18th century Germany. > > That's a ridiculous straw man -- it's not even close to what anyone > is suggesting in this discussion. Maybe no one here suggested it, but I think I'm reading Koopman correctly that IS his position, or why would he have recorded all the cantatas with exactly those forces?. Thanks! Kim Patrick Clow ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 4 Sep 2007 at 16:21, Kim Patrick Clow wrote: > On 9/4/07, David W. Fenton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > And the number of parts in the Dresden set doesn't tell you anything - > > - it is always the case that when sending a set of parts you copied > > out a single part for each independent part, and left it up to the > > recipient to create the doubling parts. > > But why didn't those *other* copies of the parts survive in Dresden? Because they were never used? Or because they got lost? Or because they didn't need them? By itself, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. > Besides Parrott's monograph gives a detailed listing (pgs 177-187) of > all surviving vocal parts from Bach's cantatas, and very few of them > have multiple copies, just single S/A/T/B parts. Which doesn't tell us whether or not Bach would object to having 8-12 singers, only that in many situations, the parts clearly indicate one- on-a-part performance. > Parrott quotes from Praetorius: > > "When a large company of musicians is on hand, one can thus also have > such ripieno parts copied out two or three times, and distributed and > divided ..." It's always easy to mine treatises for all sorts of information. It's much more difficult to demonstrate that the remarks in those treatises: 1. represent anything other than recommendations or theories, and more important, 2. it's difficult to prove that the traditions represented in any particular treatise are connected with particular repertories. Praetorius is much, much earlier than Bach, of course. > Parrott cites many other quotes / sources showing that if there were > other singers, it was normative to copy out those parts. We know Bach performed his cantatas, but do we know that the Dresden B Minor Mass parts were used in a performance? I thought that there is no known performance until CPE's Berlin one quite some time after his father's death. > And what > about performance materials in Darmstadt and Frankfurt and Hamburg, > which have the same disposition, with one vocal part surviving, with > very few mutliple ones? Parrott raised the question and it's a valid > one, if there were multiple copies of vocal parts, if you add up Bach, > Telemann and Graupner's cantata output, we have about 3700 cantatas, > where there should be hundreds of copies of vocal parts. They just > don't exist. What survives is what survives, not what was. And what was is not necessarily strictly limiting for what would have been considered appropriate performance forces. It's the dogmatic limitation that has always annoyed the hell out of me, not the assertion that the pieces were performed one on a part in their original performances. > Actually the onus is on providing proof that 12-20 member choirs were > the norm in early 18th century Germany. That's a ridiculous straw man -- it's not even close to what anyone is suggesting in this discussion. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 9/4/07, David W. Fenton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And the number of parts in the Dresden set doesn't tell you anything - > - it is always the case that when sending a set of parts you copied > out a single part for each independent part, and left it up to the > recipient to create the doubling parts. But why didn't those *other* copies of the parts survive in Dresden? Besides Parrott's monograph gives a detailed listing (pgs 177-187) of all surviving vocal parts from Bach's cantatas, and very few of them have multiple copies, just single S/A/T/B parts. Parrott quotes from Praetorius: "When a large company of musicians is on hand, one can thus also have such ripieno parts copied out two or three times, and distributed and divided ..." Parrott cites many other quotes / sources showing that if there were other singers, it was normative to copy out those parts. And what about performance materials in Darmstadt and Frankfurt and Hamburg, which have the same disposition, with one vocal part surviving, with very few mutliple ones? Parrott raised the question and it's a valid one, if there were multiple copies of vocal parts, if you add up Bach, Telemann and Graupner's cantata output, we have about 3700 cantatas, where there should be hundreds of copies of vocal parts. They just don't exist. Actually the onus is on providing proof that 12-20 member choirs were the norm in early 18th century Germany. Thanks Kim Patrick Clow ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 4 Sep 2007 at 17:35, Johannes Gebauer wrote: > You probably conduct choirs, > and because Joshua's theories rob you of the whole Bach repertoire you > simply assume there must have been large choirs? That is as ludicrous an accusation as you accuse John of making. The dispute is not between large choirs (30 singers?) and one-on-a- part ensembles, but between small choirs (8-12) vs. religiously and slavishly insisting on one-on-a-part in all cases. It's quite clear that small groups of singers (fewer than 15-20) were the norm, but not at all clear to me that Rifkin's interpretation of the evidence proves that we should abandon 8 and 12-part performances in favor of 4 and fewer. Bach might have done any number of things had he the personnel. And the number of parts in the Dresden set doesn't tell you anything - - it is always the case that when sending a set of parts you copied out a single part for each independent part, and left it up to the recipient to create the doubling parts. This is the reason so many part sets have various paper types and different copyists in them, precisely because the original copyist created only the minimum number of parts to convey the complete musical texture, not the desired number of parts for a performance. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] (OT) was alto as tenor?
On 04.09.2007 John Howell wrote: If we picture him as taking 3 months to rehearse for a Fall Concert, that simply is the wrong picture. Remember that in his first 2 years at Leipzig he turned out a new cantata EVERY SINGLE WEEK! Those boys and those musicians could sightread, folks. No question about it!! ok, so how would the boys have known when to sing and when not to sing for the solos? Have you ever actually looked at those parts which you claim where used by three or more boys to sing from? There is no indication what is an aria and what is a choir piece. You get a double bar and a new meter, that's it. Either the concept of sightread performances is wrong, or, more likely, the concept of several singers per part is wrong. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] (OT) was alto as tenor?
On 9/4/07, John Howell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I scanned 3 pages of Parrott's book: http://web.christophgraupner.info:81/bach/ He shows some interesting stats on other composers and the parts ratio to singers/instrumentalists. On page 3, there is a foot note where Graupner and Telemann are cited as well, along with Jeanne Swack's research (via Telemann) in supporting Dr. Rifkin's theory. I also included Dr. Rifkin's rebuttal of Ton Koopman's critique. Enjoy! Kim Patrick Clow ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] (OT) was alto as tenor?
At 11:52 PM -0400 9/3/07, Kim Patrick Clow wrote: I've read Andrew Parrott's book, and from the way I understand it, there should be hundreds of parts floating around in libraries, but that's just not the case! OK, I'm negative on this whole concept. (This should surprise anyone?!) But even attempting to be objective, this kind of argument strikes me as nothing but a straw man. WHY and HOW should there "be hundreds of parts floating around in libraries"? None of Bach's vocal/choral works were published in his lifetime. They were written for immediate use (like "next Sunday"!) at a breakneck pace in his first 3 years in Leipzig. They were probably recycled on a regular basis over the years he spent there. Yes, he probably traded music with other Kantors from time to time, but nobody seems to think that was a major part of his practice. In the case of the Johannespassion there were, if I remember correctly, 3 different sets of parts, all of them (or maybe all but one) incomplete. Changes were inserted in those parts by being sewn into the existing parts. NOBODY MADE MORE COPIES OR MADE MORE WORK FOR THEMSELVES THAN THEY ABSOLUTELY HAD TO! In this, Bach's musical world was much like the 20th century commercial musical world, where arrangements written for the recording studio typically exist in a single set of parts, were never intended for publication and were never published, and are subject to the same laws of entropy under which parts do get lost, damaged, and otherwise disappear. SO WHY SHOULD THERE BE "HUNDREDS OF PARTS"?!! Heck, we know that Mozart performed his C minor Mass K427 in Salzburg in an attempt to reconcile with his father, with his new wife as one of the soprano soloists, but neither a complete score nor a complete set of parts survive. Unique works do disappear, and have throughout history. I don't know how true it is, but I've heard John Eliot Gardiner even had some of the manuscript parts that survived examined for fingerprints or any signs of being used extensively, shockingly-- the parts show hardly any sign of use. If anyone knows more about this, could you post links please? I'd be most appreciative. No, I haven't read anything about that, which doesn't mean it isn't true. Thirty years ago I was on the cutting edge of Bach research, but I haven't been there for years. But just try to put yourself in Bach's musical world. Yes, we know that he often tinkered with a composition when he went to repeat it, but I suspect that when he recycled cantatas (and passions and oratorios) every couple of years they would be passed out for a rather short time and then filed away again. If we picture him as taking 3 months to rehearse for a Fall Concert, that simply is the wrong picture. Remember that in his first 2 years at Leipzig he turned out a new cantata EVERY SINGLE WEEK! Those boys and those musicians could sightread, folks. No question about it!! It wasn't until after his death that his sons looked through his manuscripts trying to find something they could make some money from, and what they decided on was the collection of chorale settings, not the large scale works. So, no incentive to take the time and trouble to make "hundreds of copies." John -- John R. Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 03.09.2007 John Howell wrote: Parrott's hypothesis appears to be just that, like the hypothesis that Bach intended his cantatas to be performed one on a part, but copied extra vocal parts just for the heck of it!! Not sure what exactly you are talking about, but if you are refering to Rifkin's conclusions, the facts are somewhat a little more complex, and what you are saying is definitely not what Joshua said. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 04.09.2007 John Howell wrote: This is why I find Rifkin's hypotheses wildly speculative. There is, as far as I know, no evidence for the ripienists NOT sharing the parts, either. There is, however, Bach's own description of the classes into which he divides the boys in the choir, where he very clearly identifies both soloists and ripienists (as well as those not yet good enough to use). I believe that another facet of the "one on a part" hypothesis is the ASSUMPTION that half the boys would be too sick to sing on any given day, which is another wild speculation, and yet another that Bach was responsible for providing music for the 5 churches in Leipzig every Sunday, so the boys would have been spread out all over town. Now you can't have both hypotheses true at the same time. Either half the boys were too sick to sing ANYWHERE, or they weren't and they were spread out all over town. Another misconception. They weren't "spread out", rather the same boys had to sing in several services. One at 10, one at 11, one at 12. Actually, I believe Bach was only directly responsible for two churches not five. If you have ever worked with a boys choir you will know that once the flu strikes, it takes out more than one. I must say to hear your lecture on how little sense this all makes to you, while at the same time you claim you have only seen one set of parts, which happens to be the John Passion which is a special case in many ways, I must question your competence. Joshua has seen most if not all existing vocal parts by Bach. He has immense knowledge on the sources, the forces etc. If you really want to question his theories I suggest you start doing some serious research. Perhaps you should start by actually reading Andrew Parrot's book, which comes to mostly the same conclusions. Bashing Joshua for his conclusions without knowing his research in depth is very bad scientific practice. He may well be wrong in some details, and I am sure he would be the first to ackowledge his errors when he is given the evidence. Rifkin's belief is not really an hypothesis at all. It is a predetermined belief, in support of which he has sifted through what evidence there is and selected that which supports his belief. Again, this is crazy coming from someone who knows only the John Passion parts. Where do you take your knowledge from? Perhaps the case is the other way round? You probably conduct choirs, and because Joshua's theories rob you of the whole Bach repertoire you simply assume there must have been large choirs? In doing so he stretches the interpretation of a great many different facts, as in assuming with no evidence that 2 or 3 boys could not have read of the same piece of music. Obviously they could have. It is not so much a question of whether they could have, but of whether they did. Incidentally there is still very little agreement on which parts of the B minor mass are solo and which are full choir. The reason is simple: the original parts have nothing to indicate the use or non-use of the choir. Noone has yet come up with an answer to this. How do the three boys know where to stop? I must say I personally don't even see any reason to discuss this subject any further. The literature is all there, and anyone who hasn't at least read Parrot's book on the subject simply doesn't know the facts. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] alto as tenor?
On 04.09.2007 John Howell wrote: Which is a pretty wild leap of faith in my book. By the same logic one would have to assume a priori that he provided his violinists with written parts meant for use by a single performer only, so he only used one violin on each part, and that is certainly not in agreement with his own description of his "ideal" forces. (From the 1731 Town Council memo, I think, but I'm not sure.) This source must be one of the most misinterpreted ones ever. Bach is not talking about ideal "forces". Rather he is talking about how many _singers_ (not instrumentalists) he needs to fulfill the musical needs of the services. That was not one service, but several, and he needed at least three boys per part because two would easily be struck by illness, or their voice breaking. There is absolutely nothing here to suggest that he ever had that number of singers for any particular cantata performance. The performance of the John Passion you are refering to was in fact one of the largest performances which Bach ever staged. It included to the best of my memory, 8 singers, 3 first vlns, 2 second vlns, everything else single, including a contra bassoon (presumably to make up for the broken organ). This performance did not include Viole d'amore. I have done it with Joshua in precisely this way. it was very convincing. The B minor Mass, which I also had the honour to do with Joshua, needs 8 singers (no choir), 2 firsts, 2 seconds. There is a lot of evidence to support this. In fact those parts of the mass sent to Dresden use exactly what was available there, which did not include a choir in today's use of the word. Joshua never claimed that there were no ripienos in any of the cantatas. Instead he has always differentiated between cantatas with and without ripieno. The ripieno, however, seldom included more than one per part. That was the standard in most church performances at the time. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
