Re: Facsimeles etc.
Michael, and all, > cycled into my Trash bin. Or is it possible to just have an email blocker > for one individual on the list? Yes, it is possible. Depending on the email client software you use. I can tell you how to do it with M$ Outlook or Outlook express, which you are probably using unless you are using proprietary AOL software or some other of the sort. Go to Tools on the top line of your email page, go to Message Rules, then slide over to the sub set that offers Mail Rules, Newsgroup Rules and something else. Select Mail Rules, then New in that menu. You can select a From address and send it anywhere you want, including the Delete Bin. You can also make selections from the Subject Line, or from words in the body of the message. And the rule can have multiple criteria for one final destination. The only soft point is that you can't use the CC: line as a criterion. And many on this list use "reply all" without editing the To: line, so much of the Lute List traffic I try to trap to my specific Lute List folder comes through to my Inbox as the word Lute is in the CC: line. Another little hint. Your list of email folders is alphabetical except for the embedded M$ folders (Inbox, Outbox, Sent, Deleted, Drafts). To keep the new messages from the lists I belong to (harp and lute) I route the new messages to "About Harp" and "About Lute" which puts them near the top where I'll see them - then if I want to save them after reading they go into the Music folder in the subfolders Harp and Lute. The only thing that sorts above them is the folder I keep for things I can't handle tonight but want to look back at the next day. They go in "Aah So, need to read". That places the "current" things just below the M$ embedded set of folders where I'll notice them. There are probably ways to block a sender in all email clients, the reason one can't block spam with that is that they always change sending addresses. Best, Jon
Re: lute FAQ ??
I agree, that and other non constructive subjects like as to how to tie fret knots, guauges of frets, gut or nylon etc. Bruno Montreal, Quebec Christopher Schaub wrote: >Does a lute FAQ exist? I think it would be great to help newcomers and the >curious with the basic questions. I've seen the thumb under/over question more >than a few times just this year. Maybe a brief history with the basics on >historical playing techniques, how to read various tab's, major composers and >works, periods and also a good list of references. A good FAQ exists for the >classical guitar newsgroup, and it saves a ton on repeating the same e-mails. >Most of this material exists already, and it would just take some organizing. >I'm volunteering to coordinate the first draft if folks are willing to >contribute content. > >= >web: http://www.christopherschaub.com >email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > >
Re: Assorted Questions
Richard, Catching up, and I didn't see Howard's question. > Here in England I also know people whose names are clearly > anglicised versions of German names given to their families at the time in question. And the most prominent may be Mountbatten, the former Battenbergs who changed the name in WWI. But then Windsor isn't an anglicization but a pure change from Saxe-Coburg ( I think that was it). But I'm tempted into an old joke. In the States there are many who have made their names more pronouncable in American English. So -- the new immigrant with a name full of consecutive vowels goes to the judge and asks to have his name changed to Murphy. Then six months later he is back asking the judge to change it to Smith. The judge asks why he wants the new change. "So, when people ask 'what was your name before it was Smith' ". Best, Jon
Re: Lute Question
Interesting conversation, and I'm sure it will all be solved for me when my copy of Damiani's "Method" arrives from Ut Orpheus Editzioni (but can I trust Italian mail). And my little McFarlane tutor mentions using the non adjacent fingers, and as Leonard has said that can leave the others free for an upper or lower string (I seem to have found). But I have a question on Mat's notation. The one Dowland I've downloaded from one of the sites Jose-Luis mentioned seems to show an "r" where I would expect a "c" (second fret). I thought that was print face, but from Mat's layout it seems to be official. My little tutorial names the frets as "a" (open), then b, c, d, e, etc. through the alphabet. From the notation below it appears that it is a,b,r,d, e, etc.. Or else Mat has very large hands. > --a-r2-d4- > --a-b1-d4- > --a-b1-d4- > -a-r2- > -a-r2-d4-- > -a-r2-d4-- > > is just as good to me as > > --a-r1-d3- > --a-b1-d4- > --a-b1-d4- > -a-r1- > -a-r1-d3-- > -a-r1-d3-- > Now to the notation as you all set it on the email. Both the above appear to be a run from bass to treble, but the location of the "a" on the next string seems to imply that the (in the first case, d3 and a on the next course) is played as a diad. Is it the spacing? (the transition from 4th course to 3rd course looks like a step, but the others look like note, note, chord). What is the protocol for typing an example on this list, given that the email isn't formatted. Best, Jon
lute FAQ ??
Does a lute FAQ exist? I think it would be great to help newcomers and the curious with the basic questions. I've seen the thumb under/over question more than a few times just this year. Maybe a brief history with the basics on historical playing techniques, how to read various tab's, major composers and works, periods and also a good list of references. A good FAQ exists for the classical guitar newsgroup, and it saves a ton on repeating the same e-mails. Most of this material exists already, and it would just take some organizing. I'm volunteering to coordinate the first draft if folks are willing to contribute content. = web: http://www.christopherschaub.com email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: falce and unperfect
At 09:37 PM 12/5/2003 -0500, Roman Turovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >MO, there is a Paul Revere Trophy "for the unsurpassed excellence in e-mail" >in the snail-mail for you. It is yours to keep forever. We are just non >interested anymore. Best news I heard all day! Just keep this non-interest in my postings for as long as you can. Perhaps when your school-girlish acrimony will blow off with your phoney bluster, there will be room here for discussions for what really matters. Somehow I suspect that you will be able to resist the urge to attack me, once you get more of that second-hand whiff of wind... see you later, boychik. BTW, you did notice that your buddy and chief sycophant (to borrow your own underhanded compliments) Michael Thames, have expressed a good opinion of DAS' book? Any particular reason you are not giving him the same treatment as you gave me on the same subject? or your high moral principles are easily manipulated by sycophancy? Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Fretgut question
Good idea, I'll check it! Got a good range of fretgut in the mail yesterday. Should be fine. Just updated Weiss Plucked http:/weissplucked.com/ Regards, Michael. Ed Durbrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Michael Stitt wrote: >I'm at astage where my fretgut on my 14 course swan neck are so >frayed that buzzing is serious. I survived two years on my old >supply but forgot what size I need. I have two requests. The first >is short term. What diameter fretgut should I order? I recall 0.9, >0.8, 0.7 down the neck? Is this right? I'd say it depends how your lute is set up. I've had lutes set up with diminishing size gages and I've had them with the same gage throughout. If it seemed fine before, why don't you take a micrometer and measure an unfrayed portion and order the same size? You'll have to slide the fret back to loosen it, but that is no big deal. -- Ed Durbrow Saitama, Japan http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/ - Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing --
Silvius Leopold Weiss
Just updated Weiss Plucked! Check out at: http://weissplucked.com/ Regards, Michael. - Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing --
Re: Fretgut question
Michael Stitt wrote: >I'm at astage where my fretgut on my 14 course swan neck are so >frayed that buzzing is serious. I survived two years on my old >supply but forgot what size I need. I have two requests. The first >is short term. What diameter fretgut should I order? I recall 0.9, >0.8, 0.7 down the neck? Is this right? I'd say it depends how your lute is set up. I've had lutes set up with diminishing size gages and I've had them with the same gage throughout. If it seemed fine before, why don't you take a micrometer and measure an unfrayed portion and order the same size? You'll have to slide the fret back to loosen it, but that is no big deal. -- Ed Durbrow Saitama, Japan http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/
Re: The continuing odyssy of the new "lute"
> the temporary >solution! A sporting goods store had fishing line of 20lb test and .017in >(.43mm). I didn't want to spend $8 US for 330 yards, so the store gave me 10 >yards of it from a spare reel without charge. It works! It is holding pitch >as it stretches just as well as the nylgut Aquila's on the rest of my >courses. Not that I suggest fishline as an alternative, it definitely >doesn't have the quality of sound. But the sound is surprisingly good and >quite adequate for practice. And with ten yards of it I can supply the >entire community with back up chanterelles . Carbon fishing line was all the rage a few years back. Even famous lutenists were using it. I bought a spool of it and thought it sucked. I gave it away. But like you said, for practice, it works. -- Ed Durbrow Saitama, Japan http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/
Re: falce and unperfect
MO, there is a Paul Revere Trophy "for the unsurpassed excellence in e-mail" in the snail-mail for you. It is yours to keep forever. We are just non interested anymore. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org >>> I have to admit that I don't follow the discussion closely and just by >>> accident jumped into this thread (MO's messages are immediatly deleted) >> Likewise, a couple of dozen list messages never reached me, so I went to >> check Mailarchive. > > Never reached you because you declared here and elsewhere that you put me > in your kill-file. Glad to know you finally figured out how stupid this > maneuver is. Now that you removed me form your kill file, you can get the > full flavor of that wind, smack in your face. As for Thomas: hiding behind > _his_ kill file, he still does not hesitate to lob at me insults, without > having read and considered anything that I have said. I can't imagine a > more puerile instance of cowardice. > > That's the nature of this vindictiveness of yours. Once I committed the > faux-pas of telling you that your Sautscheck joke is stupid, you will > forever hound me with your moralistic condescension. It does not matter any > more what it was we were talking about here, and the lute and its future is > the last thing that matters to you. What matters is settling accounts. > > Matanya Ophee > Editions Orphe'e, Inc., > 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. > Columbus, OH 43235-1226 > Phone: 614-846-9517 > Fax: 614-846-9794 > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.orphee.com > > >
Re: falce and unperfect
At 08:35 PM 12/5/2003 -0500, Roman Turovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have to admit that I don't follow the discussion closely and just by > > accident jumped into this thread (MO's messages are immediatly deleted) >Likewise, a couple of dozen list messages never reached me, so I went to >check Mailarchive. Never reached you because you declared here and elsewhere that you put me in your kill-file. Glad to know you finally figured out how stupid this maneuver is. Now that you removed me form your kill file, you can get the full flavor of that wind, smack in your face. As for Thomas: hiding behind _his_ kill file, he still does not hesitate to lob at me insults, without having read and considered anything that I have said. I can't imagine a more puerile instance of cowardice. That's the nature of this vindictiveness of yours. Once I committed the faux-pas of telling you that your Sautscheck joke is stupid, you will forever hound me with your moralistic condescension. It does not matter any more what it was we were talking about here, and the lute and its future is the last thing that matters to you. What matters is settling accounts. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: falce and unperfect
At 06:21 PM 12/5/2003 -0500, Roman Turovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I'd rather be a professional socialist, than an amateur >capitalist I have no idea what is a professional socialist, but I do know something about capitalism. I am glad you acknowledge the fact that I am only an amateur in that endeavor. I am proud to count among my fellow amateur capitalists many lute makers who charge money for their lutes, many lutenists performers who charge money for their performances and for their CDs, and many lute teachers who charge money for their teaching. Also some really petty amateur capitalists like Lute Societies who charge money for membership, and money for _their_ editions of lute music. Ore for that matter, other amateur capitalists who sell their paintings for money. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: falce and unperfect
However the publishers produce facsimiles not to make money. The facsimiles make their OTHER books look trustworthy and sellable. In other words the facsimiles are promotional material to a large degree. RT You do have a way with words, well said !!! >>> Indeed he does. Every demagogue who speaks out of ignorance has a way with >>> words. Turovsky is no different. >>> Matanya Ophee >> I'd rather be a professional socialist, than an amateur >> capitalist > well said! Thanks > Don't you get tired of that - how do you call it? Dog fights? > There is no sense discussing with Mantanya - he is an ignorant person > mixing truth and lie at his will. And as a scientist ... better don't > try to decrease on his level of discussion. I would have ignored MO, but I see him as an insidious embodiment of small-hearted/minded positivist thinking with no morals, whose half-truths are capable of infecting those who are less vigilant. > > Actually I don't believe TREE for instance produces facsimiles as > promotional material. This will apply to other fields of production but > not to lute related material. I have plenty of respect for Albert, even if he did facsimiles for image building purposes. I HAVE NO PROBLEMS WITH THAT (My transcriptions serve a similar purpose, not primarily though: I only transcribe what I love in the first place, and I frankly think they are no worse (i.e. a lot better) than the ones in Augsburg Ms.). To put is simply: he shouldn't consider us sheep following HIS middleclass+ status quo protocol. We are people with beliefs that may be different from his, and also with an understanding that such protocols are not conducive to the survival of lutenistic species (on top of being legally meaningless). Besides: submitting oneself to convention is not my idea of an interesting life. > > I have to admit that I don't follow the discussion closely and just by > accident jumped into this thread (MO's messages are immediatly deleted) Likewise, a couple of dozen list messages never reached me, so I went to check Mailarchive. The rest is history. It seems though that the dogfight cured my flu. RT
Not facsimiles
So, how about those Redskins. Craig "I'd call you a sadistic, sodomitic necrophiliac, but that's beating a dead horse." Woody Allen - What's Up Tiger Lily
Re: falce and unperfect
At 03:18 PM 12/5/2003 -0600, Michael Thames <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >However the publishers produce facsimiles not to make money. The facsimiles >make their OTHER books look trustworthy and sellable. In other words the >facsimiles are promotional material to a large degree. >RT > > You do have a way with words, well said !!! Indeed he does. Every demagogue who speaks out of ignorance has a way with words. Turovsky is no different. Mo, are you drinking again? Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: "Matanya Ophee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 5:01 PM Subject: Re: falce and unperfect > At 03:18 PM 12/5/2003 -0600, Michael Thames <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >However the publishers produce facsimiles not to make money. The facsimiles > >make their OTHER books look trustworthy and sellable. In other words the > >facsimiles are promotional material to a large degree. > >RT > > > > You do have a way with words, well said !!! > > > Indeed he does. Every demagogue who speaks out of ignorance has a way with > words. Turovsky is no different. > > > Matanya Ophee > Editions Orphe'e, Inc., > 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. > Columbus, OH 43235-1226 > Phone: 614-846-9517 > Fax: 614-846-9794 > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.orphee.com > > >
Re: falce and unperfect
well said! Don't you get tired of that - how do you call it? Dog fights? There is no sense discussing with Mantanya - he is an ignorant person mixing truth and lie at his will. And as a scientist ... better don't try to decrease on his level of discussion. Actually I don't believe TREE for instance produces facsimiles as promotional material. This will apply to other fields of production but not to lute related material. I have to admit that I don't follow the discussion closely and just by accident jumped into this thread (MO's messages are immediatly deleted) Thomas Am Sam, 2003-12-06 um 00.21 schrieb Roman Turovsky: > >> However the publishers produce facsimiles not to make money. The facsimiles > >> make their OTHER books look trustworthy and sellable. In other words the > >> facsimiles are promotional material to a large degree. > >> RT > >> You do have a way with words, well said !!! > > Indeed he does. Every demagogue who speaks out of ignorance has a way with > > words. Turovsky is no different. > > Matanya Ophee > I'd rather be a professional socialist, than an amateur > capitalist > RT > __ > Roman M. Turovsky > http://turovsky.org > http://polyhymnion.org > -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss --
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Dear Roland, you asked: > I am tired of deleting all the messages on this subject. Why don't you > who wish to pursue it go off line? Well the same with me! I sincerely wish that the theoretical copyright thinkers choose to change to private e-mail communication! All the best... ;-) Arto
Re: falce and unperfect
> bothered. But once I started, the only way to limit the costs was to drop > the project. The costs were mainly imposed on me by the library. Whopping 2 bottles of cognac RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: falce and unperfect
At 06:03 PM 12/5/2003 -0500, Roman Turovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Distributors and dealers get their discounts off the official "suggested > > list price". >MO, we are not children here, When I see grown men drawn into silly displays of foolish indulgence in areas they know nothing about for the sole purpose of exacting revenge from one who had criticized them in that past, I wonder how mature and sincere these people are. >and we know that this "suggested list price" >is a myth designed to make palatable eventual "NICE PRICE!!! 20% OFF!!!" >label. It is not a myth, but a reaction to existing anti-trust and anti price-fixing laws. There is nothing better the large corporations would have liked then the removal of competition enhancing regulations as the Europeans do. We little guys, are stuck in the same groove. >Moreover, it is determined by marketing research. If the market can >bear $100 tag: then limit your production costs to $32 or less. Thank you for understanding the dilemma. In principle, when the product is a dishwasher, or a car or some other utilitarian product, or even a book of music one has complete control on the costs, then you are of course correct. In the case of the Swan manuscript this was different. I proceeded to publish the book, of which I personally knew nothing at all, because I was told by its editor that this was an important book that must be made available to the lute community, before it disappears in another spectacular fire like the one that consumed a large part of the holdings of the library of the St. Petersburg Akademia Nauk in 1990. I am not a lute scholar myself, and I have to rely on the advise of my editors in deciding what to publish and how. Had I known what I know now, that the market for this particular book is insignificant, I would not have bothered. But once I started, the only way to limit the costs was to drop the project. The costs were mainly imposed on me by the library. This was Russia after the Putch and these people were incredibly incompetent, and demanding. It was a take it or leave it situation. The details of this sordid affair were described at great length in my posting on the How Much Does it Cost? thread. 1995-96 I guess. With your superior investigatory skills I am sure you can find it in the Archives in no time at all. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: falce and unperfect
>> However the publishers produce facsimiles not to make money. The facsimiles >> make their OTHER books look trustworthy and sellable. In other words the >> facsimiles are promotional material to a large degree. >> RT >> You do have a way with words, well said !!! > Indeed he does. Every demagogue who speaks out of ignorance has a way with > words. Turovsky is no different. > Matanya Ophee I'd rather be a professional socialist, than an amateur capitalist RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: falce and unperfect
At 03:18 PM 12/5/2003 -0600, Michael Thames <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >However the publishers produce facsimiles not to make money. The facsimiles >make their OTHER books look trustworthy and sellable. In other words the >facsimiles are promotional material to a large degree. >RT > > You do have a way with words, well said !!! Indeed he does. Every demagogue who speaks out of ignorance has a way with words. Turovsky is no different. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: falce and unperfect
> > So a publisher that does nothing but facsimiles, like Minkoff for example, > is using facsimiles to promotes facsimiles? Madam Minkoff produces NOT facsimilia, BUT replicas of antique books of various sorts, not necessarily with artistic content, for a totally different and much larger market. RT
Re: falce and unperfect
> Distributors and dealers get their discounts off the official "suggested > list price". MO, we are not children here, and we know that this "suggested list price" is a myth designed to make palatable eventual "NICE PRICE!!! 20% OFF!!!" label. Moreover, it is determined by marketing research. If the market can bear $100 tag: then limit your production costs to $32 or less. RT
Re: falce and unperfect
At 04:26 PM 12/5/2003 -0500, Roman Turovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > but the distribution > > scheme in place is comprised of the publisher>main distributor>subsidiary > > distributors>dealers. They all get a cut. > > > > The cost per copy is $32.- Applying the rule, the list price should be > > $224. As you can tell from my on line catalogue, the suggested list price > > for this book is $98.- In my estimation then, there was no way I could sell > > the book at all if the price was over the watershed number of a $100.- >My experience with distributors and dealers is that they add 1/3 of their >cost to the price and pass it onto the next level. >So a "$32 MO book" would be $44 at the first distributor, and $60 at the >HYPOTHETICAL second distributor, $80 for the end user, but only if the >second distributor ever existed. Obviously your experience with dealers and distributors is not the same as mine and as that of the rest of the world in the music publishing business. Nevertheless, you completely misunderstand the difference between costs of production and commercial discount. My $32.- dollars is what it took to produce the book. Period. Out of pocket expenses. Distributors and dealers get their discounts off the official "suggested list price". In the US, it is against the law to fix prices, but in Europe it is against the law to charge anything other than the price fixed by the publisher. IOW, my distributor sells books to their secondary distributors in various countries, and they in turn sell them to the shops. The discount structure of my distributor, the Theodore presser Company, is stated in their policy and if you want to know what it is, please apply to them and ask for their sales terms. I am sure they will be happy to oblige. It is based on the official suggested list price, the price that I decide what it will be for each individual edition. >So an MO book that costs $100 at the dealer- costs $67 at Theodor Presser, >i.e. MO got $45 for it- and made a $15 profit. Bullshit calculation based on ignorant assumptions. >If the MO cost is indeed authentic (the man's tongue in notably forked >[allow me to refrain from further biological considerations]) then his take >home pay is not insignificant (his rule of thumb of "7 times the cost" is >pure fantasy). yes of course. Not insignificant. Actually when I sell the book at full price directly to an individual, I make a killing, greedy bastard that I am. A killing that occurs about one every couple of years for this particular book. That and a buck 95 will not even get you a cup of coffee at Starbuck's. The fantasy above mentioned is used by the majority of commercial publishers world wide. Of course there are variations. Sometimes the price is 10 times cost, and sometimes it is 3 times cost. I have been using this rule of thumb for the last 25 years, and it was not my invention. I was given the secret of it by one Brian Jeffery. >However the publishers produce facsimiles not to make money. The facsimiles >make their OTHER books look trustworthy and sellable. In other words the >facsimiles are promotional material to a large degree. So a publisher that does nothing but facsimiles, like Minkoff for example, is using facsimiles to promotes facsimiles? The formula is different. Large publishers rely mostly on their popular music fodder to bring in the bread, but they do money losing prestigious editions as a service to the community, not as advertising. Publishers who do not do _any_ popular music, no country Western, no rock'n'roll, do not have the luxury of being able to afford community service and must rely on ALL their editions to at least break even. Besides, the idea of expensive facsimiles used as advertising material is laughable. The people who buy my classical guitar music, with few exceptions of course, have no interest in lute tablature in any format. And definitely not in facsimiles which they cannot read anyway. But may be you have something there. I can start a program of bonus giveaways. You buy one copy of my Tango book, and you get the Swan manuscript for free. Will surely be a better use for the paper than macerating it into toilet paper and shopping bags. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Lute Questions
Another benefit to using non-adjacent fingers on a string: it leaves appropriate fingers available to play a moving line elsewhere, above or below the string in question. E.g., by using 1 and 3 together on an upper course, 2 and 4 are available to play counterpoint (or whatever) on a lower course. Leonard Williams [] (_) ~
Re: falce and unperfect
However the publishers produce facsimiles not to make money. The facsimiles make their OTHER books look trustworthy and sellable. In other words the facsimiles are promotional material to a large degree. RT You do have a way with words, well said !!! Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: "Roman Turovsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 3:26 PM Subject: Re: falce and unperfect > > but the distribution > > scheme in place is comprised of the publisher>main distributor>subsidiary > > distributors>dealers. They all get a cut. > > > > The cost per copy is $32.- Applying the rule, the list price should be > > $224. As you can tell from my on line catalogue, the suggested list price > > for this book is $98.- In my estimation then, there was no way I could sell > > the book at all if the price was over the watershed number of a $100.- > My experience with distributors and dealers is that they add 1/3 of their > cost to the price and pass it onto the next level. > So a "$32 MO book" would be $44 at the first distributor, and $60 at the > HYPOTHETICAL second distributor, $80 for the end user, but only if the > second distributor ever existed. > So an MO book that costs $100 at the dealer- costs $67 at Theodor Presser, > i.e. MO got $45 for it- and made a $15 profit. > If the MO cost is indeed authentic (the man's tongue in notably forked > [allow me to refrain from further biological considerations]) then his take > home pay is not insignificant (his rule of thumb of "7 times the cost" is > pure fantasy). > However the publishers produce facsimiles not to make money. The facsimiles > make their OTHER books look trustworthy and sellable. In other words the > facsimiles are promotional material to a large degree. > RT > > __ > Roman M. Turovsky > http://turovsky.org > http://polyhymnion.org > > >
Re: falce and unperfect
> but the distribution > scheme in place is comprised of the publisher>main distributor>subsidiary > distributors>dealers. They all get a cut. > > The cost per copy is $32.- Applying the rule, the list price should be > $224. As you can tell from my on line catalogue, the suggested list price > for this book is $98.- In my estimation then, there was no way I could sell > the book at all if the price was over the watershed number of a $100.- My experience with distributors and dealers is that they add 1/3 of their cost to the price and pass it onto the next level. So a "$32 MO book" would be $44 at the first distributor, and $60 at the HYPOTHETICAL second distributor, $80 for the end user, but only if the second distributor ever existed. So an MO book that costs $100 at the dealer- costs $67 at Theodor Presser, i.e. MO got $45 for it- and made a $15 profit. If the MO cost is indeed authentic (the man's tongue in notably forked [allow me to refrain from further biological considerations]) then his take home pay is not insignificant (his rule of thumb of "7 times the cost" is pure fantasy). However the publishers produce facsimiles not to make money. The facsimiles make their OTHER books look trustworthy and sellable. In other words the facsimiles are promotional material to a large degree. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: Lute Question
Dear Stewart, obviously I haven't made myself as clear as I'd have wished. I do not at all try to avoid using the 3rd finger. --a-r2-d4- --a-b1-d4- --a-b1-d4- -a-r2- -a-r2-d4-- -a-r2-d4-- is just as good to me as --a-r1-d3- --a-b1-d4- --a-b1-d4- -a-r1- -a-r1-d3-- -a-r1-d3-- only, I'm sometimes kind of lazy, trying to avoid changes of position, which is necessary in the 2nd example. All I wanted to say is that with 1-3, 1-4, 2-4 combinations you can have a more powerful (= easier) grip on the fretboard. Moreover, with this fingering there is always one finger set free to do other things required at the time. You can find this kind of fingering as early as in Newsidler (1536, klein fundament) as well as in Waissel (1592, von der applikation). A close look reveals that French lutenists like Denis Gaultier, Jacques Gallot(s) et al still applied it, with Mouton deviating (he sometimes has neighbouring fingers). I seem to remember that also the famous Dresden ms. with music by Weiss has fingerings of this type. -- Best wishes, Mathias Mathias Roesel, Grosze Annenstrasze 5, 28199 Bremen, Deutschland/ Germany, T/F +49 - 421 - 165 49 97, Fax +49 1805 060 334 480 67, E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Copy Rights
At 02:01 PM 12/5/2003 -0500, Roman Turovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >An additional reason to share facsimilia (from CG list): > > > > > From: Matanya Ophee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I was able to remove from the market an > > edition of PD material by another publisher, which was based on my > > edition of the same piece. I have made a few editorial changes to the > > original, and also included (unintentionally of course) two mistakes. > > The predators copied all my editorial changes and my mistakes without > > credit or permission. Since then, I insure that every edition of mine > > of PD material contains a lot of editorial work and at least two > > mistakes That is correct. The piece in question, Bobrowicz' Variations on la Ci Darem la Mano op. 6, is available from the Rischel & Birket Smith Collection in the Royal Library of Copenhagen. My edition of it clearly stated the source, and it would have been no problem for the predator to go there, get a copy of the original and do his own editing and his own mistakes. At the time, one would have needed to write to the library and asks for copies. Today these copies are available for download from the library's web site. The issue there was not the music, but MY editorial work. That is protected and I will continue to protect as much as I can. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
U.S. Licensed Doctors online.p
[1]Don't Waste Your Time at the Doctor= 9;s Office! RX Medication= s Delivered Right to Your Door in 24 Hours! [2]Pay LESS for your drugs & get MORE for= your $$$! Join the millions of peo= ple who are tired of the hassle with the insurance companies and doctors! We carry ALL of the well-known drugs available and most of the unknown as = well. We cur= rently have specials on the following items:janitorial Name What it does [3]ViagraST<= /td> NEW! S= oft Tablets take effect within 20 minutes!commendation [4]Levitra A hot = new, popular alternative to Viagra= medley [5]Ambien Cures = insomnia & other sleep disorderscarmela [6]Fioricet Reliev= es headache pain and migraine headachesseptum [7]Zoloft For de= pression, OCD and/or eating disordersdave [8]Soma= Reliev= es muscle spasms and/or muscle stiffnesssuckling [9]Propecia<= /td> Treatm= ent for men who suffer from hairlossfermat [10]Zyban Helps = people to stop smoking cigarettesitalic ALL Prescriptions are FREE!autumn Our qualified physicians are standing by to serve you.doleful [11]Visit our site today and let us help yo= u help yourself!= additional zzaaqyoiug ed vixb lfnylzs bkrtv wejqhshikdipjqd nilf l ytcvmtz [12]PleaseRemoveMeFromMailingList -- References 1. 3D"http://psychic.realfiugdsvsf.biz/cf649/??*= 2. 3D"http://butt.realfiugdsvsf.biz/cf649/??*= 3. 3D"http://stupid.realfiugdsvsf.biz/cf649/??*= 4. 3D"http://sleety.realfiugdsvsf.biz/cf649/??*= 5. 3D"http://covalent.realfiugdsvsf.biz/cf649/??*= 6. 3D"http://freedmen.realfiugdsvsf.biz/cf649/??*= 7. 3D"http://connive.realfiugdsvsf.biz/cf649/??*= 8. 3D"http://decent.realfiugdsvsf.biz/cf649/??*= 9. 3D"http://bartlett.realfiugdsvsf.biz/cf649/??*= 10. 3D"http://abstract.realfiugdsvsf.biz/cf649/??*= 11. 3D"http://morris.realfiugdsvsf.biz/cf649/??*northwest"; 12. 3D"http://abbot.realfiugdsvsf.biz/cf649/rem.ddd??*=
Re: falce and unperfect
At 07:02 PM 12/5/2003 +0100, Tony Chalkley wrote: >maybe it would not be a bad idea for the publishers >(seeing as two of them are on the list) to explain their market (and I don't >mean by this "justify their prices"). What a print run on the average >facsimile is, who buys it, etc. Justifying the prices is part and parcel of any project. The target audience for any project varies. Many years ago, in a thread called How Much Does it Cost? right here in this group, someone complained about the price of a particular Minkoff facsimile. It was quite a lengthy thread and among others, I posted there a lengthy article about one of my facsimiles. I did not identify it by name at the time, but at a later time I made it clear that reference was made to the St. Petersburg Swan Manuscript. Here is the story in a nut shell. It cost me, out of my own private pocket, $16,000.- to produce this facsimile. I printed 500 copies. The traditional rule of thumb in the publishing industry is that the suggested price list should by 7 times the cost. The reason for that is that very few copies are sold directly to the end users. It happens sometimes, but the distribution scheme in place is comprised of the publisher>main distributor>subsidiary distributors>dealers. They all get a cut. The cost per copy is $32.- Applying the rule, the list price should be $224. As you can tell from my on line catalogue, the suggested list price for this book is $98.- In my estimation then, there was no way I could sell the book at all if the price was over the watershed number of a $100.- Now if I sell the book directly, I make a few bucks on this one copy. If I sell it through the distribution scheme, my average take is about 28% off the list price, i.e., $27.44 which is below what it cost me to produce. I lose money. On the average, most of my sales are through my distributors. very few of them have been directly. I ceased my mail order operations in 1996, and only in the last couple of month I finally established a shopping cart on my web site. So far, I sold one copy of this book through the web site. Thank you friend, you know who you are. You can easily calculate how many copies I need to sell in order to recuperate my investment, and that is _before_ I made in single dime on the deal. Unfortunately, since its publication in 1994, nine years ago I sold a grand total of 120 copies, most of it in the first couple of years. Since then, the rate of sales is about 3-4 copies every year. which is not enough to generate any royalties to the two editors, Tim Crawford and Pierre-François Goy who did a tremendous amount of work in preparing it. It will be many years before I cover my costs on this book, and many more before I see any profit at all. That is why all this bravado about greed, monopoly, tyranny, is so hurtful and so unfair. And that is why there is no chance I will ever publish another facsimile. As soon as I did, the predators will be on it, if it is was sexy enough. The only think that protects me from them in the case of the Swan is that it is not a well known or well understood source. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Copy Rights
An additional reason to share facsimilia (from CG list): > From: Matanya Ophee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I was able to remove from the market an > edition of PD material by another publisher, which was based on my > edition of the same piece. I have made a few editorial changes to the > original, and also included (unintentionally of course) two mistakes. > The predators copied all my editorial changes and my mistakes without > credit or permission. Since then, I insure that every edition of mine > of PD material contains a lot of editorial work and at least two > mistakes > Matanya Ophee __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: Facsimeles etc.
I am tired of deleting all the messages on this subject. Why don't you who wish to pursue it go off line? R. -- Original Message -- From: Matanya Ophee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 13:06:54 -0500 >At 11:43 AM 12/5/2003 -0600, Herbert Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Matanya Ophee wrote: >> > Quite the contrary. Sky writing, ..., have a very secure business model >> > where the >> >>I simply meant (with some poetic license required, perhaps) that you can't >>sell tickets to a sky-writing show. > >They buy the tickets to the football game, placing thousands of potential >buyers in one location, which gives advertisers the venue to sell their >product. Sky writers, like banner draggers, have a secure income form that, >weather permitting of course. > >> > ... the street beggars in the swampy slums of Bangladesh are not part of >> > this new fangled accessibility to music, yet they constitute a >> > considerable portion of this thing you call "mankind". >> >>Anyone who reads National Geographic knows that very few people in the >>world are unaffected by modern electronic entertainment. > > >Yes of course. They all own computers and CD burners. > > >>If file swapping kills Columbia Records, RIAA, and MGM Studios, I think >>that mankind as a whole will indeed benefit, including the half-starved >>rat-hunters, whether or not they are part of the kill mechanism. > >Be careful what you wish for. You may get it. > >> >> > What we are really talking about is the replacement of commerciality with >> >>You're twisting my subject, and then implying that I was confused about >>what the subject was. > > >Not at all. we are talking about the same thing. > > >Matanya Ophee >Editions Orphe'e, Inc., >1240 Clubview Blvd. N. >Columbus, OH 43235-1226 >Phone: 614-846-9517 >Fax: 614-846-9794 >mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.orphee.com > > > >
Re: falce and unperfect
> Put another way, and taking the gamut of the list which runs from the > professional to the rank amateur, how people see the facsimile is going to > be very different, and maybe it would not be a bad idea for the publishers > (seeing as two of them are on the list) to explain their market (and I don't > mean by this "justify their prices"). What a print run on the average > facsimile is, who buys it, etc. From what Mr Reyermann said the cost of > production must be extremely difficult to recuperate if the market is > represented by lutelisters or even if it only represents a percentage of > players, but this isn't really just a matter of profit. It would be of no > interest to publish something that wouldn't be bought because the price was > too high. I may not be prepared to pay that price for that object, but that > simply proves that I am not part of the target public. Lutenists have NEVER been the target public, with them being 3000 worldwide max. All such publications are made for university libraries. The prices are set to compensate future losses from students' copying. Blank CD's sold "for music" are priced in the same way in the US. RT
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 11:43 AM 12/5/2003 -0600, Herbert Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Matanya Ophee wrote: > > Quite the contrary. Sky writing, ..., have a very secure business model > > where the > >I simply meant (with some poetic license required, perhaps) that you can't >sell tickets to a sky-writing show. They buy the tickets to the football game, placing thousands of potential buyers in one location, which gives advertisers the venue to sell their product. Sky writers, like banner draggers, have a secure income form that, weather permitting of course. > > ... the street beggars in the swampy slums of Bangladesh are not part of > > this new fangled accessibility to music, yet they constitute a > > considerable portion of this thing you call "mankind". > >Anyone who reads National Geographic knows that very few people in the >world are unaffected by modern electronic entertainment. Yes of course. They all own computers and CD burners. >If file swapping kills Columbia Records, RIAA, and MGM Studios, I think >that mankind as a whole will indeed benefit, including the half-starved >rat-hunters, whether or not they are part of the kill mechanism. Be careful what you wish for. You may get it. > > > What we are really talking about is the replacement of commerciality with > >You're twisting my subject, and then implying that I was confused about >what the subject was. Not at all. we are talking about the same thing. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Recent discoveries (Facsimeles etc.)
At 12:24 PM 12/5/2003 -0500, Roman Turovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I'll ask Sasha Batov about this. >RT > > >http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg02059.html Good idea. I hope you have better luck getting hold of him than I did last August. Batov was working in the Leningrad Museum of Musical Instruments at the time. That's when I met him. The Manuscript in question was in another library. But as an active lutenist in Leningrad at the same time, he should know of this manuscript and what it was. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: falce and unperfect
Dear Stewart, > > It is the "falce and unperfect" aspect of modern editions, which > make me want to look at facsimiles. I want to get as close as > possible to the original text to learn as much as I can about the > music. It's an academic thing, I suppose. It is also admirably professional, and that may be what lies behind a lot of the nastiness on this thread. The fact that one and the same piece may exist in several different versions and with several names is of vague academic interest to me, but I have other cats to whip, as they say rather picturesquely round here. At my end of the scale, hopelessly looking for pieces I can actually play and never finding the time to practice the ones I've got, the couple of facsimiles I do have are of a more plastic interest - I like looking at them. I'm not in the least interested in having something between a facsimile with that 'feel' and a retranscription, i.e. a photocopy, unless it seems 'free', like the Kapsberger PDF which came like a free gift in a cereal packet. At that same end of the scale, manuscripts would drive me mad. It took me ages to sort out the one page Willow Song that was floating around on the net, and it gave me great pleasure, but even five pages would be a chore for me. Put another way, and taking the gamut of the list which runs from the professional to the rank amateur, how people see the facsimile is going to be very different, and maybe it would not be a bad idea for the publishers (seeing as two of them are on the list) to explain their market (and I don't mean by this "justify their prices"). What a print run on the average facsimile is, who buys it, etc. From what Mr Reyermann said the cost of production must be extremely difficult to recuperate if the market is represented by lutelisters or even if it only represents a percentage of players, but this isn't really just a matter of profit. It would be of no interest to publish something that wouldn't be bought because the price was too high. I may not be prepared to pay that price for that object, but that simply proves that I am not part of the target public. > snip< Certainly the quality > varies from one publisher to the next. It seems ironic that Minkoff > editions, which are often the most expensive, often have no > editorial material, or at most a perfunctory list of contents. > Perhaps they make up for that deficit by reproducing so much music. > I have a facsimile edition of some baroque music published by > Schott, much of which I can hardly read at all. Boethius facsimiles, > on the other hand, are very legible, and have extremely useful > editorial material - concordances, information on dating, > watermarks, etc. Editions Ophee have useful information supplied by > the editors too, and the quality of the paper is excellent. Perhaps perversely, I think I would want a facsimile to be just that, with nothing else added. Good paper, yes, and as clear a print as the original allows, but nothing esle in the volume itself. I've got what I find a nice idea which could have been done better in a Marin Marais suite. A modern edition with a realisation of the figured bass, and in it are tucked the two facsimiles. > > The Welde facsimile is not yet ready to be published, but we are > well on the way. My wish is that people should be able to read every > note in the facsimile, including the notes which are now invisible, > and so we propose including in the introduction detailed information > about illegible passages. I don't know if this has ever been done > before, at least to the extent we propose doing. Aha! a sort of 'time machine facsimile' - I bet you're enjoying doing it. Yours, Tony > > For those who are unaware of the significance of your question about > Diego Cantalupi's pdf of Kapsberger III, I should explain that his > recent CD of music from Kapsberger's _Terzo Libro_ contains a > facsimile of the music, which you can read on your computer screen. > I imagine one's attitude to copyright would be no different for this > unusual CD than for any other. > > Best wishes, > > Stewart McCoy. > > > - Original Message - > From: "Tony Chalkley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Lutelist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 1:25 PM > Subject: falce and unperfect > > > > Just as an aside, where does Diego Cantalupi's pdf of Kapsberger > III fit in? > > > > Unlike Stewart, I wouldn't want a lot of facsimiles, as the ones I > have or > > have had I find difficult to read (I think this comes out in the > practical > > reproduction difficulties both with Welde and with Tree editions), > not to > > mention a bit falce and unperfect. I therefore need to transcribe > them, > > hopefully without error... > > > > Tony > > >
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 09:20 AM 12/5/2003 -0500, Roman Turovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> If you feel they do not, strive to > >> change them through proper channels in favor of breaking them. I don't > >> believe allowing the production and sale of lute tablatures is quite > >> enough to justify a label of tyranny. >Production is not questioned here, but rather an attempt to monopolize PD >material by repackaging it. That is a weak argument that does not reflect the realities of the market place. Repackaging a facsimile is not a monopoly. The Mudarra book is published in facsimile by both Chanterelle and Minkoff. The Sanz book is published in facsimile By Minkoff, Abrines and Rodrigo de Zayas, the Moscow Weiss Manuscript is published in facsimile by Zen-On (Manabe) and Orphee (Crawford). There is nothing to prevent anyone from re-publishing any manuscript in facsimile, as long as they obtain it from the original source. >IT IS VERY SIMPLE: In order to publish a classic novel one has no obligation >or necessity to pay a single penny to the library or an individual that >holds the manuscript. PERIOD. >Lute tabulatures are no different. They are different. The proper analogy here would be the re-publication of the _music_ contained in the tablature, not the image of the tablature itself. If I want to re-publish the complete works of Shakespeare, I have two choices. Take any of the available sources, off the shelf at Barnes & Noble if need be, re-typeset it and publish it. No problem. The other choice is to do a facsimile, let's say, of the first edition. In that case, I need to obtain the permission of the holder of that source, if there is only one. If there are many such sources, I may try to obtain one myself (Sotheby's for example) or negotiate with any of the known holders. Once I published this facsimile, anyone who wishes to throw good money after bad is welcome to repeat the process. All I am asking is that if you want to produce a facsimile of something I published, please retrace my steps and invest the same kind of time and money I did. Don't rip me off. The reprint industry is far more extensive than just the manufacturers of lute tablature facsimiles. Minkoff is one of the smaller operators in the field. Other well known ones are Dover Publications of New York, Da Capo Press, Olms verlag in Hildesheim, Slatkine Reprints (also in Geneva) and many others. What RT is insinuating is that by publishing a facsimile, the _intent_ of the publisher is to monopolize the market. That is utter nonsense since he has no way of knowing if this is in fact the case, particularly when the market place reality is indicates no such monopoly exists. Matanya Ophee Editions Orphe'e, Inc., 1240 Clubview Blvd. N. Columbus, OH 43235-1226 Phone: 614-846-9517 Fax: 614-846-9794 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.orphee.com
Re: Facsimeles etc.
Re: Facsimeles etc.
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Matanya Ophee wrote: > Quite the contrary. Sky writing, ..., have a very secure business model > where the I simply meant (with some poetic license required, perhaps) that you can't sell tickets to a sky-writing show. > ... the street beggars in the swampy slums of Bangladesh are not part of > this new fangled accessibility to music, yet they constitute a > considerable portion of this thing you call "mankind". Anyone who reads National Geographic knows that very few people in the world are unaffected by modern electronic entertainment. If file swapping kills Columbia Records, RIAA, and MGM Studios, I think that mankind as a whole will indeed benefit, including the half-starved rat-hunters, whether or not they are part of the kill mechanism. > What we are really talking about is the replacement of commerciality with You're twisting my subject, and then implying that I was confused about what the subject was. ???
Dowland's "conversion"
>As you certainly know the only "evidence" for Dowland's "conversion" >is Sloane 1021. > >Rainer adS Speaking of Dowland's conversion, I read that Sloane quote at one time, although it's been a while and I would like to see it again, but I am still very skeptical. It could have been hearsay or something else peculiar lost in the expanse of time. I just don't understand why the greatest lutenist in the world would change a technique that was working for him. I'm not saying he didn't, I'm just skeptical. -- Ed Durbrow Saitama, Japan http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/
Re: archive
>> Well, there are some potential linguistic pitfalls, stemming from the >> differences between American and British versions of English, as well >> as considerable differences in thinking patterns: people tend to be A >> BIT more elliptical in Midlands than in Iowa, and a direct statement >> American style could get them discombobulated. Having said that, I DO >> NOT think that Stewart is capable of that deadly half-smile of >> condescension for which I fondly remember Sir Nigel North. >> RT > I am ELLIPTICALLY grateful to you, that now I can better understand > tiny nuances between Midlands, Iowa and British English. In between of > creating those, no doubts, precious remarks (definitely OT) you might > correct the omissions of all duble/repet bars in your version of ''[B] > P'', f.20v from Danzig Lautenbuch Ms 4022 (now in Berlin), on your > http://polyhymnion.org as ''Ballo Polacco (La Mantovana)''. Thanks, I do not have an image of the original. I had a Walter Gerwig transcription years ago and I reconstructed tab from that. > In the first part of the piece double bars OPTICALLY helps much in > understanding and memorising a piece. In the second part > (indistinguishable in your edition) the repeat bars would simply save > space. Such a miniature piece on one page + one line and a bar? In > original it takes only half of the page. > > But first of all the second/last part (4 bars + 6 bars), which is much > simpler and does not have written out repetitions (contrary to your > version), is a kind of a problem, in my view. It is written in the same > duple time (crossed C) as the the first part, but I think might/should > be played in three, as tripla/proportio, so popular in this time and > genre of music. Proportio, after the ''main'' piece, could be written > out in a printed XVI/XVIIth C edition or left out in a manuscript for > extemporisation in a ''usual'' way. The more the written out repeats > are completely out of place on paper (either of cellulose or > electricity). > This is not a statement but a matter for discussion... as the Art of > Editing early music. Could I solicit you for a scan? > And please, don't kill me with discombobulation, condescension and > whatever you have at your undoubtedly creative hand - this is, as I > understand, an International Lute-list. Dobrze, spokoj... RT
Lute Questions
Dear Stewart and Mathias, Many, many thanks indeed for your kind recommendations, which I will study in more detail tonight. You mention, Stewart, the size of my fingers, and indeed these are a problem, too. When I was a kid for a time my hobby was collecting the very highest twig on a tree, the kind of sensible thing boys do. One day the branch I was hanging on snapped, as did the one I was standing on, and it turned out that Newton's theories on what happens in such a situation were quite correct. After a few months with both hands in plaster and after much physiotherapy (the tree was around 60 feet high), the doctor said, 'Young man, nature works miracles, you can keep your left hand'. Well, that was a relief! But as a result, my fingers aren't as long as they ought to be with a bloke who is around 6 feet tall. On the right hand the fourth finger does very little (so when I played the piano, I always had to use the 'accelerator' pedal, as otherwise any form of legato or octaves were impossible. In addition, the little finger of the same hand used to jump out of joint at the most awkward moments. I also played the clarinet and that finger works quite a number of keys, so it was a dreadful moment when it happened as I was playing one of the Brahms sonatas, standing there, trying to get it back into joint while my accompanist was wondering what to do. And there were other occasions, equally embarrassing... And as can be imagined, the left hand in hardly in better shape, which is why the tendonitis came in the first place. All that straining to play like Segovia (my teacher's teacher) turned out to be less than ideal. But as I say, I'll study your recommendations in peace and quiet tonight. As a little thank-you, here a translation of the Hafiz text to Schubert's 'Du bist die Ruh...', which I did today. A friend is celebrating his goodness-knows which wedding anniversary, and wanted to sing his wife the song (very romantic), and asked me to do a quick rendition in English. He likes the result, as does my own wife, so here it is (I've done it quite freely, in order to catch the mood of the thing). 'You are both peace and kindness, too, and what I long for, that is you. I dedicate my house and home, my heart and soul to you alone. So come to me and close the door behind you on the world before⦠Drive earlier pain from out my breast, and let my heart by you be blest. And may my eyes see only you, illumine me, and bless you, too.' Cheers Tom
Re: Recent discoveries (Facsimeles etc.)
I'll ask Sasha Batov about this. RT http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg02059.html lute <-- Chronological --> Find <-- Thread --> Re: Recent discoveries (Facsimeles etc.) > > For example, many years ago, I photographed in Leningrad., when it was > > still Leningrad, a lute manuscript in one library. ... One of these > > days, when I am in a better mood and > > when I can deal with lute music and lutenists directly, without regard > > to > > my so-called reputation, I may investigate this further. > >Don't cry Mataniy, don't wait for a better mood - lutenists are all the >same as guitarists, flutists, programers and bankers. Find a distance, >don't get involved in particulars... Good idea. You see, not all lutenists on this listare of the same mindset as Messrs. Abramovich, Thames and Turovsky. Obviously, there are some reasonable people here who understand that the issue of the survival of the lute is not one of instant gratification by free downloading, but one of study and research. I even have some friends in this list. I fully understand why they choose to encourage me in private messages, and not expose themselves to the kind of scatological (Yes, Jon Murphy, scatological. Just check out Turovsky's first post in this thread!) character assassination that goes on in here. People who have done so publicly in other forums, have been accused by Roman of being MO sycophants, among other expletives. >Tell us what's on the film and >either publish it (perhaps not in USA or Switzerland, if you don't want >to complain about sales) or leave to someone for a Ph.D. elaboration, >if that's better destination. Don't hide, we are looking forward. I know where it is, but I assure you, I have more urgent issues on the front burner, some even have to do with the lute. They will be announced as soon as they are ready for publication.
Re: Facsimiles etc.
A helpful resource in understanding public domain and copyright law (USA only) is Stanford University's Library site and can be found at http://fairuse.stanford.edu/ -jdh --
Re: Facsimeles etc.
> I contributed what little I know of this topic very early on and in very > short order grew mighty tired of all the scatological nonsense and > inappropriate misidentification of hominids to follow (as a professional > biologist, this latter offense was particularly troubling). Actually I took an exception (as a simian of impeccable pedigree) to calling MO a monkey because it is painfully insulting to see him perceived as of same kind as myself. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: Facsimeles etc.
> At 09:20 AM 12/5/03 -0500, Roman Turovsky wrote: If you feel they do not, strive to change them through proper channels in favor of breaking them. I don't believe allowing the production and sale of lute tablatures is quite enough to justify a label of tyranny. >> Production is not questioned here, but rather an attempt to monopolize PD >> material by repackaging it. > There are many publishers. Some charge more than less. Some are supported by grants from the Ministry of Culture, in the lucky countries that have such entities. > None hold a > monopoly on PD lute tablatures. Certainly. It's just that some local vested interests are trying to trick us into limiting our liberty to share PD material, in favor of having us pay for their versions of the same. > As I understand it, if a publisher does > risk reproduction of a facsimile, repackage it, and sell it, I can xerox a > friend's bought copy it and use it in the US if I don't reproduce > introductory text, cover art...anything that may be > copyrighted. Personally, I don't do this because I believe I should > not. I do it > > >> IT IS VERY SIMPLE: In order to publish a classic novel one has no obligation >> or necessity to pay a single penny to the library or an individual that >> holds the manuscript. PERIOD. >> Lute tabulatures are no different. > I don't think this is in doubt. By definition, public domain material is > not protected by copyright. If anybody lays hands to the material, he/she > can disseminate it at will assuming he/she hasn't willingly agreed to > legally binding restrictions in obtaining the material. If I own a rare > and beautiful thing, I have the right to restrict access to it, to share it > with friends and hide it from local street toughs, etc. In general, I'm > pretty liberal about sharing my scant stash of music and ephemera with the > world at large. Unlike many of the world's libraries, I am fortunate that > my sustained existence doesn't depend upon such things. I have been pretty > successful in accessing public collections without exorbitant fees...but I > have done so to satiate my own curiosity, not with the intent to > publish...and, I must say, I am a rather charming character. You also have some academic credentials. My wife thinks I'm extremely charming, but my access to the goodies has not been that smooth, with the exception of NYPL. > I understand > your argument; I am just a little more sympathetic to the institutions that > protect the physical manifestations of this material to the benefit of > future users and, when faced with ever-diminishing public funds, must > survive to the benefit of all. I support these institutions too, as long as they don't cross into gentrification of knowledge. RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org http://polyhymnion.org
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 11:20 PM 12/4/03 -0600, Michael Thames wrote: >As we have witnessed, a moral case could be made either way. I for one, >am in favor of all facsimiles in the public domain to be copyright free. As >far as everything else is concerned I really don't care. As I understand it, at least in the US, all facsimiles in the public domain _are_ copyright free. They may be protected by contractual agreement with the holder of the original, but the holder of the original cannot hold a US-registered copyright on them. If somebody has a richer understanding of copyright law, I'm happy to receive correction. Even if legal, I believe copying such stuff from a modern publication is wrong, so I don't do it, and I don't like that it's sometimes done. That's my decision to make. Eugene Dear Eugene, If some lute manuscript were past down to me in my family lineage, I own it legally. Or if I went to an action and bought it. I own it. I have nothing to say about that. However, if a museum owns it they have a moral obligation to free it to the public domain, as I guess is reflected in the copyright laws in the US, as you say. Maybe this is true, I don't know. based on my own experience from copying both the Yale Jauck and The Boston Berr, I can say that both museums were extremely generous with me, in both there time, and support. Not once did I hear anything about copyright issues, nor did I at any point sign a legal document with them restricting me in anyway from releasing the plans I made. Now, that I've obtained the plans, it is then my choice whether I sell them for profit or not, isn't it? I've chosen not to, regardless of the expence involved, but others have chosen to make money That's the moral issue involved here. I don't see the world so black and white. Why is it that in poorer countries they don't have these kinds of restriction and in richer ones they do. The morals you proclaim have no solid base, because from one place to an other they change. You can't condem everyone, who lives outside the US or Europe criminals because they have a different take on things. Michael Thames Luthier www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com Site design by Natalina Calia-Thames - Original Message - From: "Euge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Michael Thames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 5:55 AM Subject: Re: Facsimeles etc. > At 11:20 PM 12/4/03 -0600, Michael Thames wrote: > >As we have witnessed, a moral case could be made either way. I for one, > >am in favor of all facsimiles in the public domain to be copyright free. As > >far as everything else is concerned I really don't care. > > > As I understand it, at least in the US, all facsimiles in the public domain > _are_ copyright free. They may be protected by contractual agreement with > the holder of the original, but the holder of the original cannot hold a > US-registered copyright on them. If somebody has a richer understanding of > copyright law, I'm happy to receive correction. Even if legal, I believe > copying such stuff from a modern publication is wrong, so I don't do it, > and I don't like that it's sometimes done. That's my decision to make. > > Eugene >
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 09:20 AM 12/5/03 -0500, Roman Turovsky wrote: > >> If you feel they do not, strive to > >> change them through proper channels in favor of breaking them. I don't > >> believe allowing the production and sale of lute tablatures is quite > >> enough to justify a label of tyranny. >Production is not questioned here, but rather an attempt to monopolize PD >material by repackaging it. There are many publishers. Some charge more than less. None hold a monopoly on PD lute tablatures. As I understand it, if a publisher does risk reproduction of a facsimile, repackage it, and sell it, I can xerox a friend's bought copy it and use it in the US if I don't reproduce introductory text, cover art...anything that may be copyrighted. Personally, I don't do this because I believe I should not. Again, I am happy to receive correction from those who really know something about copyright law. >IT IS VERY SIMPLE: In order to publish a classic novel one has no obligation >or necessity to pay a single penny to the library or an individual that >holds the manuscript. PERIOD. >Lute tabulatures are no different. I don't think this is in doubt. By definition, public domain material is not protected by copyright. If anybody lays hands to the material, he/she can disseminate it at will assuming he/she hasn't willingly agreed to legally binding restrictions in obtaining the material. If I own a rare and beautiful thing, I have the right to restrict access to it, to share it with friends and hide it from local street toughs, etc. In general, I'm pretty liberal about sharing my scant stash of music and ephemera with the world at large. Unlike many of the world's libraries, I am fortunate that my sustained existence doesn't depend upon such things. I have been pretty successful in accessing public collections without exorbitant fees...but I have done so to satiate my own curiosity, not with the intent to publish...and, I must say, I am a rather charming character. I understand your argument; I am just a little more sympathetic to the institutions that protect the physical manifestations of this material to the benefit of future users and, when faced with ever-diminishing public funds, must survive to the benefit of all.
Facsimilia Rectificata
For your perusal and delectation: I have just posted a TEMPO DI MINUETTO by Georg Christoph Wagenseil at http://polyhymnion.org/swv/opus-2.html It differs in some minor [editorial] details from its facsimile that may be found at http://polyhymnion.org/swv/facs.html Enjoy, RT __ Roman M. Turovsky http://turovsky.org
Re: Facsimeles etc.
>> Barring obvious cases of tyranny, law should >> reflect the social norms of a society. Since when tyranny does not reflect the social norms of a society??? There is a maxim: "Every people deserves its government". >> If you feel they do not, strive to >> change them through proper channels in favor of breaking them. I don't >> believe allowing the production and sale of lute tablatures is quite >> enough to justify a label of tyranny. Production is not questioned here, but rather an attempt to monopolize PD material by repackaging it. IT IS VERY SIMPLE: In order to publish a classic novel one has no obligation or necessity to pay a single penny to the library or an individual that holds the manuscript. PERIOD. Lute tabulatures are no different. RT
Re: Adopt-a-lutenist
Excellent, David, Well done. There is another lutenist to adopt (actually 2, father and son). They share a smallish lute of ca.60cm. Nikolay Makarenko Kommunarov, 115, room 7, 35, Krasnodar, RUSSIA phone: (8612) 65-11-89 RT > I was just going to send him a set of strings. It'll be long lasting, > weather-proof, not so beautiful but utterly practical in any environment > carbon, so if any of you want to send him something else so he has a choice, > that might be a good idea. He keeps sending me his cd's for reviews in our > news letter. I was polite about the first one, I'm thinking about what to do > with the second one. > David >> I've been in contact with Anatoly Shpakov of Kiev. He made a couple of CDs >> on which I'd rather not comment, except that he uses tennis racket wire on > a >> course or two (he is aware of the difference, after Tony Rooley's concert >> there a few weeks ago). >> If anyone of you wants to help him out with strings (65cm ca.) and/or > music, >> CDs etc. (Renaissance only): >> Anatoly Shpakov >> Malinovsky St., 11, apt. 182, >> Kyiv-Kiev-04212 >> UKRAINE >> >> RT >> __ >> Roman M. Turovsky >> http://turovsky.org >> http://polyhymnion.org >> >> >> Deze e-mail is door E-mail VirusScanner van Planet Internet gecontroleerd > op virussen. >> Op http://www.planet.nl/evs staat een verwijzing naar de actuele lijst > waar op wordt gecontroleerd. >> >> >> > >
French poem
Dear lutenists, Just as I had removed myself from the list for the holidays I received a copy of this message from Professor Thierry Favier at the University of Dijon seeking identification of the poem below. If I any of you know the source, would you mind passing the information on to Professor Favier at [EMAIL PROTECTED] many thanks, Christopher Berg University of South Carolina >Veuillez m'excuser de vous solliciter pour >l'identification d'un poème. Il s'agit de "stances" >intitulées "Récit de la musique au Roy", qui débutent >ainsi : >Je suis la Reyne des concerts >L'esprit des luths, l'ame des airs, >Et la belle ouvrière des charmes : >Mais, illustre et fameux vainqueur, >Je ne me vante que des armes, >Dont j'ai pû te réduire à me donner ton coeur. > >Mes attraits rendus innocens, >Ne sont plus dangereux aux sens ; >Je suis dévote à ton exemple ; >Et ce qui comble mon bon-heur, >Par toy remise dans le Temple, >Avecque la Vertu je recouvre l'honneur. > >L'attribution et la localisation de ce poème revêtent >une importance particulière pour mes travaux actuels. >En vous remerciant de prendre quelques minutes pour >solliciter votre mémoire ou vos notes. >Très cordialement, >Bien amicalement, >Thierry Favier, Université de Dijon
Re: Lute Questions
Dear Mathias, What you say is extremely interesting - not a third finger in sight. This is what I think of as double bass fingering, where semitones are fingered with only the 1st, 2nd, and 4th fingers. The 3rd finger may be used to support the 4th finger, but doesn't have a note in its own right until you reach very high positions. Many years ago I went to a lecture given by an eminent double bass soloist. I'm afraid I have forgotten her name. For the double bass she advocated what I think of as bass guitar fingering, i.e. one finger per fret. She played the double bass extremely well, but her fingers were at full stretch when she came down to the lower positions, and it all looked rather unnatural. I wouldn't use your fingering (avoiding the 3rd finger) quite as much as you do, although I do find I use double bass fingering (for want of a phrase) more with the theorbo than with the lute, where stretches are exacerbated by the greater string length. For example, I might play _ _2c__ _4d__ _2c__ __a__ _ on the theorbo, rather than _ _2c__ _3d__ _2c__ __a__ _ as I normally would on a renaissance lute. When it comes to ornaments, using the 2nd and 4th fingers can give far more torque (if that's the right word). For example, if I saw this for the renaissance lute _ __c#_ _ _ __a__ _ I would play ___ __2c_4d_2c_ ___ ___ __a ___ or _ __2c_4d_2c_4d_2c_ _ _ __a__ _ depending on the length of the note. If I remember right, I have seen this fingering for the A chord on a baroque guitar: __a__ _2c__ _1c__ _1c__ __a__ _ which means that when you have an ornament on the 2nd course, you can get a good torque between the 2nd and 4th fingers: __a__ _4d_2c_4d_2c_ _1c__ _1c__ __a__ _ This is why I now finger G chords on the lute like this: __a___ __a___ _2c___ _1c___ _1c___ __a___ not only because there might be an ornament at the 3rd course, but also because the 2nd finger can slide safely along a course in passages like this: ___a_ 4f__3e__|__a__||_ ___2d_-_|_2c__||_ _2e_|_1c__||_ _1c_|_1c__||_ |__a__||_ Best wishes, Stewart McCoy. - Original Message - From: ""Mathias Rösel"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Lutelist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 11:12 AM Subject: Re: Lute Questions > I was taught to use pairs of fingers, rather, and to avoid using neighbouring fingers on > scales, i.e. 1st and 3rd/4th work together as well 2nd and 4th, but not 1st and 2nd, 2nd > and 3rd, 3rd and 4th. It applies to both renaissance and baroque lute. Main advantage of > that fingering is physical enhancement of single fingers and, at the same time, relief of > muscles. E.g. > > --a-r2-d4- > --a-b1-d4- > --a-b1-d4- > -a-r2- > -a-r2-d4-- > -a-r2-d4-- > > -- > Best wishes, > > Mathias
Re: Facsimeles etc.
At 11:20 PM 12/4/03 -0600, Michael Thames wrote: >As we have witnessed, a moral case could be made either way. I for one, >am in favor of all facsimiles in the public domain to be copyright free. As >far as everything else is concerned I really don't care. As I understand it, at least in the US, all facsimiles in the public domain _are_ copyright free. They may be protected by contractual agreement with the holder of the original, but the holder of the original cannot hold a US-registered copyright on them. If somebody has a richer understanding of copyright law, I'm happy to receive correction. Even if legal, I believe copying such stuff from a modern publication is wrong, so I don't do it, and I don't like that it's sometimes done. That's my decision to make. Eugene
Re: Lute Questions
"Stewart McCoy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > 2) Chromatic fingering. Guitarists are taught to have one finger per > fret - to use the 1st finger for the 1st fret, the 2nd finger for > the 2nd fret, > > I'm generalising, of course, but my experience is that lute players > tend to use their little finger more than guitarists do, and lute > music may often involve just two frets. That means that the 1st and > 2nd fingers may operate at the 2nd fret, while the 3rd and 4th > fingers operate at the 3rd fret: I was taught to use pairs of fingers, rather, and to avoid using neighbouring fingers on scales, i.e. 1st and 3rd/4th work together as well 2nd and 4th, but not 1st and 2nd, 2nd and 3rd, 3rd and 4th. It applies to both renaissance and baroque lute. Main advantage of that fingering is physical enhancement of single fingers and, at the same time, relief of muscles. E.g. --a-r2-d4- --a-b1-d4- --a-b1-d4- -a-r2- -a-r2-d4-- -a-r2-d4-- -- Best wishes, Mathias Mathias Roesel, Grosze Annenstrasze 5, 28199 Bremen, Deutschland/ Germany, T/F +49 - 421 - 165 49 97, Fax +49 1805 060 334 480 67, E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Adopt-a-lutenist
I was just going to send him a set of strings. It'll be long lasting, weather-proof, not so beautiful but utterly practical in any environment carbon, so if any of you want to send him something else so he has a choice, that might be a good idea. He keeps sending me his cd's for reviews in our news letter. I was polite about the first one, I'm thinking about what to do with the second one. David * LGS-Europe c/o David van Ooijen Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Http://www.lgs-japan.org * Read about my latest Japanese CD and hear a sample at http://home.planet.nl/~d.v.ooijen/david/ensembles/chiyomi.html - Original Message - From: "Roman Turovsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "LUTE-LIST" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:25 PM Subject: Adopt-a-lutenist > I've been in contact with Anatoly Shpakov of Kiev. He made a couple of CDs > on which I'd rather not comment, except that he uses tennis racket wire on a > course or two (he is aware of the difference, after Tony Rooley's concert > there a few weeks ago). > If anyone of you wants to help him out with strings (65cm ca.) and/or music, > CDs etc. (Renaissance only): > Anatoly Shpakov > Malinovsky St., 11, apt. 182, > Kyiv-Kiev-04212 > UKRAINE > > RT > __ > Roman M. Turovsky > http://turovsky.org > http://polyhymnion.org > > > Deze e-mail is door E-mail VirusScanner van Planet Internet gecontroleerd op virussen. > Op http://www.planet.nl/evs staat een verwijzing naar de actuele lijst waar op wordt gecontroleerd. > > >
