[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Chris Wilke Straube
Thanks Roman. I am honored again. You are welcome at mine as well. You are an inspiration to us all. Dale - Original Message - From: Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; BAROQUE-LUTE baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu; Dale Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 7:45 AM Subject: Re: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Chris Wilke Straube Dale, You can eat at my table. RT - Original Message - From: Dale Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; BAROQUE-LUTE baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu; Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 6:49 PM Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Chris Wilke Straube Chris Thank you for honoring me with a reply. I have been immersed in this music for 3 decades now and learn new things about it constantly, still. Ron McFarlaine rubbed my nose in the mess I was making of galant ornamentation. He invoked in the Holy Father, C.P.E. Bach. I saw the light. The heavy , heavy light. Apogiaturas are to be held AT LEAST half the note value of the apogiaturee. The emphasis is to be on the dissonance. Sometimes it's cool not even to resolve it. I think these guys were ALL about the tension. Holding a grace note as long as possible and resolving only for a fraction of the value is so hard and yet so dramatic that it hurts. We must suffer a little more. Must As for the staccato chords with the einfall, search for the dog bark rather than the choked singer affekt. PETA is easier to deal with than the police and lawyers. An einfall or an an abzug (apogiaturas from below or above) can be played as accaciaturas if (and only if) the affekt is clear. I think that with a staccato sign, the affekt is clear. Bla bla bla I hate this academic crap. Yer my hero. Dale - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Dale Young [EMAIL PROTECTED]; BAROQUE-LUTE baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu; Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 12:33 PM Subject: Re: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Chris Wilke Straube Dale, --- Dale Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They may well be the most difficult lute pieces to play, well, ever. (excepting transcriptions of the Mahler symphonies, of course.) I don't know about that. Once you achieve general mastery of the instrument (as opposed virtuosity) the pieces aren't so hard. (I'm still working very hard and hope someday to actually acheive general mastery of the instrument, by the way.) Sure, there are the awkward parts - I love the extreme impracticality of the chord played on courses 5, 8 and 10 at the same time, for example. The sudden juxtapositions of dynamic changes are loads of fun to make your lute do, too. The huge range and particular concentration on melodies in the bass register make for lots of work with the right hand. The unusual style is difficult at first, but this is just because as lute players we're not used to the rules of this music. Maybe I'll eventually even understand it. Mr Wilke's performance is the first I have heard and I found it quite satisfying. His phrasing and voicing choices were very appropriate. He pulled off the technically challenging parts cleanly, all the odd, high position barre-chord leaps, double-stop trills, and awkward turns . Thanks! His interpretation of some of the ornaments and articulations though (multiple strikes on simple appogiaturas and overlooking of some staccato marks) gave me pause. While, I'm not sure I agree with you, I can buy your interpretation of the appogiatura vs. trill arguement. As for the staccato marks, it is difficult to make sense of them. Everyone one of the chords marked with a staccato also has an appogiatura from below symbol. Very, very difficult to play this truly staccato without making it sound unmusical like someone just choked the singer! I believe that Straube here really means definately observe the silence of the rest following my mark, i.e. no ringing. That's what I did anyway. But, hell... in the words of Bob Barto It's hard. And he played it better than I ever will. Keep the cadenza too! Bravo!! Thanks again. Its been fun stuff to play. Yeah Dan, better than old sequencemeister,Weiss. Fightin' words. Dale To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping __ D O T E A S Y - Join the web hosting revolution! http://www.doteasy.com
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
You can easily work it out yourself from what I've told you David Tayler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, I'm asking, how would you, specifically, tune the theorbos I just mentioned? Atton, Ecco, Hoess, Kaiser, Aman, Koch, Langenwalder, Attore, Mascotto, Stehelin, Greiff, Tieffenbrucker dt At 12:32 AM 1/30/2008, you wrote: you replied to it David Tayler wrote: I must have missed that post, if you can tell me how the following instruments were tuned Atton, Ecco, Hoess, Kaiser, Aman, Koch, Langenwalder, Attore, Mascotto, Stehelin, Greiff, Tieffenbrucker Then I can do some analysis. dt At 05:03 AM 1/29/2008, you wrote: see earlier David Tayler wrote: How were they tuned? dt At 12:42 AM 1/29/2008, you wrote: As very carefully explained earlier, theorbos of your recommended size existed but not tuned as you believe. MH To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Support the World Aids Awareness campaign this month with Yahoo! for Good -- Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Try it now. -- - Sent from Yahoo! #45; a smarter inbox. --
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
To the benefit of those not interested in a peeing contest but in theories on theorbo stringing, as I am, and not in the happy possesion of a list of historical theorbos stating string length and setup, here's what the guys are talking about (info taken from one of the Pohlmanns lying around here): Atton 1x1, 5x2 = 77,5cm 6x1 = 147cm Ecco 1x1, 5x2 = 75,5cm 6x1 = 161,5cm Hoess 6x2 = 80cm 9x1 = 158cm Kaiser 1x1, 6x2 = 73,1cm 6x1 = 157,6cm Aman 1x1, 5x2 = 80,9cm 5x2 = 150,4cm Koch 7x2 = 82,7cm 7x1 = 167,5cm Langenwalder 6x1 = 76,4cm 8x1 = 141,5cm Attore 1x1, 5x2 = 73cm 3x2 = 156cm Attore 6x2 = 65,7cm 8x1 = 152cm Mascotto 1x3, 4x2 = 74,5cm (original 1x1, 5x2) 6x1 = 158cm The point here is, as I understand it from the discussion so far, not their setup (6+8; 7+7; 8+6) or double versus single strung, but their relative short stopped strings. Granted that some/many/all instruments are modified over the years not all figures above are to be taken at face value. Perhaps some instruments can be argued not to be therobos. Fine, but I'd say there are instruments left we would call theorbos that have a stopped string length of somewhere around 75 to 80cm. And I think enough of these to assume there have been more around in the old days. I'm curious too, how were they tuned according to you, Martyn? David David van Ooijen [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.davidvanooijen.nl To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?)
And the Victor Meldrew Award for Music Criticism goes to Stewart McCoy! For those who have never heard of Victor, the archetypal grumpy old man: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_Meldrew I'm only pulling your leg, Stewart, obviously, but I do have a serious point to make regarding time keeping and respecting composers' wishes. Those who go against a composer's wishes are operating well within period performance practice of ANY period, let alone the Renaissance and Baroque. Whether you think that is a good thing or not, whether you support fidelity to the written score or not, is entirely your own choice. Dowland and many, many other composers complained that performers were changing their scores - that's what performers do, and that's how composers respond, especially when they are trying to sell new editions...'The performer is king'. To be honest, I don't care much for brother Karamazov's performances either. He not only looks like Jim Carey on the 'forlorn' video, but phrases the music like Carey acts. But I will defend to the death his right to do it that way if he wants to. Dramatic gestures while performing were not invented in the 19th century, and fidelity to the written score has led to some of the most insipid 'early music' performances over the last 30 years. Thankfully we live in an age when there are more and more performers to choose from, should we wish to choose. Odd to think that more people have heard Karamazov perform Dowland than ever heard Dowland himself...Karamazov has a different audience, and he does a remarkable job at bringing new blood into the modern lute world. Whether we need that, of course, is another matter. Rob www.rmguitar.info -Original Message- From: Stewart McCoy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 30 January 2008 17:18 To: Lute Net Subject: [LUTE] Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?) Dear Rob, Thanks for directing us towards this Polish website. I don't understand Polish, but I listened to the background music - a piece by Dlugoraj. It's a lovely piece of music, exciting, with lots of drive, yet on this website it is played arhythmically - totally out of time. Why do so many lutenists play like that? Playing out of time is not necessary, not expressive, not skillful, and I find it thoroughly irritating. Do they ever consider what the rhythm signs above the tablature staves mean? What evidence is there that lutenists in the past ignored rhythm signs, and interpreted music in this dreamy, self-satisfying way? In attempting to find evidence, I came across the following at the end of Mary Burwell's Lute Tutor: In Conclusion the greatest Errour that is in playing upon the Lute is to play too fast, and not to keepe the tyme, and not to use the right fingers, without that play never soe well you are but a Bungler and fitt onely to amaze the ignorant Sorte of people and make a foole of yourselfe. Not wishing to rely on one source, I turned to Thomas Mace's _Musick's Monument_ (London, 1676). On page 124 he writes: ... you cannot fail to know my Mistress's Humour, provided you keep True Time, which you must be extreamly careful to do, in All Lessons: For Time is the One half of Musick. This comes where he is describing how to play a piece called my Mistress's Humour, which, you might think, he would want to be played with the utmost expression. He wants louds and softs, he wants ornaments, and he wants his piece to be played in time. He even says that you should play in time not just in this piece, but in all pieces (lessons). In the last few years, Julian Bream has given master classes at Lute Society meetings in London. He stressed two things: the need to play notes together, (i.e. not to roll and spread chords); and to play in time. He said, I may be old-fashioned, but I like music to be played in time. There are very many eminent players today, much admired, playing in concerts, on CDs, and on YouTube, who consistently play out of time. May they meet the ghost of Lully banging his stick. Stewart McCoy. - Original Message - From: Rob [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'LuteNet list' lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 11:02 AM Subject: [LUTE] Polish, anyone? Nice picture of a 'mandora' on this site: http://www.innow.com.pl/muzykadawna/contrabellum.htm What's it all about? Rob To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?)
I like these quotes. ..but do you think the occasional (and tasteful) spreading of chords is a bad or non-HIP thing? Andrew On 30 Jan 2008, at 17:17, Stewart McCoy wrote: In the last few years, Julian Bream has given master classes at Lute Society meetings in London. He stressed two things: the need to play notes together, (i.e. not to roll and spread chords); and to play in time. He said, I may be old-fashioned, but I like music to be played in time. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] theorbo size
Just out of interest, what size chitaronne do you think Piccinini was playing when he wrote his pieces? I used to have a 92cm chitaronne and I can tell you not many of those pieces are playable on a monster like that. The theorbo I have now measures 85 cm and even then a lot of the pieces are only just playable, particularly the slurred passages and leaps from one end of the fingerboard to another. May be the Italians, like the French, had two basic sizes of chitaronne: one for solo pieces and one for accompanying. I don't know, I'm just wondering... Nigel To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?)
From: Rob [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm only pulling your leg, Stewart, obviously, but I do have a serious point to make regarding time keeping and respecting composers' wishes. Well, in that case we should level the same charges against Hoppy Smith, who both keeps country time and alters the performing material. RT == http://polyhymnion.org Feci quod potui. Faciant meliora potentes. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
I've already very clearly explained how small theorboes (ie up to low 80s) were tuned (and even given sources for tablature) and generally really can't be bothered to continually repeat myself. However, in case you personally missed it, I'll do it one more time: EITHER nominal A or G tuned but with only the first course tuned an octave down ie highest course is the second at e for an A theorbo or d for a G theorbo; OR with first two courses an octave down but at a higher nominal pitch eg in D like Talbot MS French lesser theorboe for lessons; note that in this case the highest pitched course is the third at e'. Interestingly, the fingered string length of this instrument which belonged to a M. Crevecoeur(s) and made by 'Sellier' (Sellas?) works out at 76cm - squarely in the range that some modern players persist in using for a nominal A or G tuned theorbo with top two courses an octave down! MH LGS-Europe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To the benefit of those not interested in a peeing contest but in theories on theorbo stringing, as I am, and not in the happy possesion of a list of historical theorbos stating string length and setup, here's what the guys are talking about (info taken from one of the Pohlmanns lying around here): Atton 1x1, 5x2 = 77,5cm 6x1 = 147cm Ecco 1x1, 5x2 = 75,5cm 6x1 = 161,5cm Hoess 6x2 = 80cm 9x1 = 158cm Kaiser 1x1, 6x2 = 73,1cm 6x1 = 157,6cm Aman 1x1, 5x2 = 80,9cm 5x2 = 150,4cm Koch 7x2 = 82,7cm 7x1 = 167,5cm Langenwalder 6x1 = 76,4cm 8x1 = 141,5cm Attore 1x1, 5x2 = 73cm 3x2 = 156cm Attore 6x2 = 65,7cm 8x1 = 152cm Mascotto 1x3, 4x2 = 74,5cm (original 1x1, 5x2) 6x1 = 158cm The point here is, as I understand it from the discussion so far, not their setup (6+8; 7+7; 8+6) or double versus single strung, but their relative short stopped strings. Granted that some/many/all instruments are modified over the years not all figures above are to be taken at face value. Perhaps some instruments can be argued not to be therobos. Fine, but I'd say there are instruments left we would call theorbos that have a stopped string length of somewhere around 75 to 80cm. And I think enough of these to assume there have been more around in the old days. I'm curious too, how were they tuned according to you, Martyn? David David van Ooijen [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.davidvanooijen.nl To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Sent from Yahoo! #45; a smarter inbox. --
[LUTE] Re: theorbo size
Nigel, I wonder about this too based on my own experiences with big and small theorbos. As I stated on a earlier post on a related subject, its probable that Pittoni and Melli (Melli, definately, Pittoni is a little less definative) wrote for an instrument with an octave second course. This meant that they had to have an instrument with a neck short enough for a high (AND low) E, yet long enough to tune in A. (In this case, Pittoni is definately in A because of the part in mensual notation. Melli - presumably in A, but who knows?) At any rate, I've found sections of a lot of Italian solo music to be quite technically challening even on my small theorbo (76cm) which I currently have inauthentically tuned in A. And then there's always the tiorbino tuned an octave higher than the regular theorbo... Only Castaldi published for this, but I suppose it could have been in wider use for solo music in Italy than we now know. (Is that smallish instrument he's holding in the engraving a theorbo or tiorbino?) This is not definative, either, I'm afraid. Castaldi's pieces specifying the tiorbino are all deuts with a full-sized theorbo. Since the part for standard theorbo in these duets is of equal difficulty as the part for tiorbino, the big guy has to do all the same acrobatics as the small fry. This doesn't help us much in figuring out which tiorba is the more practical solo instrument. Maybe if David Dolata is lurking out there, he could help us out... Chris --- Nigel Solomon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just out of interest, what size chitaronne do you think Piccinini was playing when he wrote his pieces? I used to have a 92cm chitaronne and I can tell you not many of those pieces are playable on a monster like that. The theorbo I have now measures 85 cm and even then a lot of the pieces are only just playable, particularly the slurred passages and leaps from one end of the fingerboard to another. May be the Italians, like the French, had two basic sizes of chitaronne: one for solo pieces and one for accompanying. I don't know, I'm just wondering... Nigel To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
Collected wisdom I, for one, am grateful for the information on theorbo tuning and sizes. I hope the discussion does not get too prickly to continue - Please, swallow your rancor. Joseph Mayes On 1/31/08 8:36 AM, Martyn Hodgson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've already very clearly explained how small theorboes (ie up to low 80s) were tuned (and even given sources for tablature) and generally really can't be bothered to continually repeat myself. However, in case you personally missed it, I'll do it one more time: EITHER nominal A or G tuned but with only the first course tuned an octave down ie highest course is the second at e for an A theorbo or d for a G theorbo; OR with first two courses an octave down but at a higher nominal pitch eg in D like Talbot MS French lesser theorboe for lessons; note that in this case the highest pitched course is the third at e'. Interestingly, the fingered string length of this instrument which belonged to a M. Crevecoeur(s) and made by 'Sellier' (Sellas?) works out at 76cm - squarely in the range that some modern players persist in using for a nominal A or G tuned theorbo with top two courses an octave down! MH LGS-Europe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To the benefit of those not interested in a peeing contest but in theories on theorbo stringing, as I am, and not in the happy possesion of a list of historical theorbos stating string length and setup, here's what the guys are talking about (info taken from one of the Pohlmanns lying around here): Atton 1x1, 5x2 = 77,5cm 6x1 = 147cm Ecco 1x1, 5x2 = 75,5cm 6x1 = 161,5cm Hoess 6x2 = 80cm 9x1 = 158cm Kaiser 1x1, 6x2 = 73,1cm 6x1 = 157,6cm Aman 1x1, 5x2 = 80,9cm 5x2 = 150,4cm Koch 7x2 = 82,7cm 7x1 = 167,5cm Langenwalder 6x1 = 76,4cm 8x1 = 141,5cm Attore 1x1, 5x2 = 73cm 3x2 = 156cm Attore 6x2 = 65,7cm 8x1 = 152cm Mascotto 1x3, 4x2 = 74,5cm (original 1x1, 5x2) 6x1 = 158cm The point here is, as I understand it from the discussion so far, not their setup (6+8; 7+7; 8+6) or double versus single strung, but their relative short stopped strings. Granted that some/many/all instruments are modified over the years not all figures above are to be taken at face value. Perhaps some instruments can be argued not to be therobos. Fine, but I'd say there are instruments left we would call theorbos that have a stopped string length of somewhere around 75 to 80cm. And I think enough of these to assume there have been more around in the old days. I'm curious too, how were they tuned according to you, Martyn? David David van Ooijen [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.davidvanooijen.nl To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Sent from Yahoo! #45; a smarter inbox. --
[LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?)
On Jan 31, 2008, at 4:39 AM, Andrew Gibbs wrote: ..but do you think the occasional (and tasteful) spreading of chords is a bad or non-HIP thing? No, not really. As long as it's not done to excess. Rolling too many chords in a piece tends to muddy up the counterpoint and blur the rhythm. But there are times when a chord has to be spread: a chord consisting of five or six notes obviously has to be rolled, and it's perfectly legitimate to play a chord with the right-hand thumb moving down over the bass note(s) and the index finger moving up backwards over the higher strings. In fact, there are markings in the tablature that we take as standard indications that call for separation of vertically-arranged notes. David R [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
I've already very clearly explained how small theorboes (ie up to low 80s) were tuned (and even given sources for tablature) and generally really can't be bothered to continually repeat myself. However, in case you personally missed it, I'll do it one more time: EITHER nominal A or G tuned but with only the first course tuned an octave down ie highest course is the second at e for an A theorbo or d for a G theorbo; OR with first two courses an octave down but at a higher nominal pitch eg in D like Talbot MS French lesser theorboe for lessons; note that in this case the highest pitched course is the third at e'. Interestingly, the fingered string length of this instrument which belonged to a M. Crevecoeur(s) and made by 'Sellier' (Sellas?) works out at 76cm - squarely in the range that some modern players persist in using for a nominal A or G tuned theorbo with top two courses an octave down! Yes, I've missed it, sorry about that, so thank you for repeating yourself. So 76cm works with first two strings down. I think so too. We agree. Both French and Italians would have come to the same conclusion: first two strings down works on 76cm. Your issue is French theorbe de piece was in d, and some modern players use the same string lengths with two first courses down at a or g. Given a low French pitch (presumably somewhere near 392Hz) and a high Italian (440/466Hz at places), I see not much difference. If it works with the strings and your instrument, it works with your strings and your instrument. There will be a working range of tunings, d and a included. Anyway, nominal tunings are just naming conventions in a transposing world, with a floating pitch on top of that! David MH LGS-Europe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To the benefit of those not interested in a peeing contest but in theories on theorbo stringing, as I am, and not in the happy possesion of a list of historical theorbos stating string length and setup, here's what the guys are talking about (info taken from one of the Pohlmanns lying around here): Atton 1x1, 5x2 = 77,5cm 6x1 = 147cm Ecco 1x1, 5x2 = 75,5cm 6x1 = 161,5cm Hoess 6x2 = 80cm 9x1 = 158cm Kaiser 1x1, 6x2 = 73,1cm 6x1 = 157,6cm Aman 1x1, 5x2 = 80,9cm 5x2 = 150,4cm Koch 7x2 = 82,7cm 7x1 = 167,5cm Langenwalder 6x1 = 76,4cm 8x1 = 141,5cm Attore 1x1, 5x2 = 73cm 3x2 = 156cm Attore 6x2 = 65,7cm 8x1 = 152cm Mascotto 1x3, 4x2 = 74,5cm (original 1x1, 5x2) 6x1 = 158cm The point here is, as I understand it from the discussion so far, not their setup (6+8; 7+7; 8+6) or double versus single strung, but their relative short stopped strings. Granted that some/many/all instruments are modified over the years not all figures above are to be taken at face value. Perhaps some instruments can be argued not to be therobos. Fine, but I'd say there are instruments left we would call theorbos that have a stopped string length of somewhere around 75 to 80cm. And I think enough of these to assume there have been more around in the old days. I'm curious too, how were they tuned according to you, Martyn? David David van Ooijen [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.davidvanooijen.nl To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Sent from Yahoo! #45; a smarter inbox.
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
Hm..., how many of you are playing continuo on a theorbo in 'd', if it's so obvoius? Jurek ___ On 2008-01-31, at 17:25, LGS-Europe wrote: I've already very clearly explained how small theorboes (ie up to low 80s) were tuned (and even given sources for tablature) and generally really can't be bothered to continually repeat myself. However, in case you personally missed it, I'll do it one more time: EITHER nominal A or G tuned but with only the first course tuned an octave down ie highest course is the second at e for an A theorbo or d for a G theorbo; OR with first two courses an octave down but at a higher nominal pitch eg in D like Talbot MS French lesser theorboe for lessons; note that in this case the highest pitched course is the third at e'. Interestingly, the fingered string length of this instrument which belonged to a M. Crevecoeur(s) and made by 'Sellier' (Sellas?) works out at 76cm - squarely in the range that some modern players persist in using for a nominal A or G tuned theorbo with top two courses an octave down! Yes, I've missed it, sorry about that, so thank you for repeating yourself. So 76cm works with first two strings down. I think so too. We agree. Both French and Italians would have come to the same conclusion: first two strings down works on 76cm. Your issue is French theorbe de piece was in d, and some modern players use the same string lengths with two first courses down at a or g. Given a low French pitch (presumably somewhere near 392Hz) and a high Italian (440/466Hz at places), I see not much difference. If it works with the strings and your instrument, it works with your strings and your instrument. There will be a working range of tunings, d and a included. Anyway, nominal tunings are just naming conventions in a transposing world, with a floating pitch on top of that! David MH LGS-Europe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To the benefit of those not interested in a peeing contest but in theories on theorbo stringing, as I am, and not in the happy possesion of a list of historical theorbos stating string length and setup, here's what the guys are talking about (info taken from one of the Pohlmanns lying around here): Atton 1x1, 5x2 = 77,5cm 6x1 = 147cm Ecco 1x1, 5x2 = 75,5cm 6x1 = 161,5cm Hoess 6x2 = 80cm 9x1 = 158cm Kaiser 1x1, 6x2 = 73,1cm 6x1 = 157,6cm Aman 1x1, 5x2 = 80,9cm 5x2 = 150,4cm Koch 7x2 = 82,7cm 7x1 = 167,5cm Langenwalder 6x1 = 76,4cm 8x1 = 141,5cm Attore 1x1, 5x2 = 73cm 3x2 = 156cm Attore 6x2 = 65,7cm 8x1 = 152cm Mascotto 1x3, 4x2 = 74,5cm (original 1x1, 5x2) 6x1 = 158cm The point here is, as I understand it from the discussion so far, not their setup (6+8; 7+7; 8+6) or double versus single strung, but their relative short stopped strings. Granted that some/many/all instruments are modified over the years not all figures above are to be taken at face value. Perhaps some instruments can be argued not to be therobos. Fine, but I'd say there are instruments left we would call theorbos that have a stopped string length of somewhere around 75 to 80cm. And I think enough of these to assume there have been more around in the old days. I'm curious too, how were they tuned according to you, Martyn? David David van Ooijen [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.davidvanooijen.nl To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Sent from Yahoo! #45; a smarter inbox.
[LUTE] Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?)
Dear Andrew, My view is that an occasional spread chord is a useful device, and should certainly be in one's expressive armoury. However, spreading chords feels good to a player, and there is a danger that it is overdone. It is actually easier to play a spread chord than to play all the notes together, which is ultimately, I think, why people do it so much. I find myself starting to spread chords when I am unsure of the music, or a bit nervous, and I realise that I am feeling my way. In the past we know that notes were not always played together: there are separe marks in French baroque music, and notes with more than 4 notes have to be spread in some way. Composers like Dowland often finish a piece with a 6-note chord of G major, which has to be spread. This makes the last chord special, and it is too late in the piece to cause any damage to the rhythm. Perhaps one should save up spread chords for places like that, where the composer clearly wants a spread chord. The blind lutenist, Matthew Wadsworth, once took part in one of Julian Bream's master classes for the Lute Society. Bream was trying to get him to stop rolling so many chords. At one point Bream stopped him, and told him not to roll a particular chord. But Mr Bream, said Wadsworth, the chord has six notes. Bream thought for a moment, smiled, and then said, Alright, we'll let you have that one. The advantage of a spread chord is that it gives fullness of sound, and thus helps to distinguish it from other chords - to make it special. One disadvantage is that it obscures the beat. This is normally not desirable, but it can be extremely useful when playing with a beginner, who is struggling to keep up or stay in time. By rolling chords, it sounds as if you're playing well together, even though the poor chap's rhythm is all over the place. Another disadvantage is that a spread chord tends to obscure polyphonic lines, emphasising the vertical rather than the horizontal. When playing lute duets and trios with competent players, one should make an effort to avoid spreading chords, or the overall sound will be a mess. When playing alone, I think they should only be used very sparingly, like vibrato. Best wishes, Stewart. - Original Message - From: Andrew Gibbs To: Stewart McCoy Cc: Lute Net Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:39 AM Subject: Re: [LUTE] Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?) I like these quotes. ...but do you think the occasional (and tasteful) spreading of chords is a bad or non-HIP thing? Andrew On 30 Jan 2008, at 17:17, Stewart McCoy wrote: In the last few years, Julian Bream has given master classes at Lute Society meetings in London. He stressed two things: the need to play notes together, (i.e. not to roll and spread chords); and to play in time. He said, I may be old-fashioned, but I like music to be played in time. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?)
- Original Message - From: Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Stewart McCoy' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Lute Net' lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 12:27 PM Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?) From: Rob [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm only pulling your leg, Stewart, obviously, but I do have a serious point to make regarding time keeping and respecting composers' wishes. Well, in that case we should level the same charges against Hoppy Smith, who both keeps country time and alters the performing material. RT Yes, we should. SAM To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
Martyn Hodgson wrote: I've already very clearly explained how small theorboes (ie up to low 80s) were tuned (and even given sources for tablature) and generally really can't be bothered to continually repeat myself. Let me see if I can summarize then: There is no historical information connecting any particular theorbo with any particular stringing, tuning or nominal pitch, though the Talbot ms does contain measurements that are subject to varying interpretations. That's actually more information than was contained in Martyn's posts on the subject (which seemed to consist entirely of categorical statements of opinion and protestations that he had already explained himself), but what the hell... To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
Hm..., how many of you are playing continuo on a theorbo in 'd', if it's so obvoius? I don't. I keep mine (76cm) in a, first two courses down. All gut, 415 to 466 tested. I don't see the point why not. I haven't seen valid and or historical arguments against it. It would work in d too, I'm sure. David David van Ooijen [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.davidvanooijen.nl Jurek ___ On 2008-01-31, at 17:25, LGS-Europe wrote: I've already very clearly explained how small theorboes (ie up to low 80s) were tuned (and even given sources for tablature) and generally really can't be bothered to continually repeat myself. However, in case you personally missed it, I'll do it one more time: EITHER nominal A or G tuned but with only the first course tuned an octave down ie highest course is the second at e for an A theorbo or d for a G theorbo; OR with first two courses an octave down but at a higher nominal pitch eg in D like Talbot MS French lesser theorboe for lessons; note that in this case the highest pitched course is the third at e'. Interestingly, the fingered string length of this instrument which belonged to a M. Crevecoeur(s) and made by 'Sellier' (Sellas?) works out at 76cm - squarely in the range that some modern players persist in using for a nominal A or G tuned theorbo with top two courses an octave down! Yes, I've missed it, sorry about that, so thank you for repeating yourself. So 76cm works with first two strings down. I think so too. We agree. Both French and Italians would have come to the same conclusion: first two strings down works on 76cm. Your issue is French theorbe de piece was in d, and some modern players use the same string lengths with two first courses down at a or g. Given a low French pitch (presumably somewhere near 392Hz) and a high Italian (440/466Hz at places), I see not much difference. If it works with the strings and your instrument, it works with your strings and your instrument. There will be a working range of tunings, d and a included. Anyway, nominal tunings are just naming conventions in a transposing world, with a floating pitch on top of that! David MH LGS-Europe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To the benefit of those not interested in a peeing contest but in theories on theorbo stringing, as I am, and not in the happy possesion of a list of historical theorbos stating string length and setup, here's what the guys are talking about (info taken from one of the Pohlmanns lying around here): Atton 1x1, 5x2 = 77,5cm 6x1 = 147cm Ecco 1x1, 5x2 = 75,5cm 6x1 = 161,5cm Hoess 6x2 = 80cm 9x1 = 158cm Kaiser 1x1, 6x2 = 73,1cm 6x1 = 157,6cm Aman 1x1, 5x2 = 80,9cm 5x2 = 150,4cm Koch 7x2 = 82,7cm 7x1 = 167,5cm Langenwalder 6x1 = 76,4cm 8x1 = 141,5cm Attore 1x1, 5x2 = 73cm 3x2 = 156cm Attore 6x2 = 65,7cm 8x1 = 152cm Mascotto 1x3, 4x2 = 74,5cm (original 1x1, 5x2) 6x1 = 158cm The point here is, as I understand it from the discussion so far, not their setup (6+8; 7+7; 8+6) or double versus single strung, but their relative short stopped strings. Granted that some/many/all instruments are modified over the years not all figures above are to be taken at face value. Perhaps some instruments can be argued not to be therobos. Fine, but I'd say there are instruments left we would call theorbos that have a stopped string length of somewhere around 75 to 80cm. And I think enough of these to assume there have been more around in the old days. I'm curious too, how were they tuned according to you, Martyn? David David van Ooijen [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.davidvanooijen.nl To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Sent from Yahoo! #45; a smarter inbox.
[LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?)
Actually Bream is not old fashioned. This is rather modern attitude - a need for steady rhythm and sharp accents. In baroque period breaking chords was absolutely common practice and thought of as embellishment. G.Frescobaldi, Toccate 1615 : The openings of the toccatas are to be taken adagio and arpeggiando; it is the same with suspensions or discords, even in the middle of the work, one breaks them together, so as not to leave the instrument empty; which breaking is to be performed at the discretion of the performer As far as rhythm is concerned flexibility was the rule: 1/Th. Mace Musick's Monument Many Drudge, and take much Pains to Play their Lessons very Perfectly, which when they can do, you will perceive Little Life, or Spirit in them. They do not labour to find out the Humour, Life, or Spirit of their lessons. 2/Jean Rousseau, Traite de la Viole 1687 There are people who imagine that imparting the movement is to follow and keep time; but these are very different matters. 3/Joachim Quantz, Essay 1752 The performance should be easy and flexible. However difficult the passage, it must be played without stiffness or constraint. Obviously it involves the problem of borrowing or steeling time. However whatever we do, the question is not- should we do it- but rather -is it tasteful. And a Good taste is really precious for me. Jaroslaw -Original Message- From: Andrew Gibbs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 10:40 AM To: Stewart McCoy Cc: Lute Net Subject: [LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?) I like these quotes. .but do you think the occasional (and tasteful) spreading of chords is a bad or non-HIP thing? Andrew On 30 Jan 2008, at 17:17, Stewart McCoy wrote: In the last few years, Julian Bream has given master classes at Lute Society meetings in London. He stressed two things: the need to play notes together, (i.e. not to roll and spread chords); and to play in time. He said, I may be old-fashioned, but I like music to be played in time. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?)
In fact, there are markings in the tablature that we take as standard indications that call for separation of vertically-arranged notes. Are these markings in historical tabulatures too? I do not remember i saw one. wolfgang -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: David Rastall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 31. Januar 2008 16:09 An: Andrew Gibbs Cc: Stewart McCoy; Lute Net Betreff: [LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?) On Jan 31, 2008, at 4:39 AM, Andrew Gibbs wrote: ..but do you think the occasional (and tasteful) spreading of chords is a bad or non-HIP thing? No, not really. As long as it's not done to excess. Rolling too many chords in a piece tends to muddy up the counterpoint and blur the rhythm. But there are times when a chord has to be spread: a chord consisting of five or six notes obviously has to be rolled, and it's perfectly legitimate to play a chord with the right-hand thumb moving down over the bass note(s) and the index finger moving up backwards over the higher strings. In fact, there are markings in the tablature that we take as standard indications that call for separation of vertically-arranged notes. David R [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
On Jan 31, 2008, at 9:56 AM, Jerzy Zak wrote: I'm interested how one manages with the bass notes below the _d_ on the 6th course of the instrument tuned in 'd'. This is more or less one third of the statistical bass notes in an everage part to play (depending of course on period and instrumentation). I've never tried it, so take this for what it's worth: Answer 1: Manage the same way a guitarist manages without the bourdon A. Answer 2: If you have eight fingerboard strings, you're chromatic down to B-flat, so the only major problems are the low G#,F# and Eb. A small price to pay for being able to play a three-note chord over middle C in first position? http://www.theorbo.com/Instruments/Monsieur.htm -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
On 2008-01-31, at 18:20, LGS-Europe wrote: Hm..., how many of you are playing continuo on a theorbo in 'd', if it's so obvoius? I don't. I keep mine (76cm) in a, first two courses down. All gut, 415 to 466 tested. I don't see the point why not. I haven't seen valid and or historical arguments against it. It would work in d too, I'm sure. David I understand you, David, very well, I've also got older living for years with the machine in 'a'. But who have a camparable experience in playing in 'd'? Musicology maybe, but music performance is not a theory class and I'm interested how one manages with the bass notes below the _d_ on the 6th course of the instrument tuned in 'd'. This is more or less one third of the statistical bass notes in an everage part to play (depending of course on period and instrumentation). Jurek __ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
On Jan 31, 2008, at 8:56 AM, Jerzy Zak wrote: Hm..., how many of you are playing continuo on a theorbo in 'd', if it's so obvoius? I'm not sure what the it in your question is. When Ensemble Chanterelle consisted of Sally Sanford, Cathy Liddell and Kevin Mason, their basic setup was voice, theorbo in A and theorbo in D. That was a while ago. Linda Sayce says on her web site that she plays a lot of continuo on a 76cm theorbo in D. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?)
On Jan 31, 2008, at 12:49 PM, wolfgang wiehe wrote: Are these markings in historical tabulatures too? I do not remember i saw one. I was thinking of the French ornamentation markings: offhand the only one I can think of without searching through the music is a slanted line separating vertical tab letters, meaning to play them separated. I'm sure others can reply to this in greater detail... ;-) Regards, David R [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?)
Are these markings in historical tabulatures too? I do not remember i saw one. I was thinking of the French ornamentation markings: offhand the only one I can think of without searching through the music is a slanted line separating vertical tab letters, meaning to play them separated. But that are separé signs! They don't mean rolling the chord. B. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
A small price to pay for being able to play a three-note chord over middle C in first position? That's the point and the most promising bit. However the price seems to me not small, indeed, and therefore my quest for someone maybe experienced. Play an archlute! ;-) Are To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?)
On Jan 31, 2008, at 2:15 PM, Bernd Haegemann wrote: But that are separe signs! They don't mean rolling the chord. If there are three notes written vertically I guess you could call that a chord. What about that squiggly line drawn beside a chord to indicate rolling it? Surely that must exist in historical sources, doesn't it? Maybe there aren't any signs that tell us to roll chords, I don't know. But there are plenty of chords in Baron, Weiss, etc., etc., even four-note chords that we definitely would play either arpeggiated, rolled, separated, whatever, because even though they may be written out vertically they are intended to be played anything but vertically. We know to do this; we know to roll chords in certain places. It's part of our education into playing Baroque music correctly. We're not supposed to play it straight; we're supposed to enlarge and elaborate on what;s written before us on the page. Perhaps for that reason there are so few direct indications of chord-rolling. Whether or not that applies to Dowland, I wouldn't dare say. DR [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
I don't. I keep mine (76cm) in a, first two courses down. All gut, 415 to 466 tested. I don't see the point why not. I haven't seen valid and or historical arguments against it. It would work in d too, I'm sure. David I understand you, David, very well, I've also got older living for years with the machine in 'a'. But who have a camparable experience in playing in 'd'? Musicology maybe, but music performance is not a theory class and I'm interested how one manages with the bass notes below the _d_ on the 6th course of the instrument tuned in 'd'. This is more or less one third of the statistical bass notes in an everage part to play (depending of course on period and instrumentation). Jurek The way I understand it, limited I'm sure, is that the theorbe de pieces in d was used for ... pieces, meaning solo pieces. Once you have one, I'm sure you'll use it for continuo too, but that's another starting point. If you're after one continuo theorbo with two first strings down, a or g seems more practical. David To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
On 2008-01-31, at 20:42, Are Vidar Boye Hansen wrote: A small price to pay for being able to play a three-note chord over middle C in first position? That's the point and the most promising bit. However the price seems to me not small, indeed, and therefore my quest for someone maybe experienced. Play an archlute! ;-) I do not have one, but I have two 'thorboes' and am thinking of a third one, perhaps a fourth... ;-((? J __ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?)
On 2008-01-31, at 20:15, Bernd Haegemann wrote: Are these markings in historical tabulatures too? I do not remember i saw one. I was thinking of the French ornamentation markings: offhand the only one I can think of without searching through the music is a slanted line separating vertical tab letters, meaning to play them separated. But that are separé signs! They don't mean rolling the chord. B. Sometime they are a real puzzle what they mean - thick texture, quick motion... Jurek _ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
Dear Howard, On 2008-01-31, at 18:59, howard posner wrote: On Jan 31, 2008, at 8:56 AM, Jerzy Zak wrote: Hm..., how many of you are playing continuo on a theorbo in 'd', if it's so obvoius? I'm not sure what the it in your question is. Martyn Hodgson in his recent reply stated quite categorically there are two correct options (and I think he'll not repet it agan): EITHER nominal A or G tuned but with only the first course tuned an octave down ie highest course is the second at e for an A theorbo or d for a G theorbo; OR with first two courses an octave down but at a higher nominal pitch eg in D like Talbot MS French lesser theorboe for lessons; note that in this case the highest pitched course is the third at e'. I have my opinion on it, but I may be wrong as living on the province of the western culture, so I asked if the instrument tuned in D is in on a par with the one in A? Do you know it from calculations or experience? When Ensemble Chanterelle consisted of Sally Sanford, Cathy Liddell and Kevin Mason, their basic setup was voice, theorbo in A and theorbo in D. That was a while ago. Linda Sayce says on her web site that she plays a lot of continuo on a 76cm theorbo in D. After a second lecture in fact I've found maybe less then 1% of text devoted to the 'French lesser theorboe' on the Linda's page: http://www.theorbo.com/Theorbo/Theorbo.htm Only here: http://www.theorbo.com/Instruments/Monsieur.htm she says: ...I find this instrument is also surprisingly useful for continuo, especially for chamber works and pieces where the bass line is often simply too high for the A-tuned instrument. but... To the best of my knowledge there is no evidence whatsoever for using a D theorbo for continuo, though I find it hard to believe that if the instrument was around, the professionals at least would not have used it for continuo! I beleve her! It is extremely tempting, but what about the register arround and below of the 6th course of the D theorbo? You say: Answer 2: If you have eight fingerboard strings, you're chromatic down to B-flat, so the only major problems are the low G#,F# and Eb. That's cleare, but these are tricks! You have to learn them like solo fragments and they'll hardly pass as naturally as anything above 'd'. Try it on, say, Corelli or Couperin (middle to high baroque). A small price to pay for being able to play a three-note chord over middle C in first position? That's the point and the most promising bit. However the price seems to me not small, indeed, and therefore my quest for someone maybe experienced. Jurek _ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?)
Dear All: My favorite advice on the subject of playing in time comes from Pablo Casals: Fantasy as much as you like, but with order. I interpret that as putting as much expression into the piece as you see fit, but keep playing in time. Occasionally when playing to a metronome I experiment by playing as freely as possible while still playing in time. Do you see those tree? Liszt once asked a student. The wind toys with their leaves, it develops life among them; the trees remain the same. That is Chopin's rubato. (Casals and the Art of Interpretation, Berkeley, 1977, 1980, p. 85) On Frescobaldi's advice, are we sure it is to be applied broadly and not just to the openings of his toccatas? Cheers, Jim Stimson From: =?ISO646-US?Q?Jaros=3Faw_Lipski?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2008/01/31 Thu AM 11:47:49 CST To: 'Lute' lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?) Actually Bream is not old fashioned. This is rather modern attitude - a need for steady rhythm and sharp accents. In baroque period breaking chords was absolutely common practice and thought of as embellishment. G.Frescobaldi, Toccate 1615 : The openings of the toccatas are to be taken adagio and arpeggiando; it is the same with suspensions or discords, even in the middle of the work, one breaks them together, so as not to leave the instrument empty; which breaking is to be performed at the discretion of the performer As far as rhythm is concerned flexibility was the rule: 1/Th. Mace Musick's Monument Many Drudge, and take much Pains to Play their Lessons very Perfectly, which when they can do, you will perceive Little Life, or Spirit in them. They do not labour to find out the Humour, Life, or Spirit of their lessons. 2/Jean Rousseau, Traite de la Viole 1687 There are people who imagine that imparting the movement is to follow and keep time; but these are very different matters. 3/Joachim Quantz, Essay 1752 The performance should be easy and flexible. However difficult the passage, it must be played without stiffness or constraint. Obviously it involves the problem of borrowing or steeling time. However whatever we do, the question is not- should we do it- but rather -is it tasteful. And a Good taste is really precious for me. Jaroslaw -Original Message- From: Andrew Gibbs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 10:40 AM To: Stewart McCoy Cc: Lute Net Subject: [LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?) I like these quotes. .but do you think the occasional (and tasteful) spreading of chords is a bad or non-HIP thing? Andrew On 30 Jan 2008, at 17:17, Stewart McCoy wrote: In the last few years, Julian Bream has given master classes at Lute Society meetings in London. He stressed two things: the need to play notes together, (i.e. not to roll and spread chords); and to play in time. He said, I may be old-fashioned, but I like music to be played in time. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
Lost in cybervoid. So her once more: I don't. I keep mine (76cm) in a, first two courses down. All gut, 415 to 466 tested. I don't see the point why not. I haven't seen valid and or historical arguments against it. It would work in d too, I'm sure. David I understand you, David, very well, I've also got older living for years with the machine in 'a'. But who have a camparable experience in playing in 'd'? Musicology maybe, but music performance is not a theory class and I'm interested how one manages with the bass notes below the _d_ on the 6th course of the instrument tuned in 'd'. This is more or less one third of the statistical bass notes in an everage part to play (depending of course on period and instrumentation). Jurek The way I understand it, limited I'm sure, is that the theorbe de pieces in d was used for ... pieces, meaning solo pieces. Once you have one, I'm sure you'll use it for continuo too, but that's another starting point. If you're after one continuo theorbo with two first strings down, a or g seems more practical. David To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?)
On Frescobaldi's advice, are we sure it is to be applied broadly and not just to the openings of his toccatas? Breaking, or spreading chords was developed on instruments which don't have enough sustain by nature like harpsichord, lute etc for the sake of enriching the texture and increasing sonority. Actually it was such a common practice that it wasn't reflected in the notation. The variety of spreading was taken for granted and didn't need any mentioning. Try to imagine harpsichord music without spreading chords - absolutely awful! Arpeggio is a part of style providing that we start with bass on the beat. Some patterns of arpeggiation where written out by baroque composers under heading of ornaments (i.e. Jean-Henri D'Anglebert Pieces de Clavecin 1689). Breaking chords however doesn't need to mean loosing a pulse. This is just a result of a bad technique. Jaroslaw From: =?ISO646-US?Q?Jaros=3Faw_Lipski?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2008/01/31 Thu AM 11:47:49 CST To: 'Lute' lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?) Actually Bream is not old fashioned. This is rather modern attitude - a need for steady rhythm and sharp accents. In baroque period breaking chords was absolutely common practice and thought of as embellishment. G.Frescobaldi, Toccate 1615 : The openings of the toccatas are to be taken adagio and arpeggiando; it is the same with suspensions or discords, even in the middle of the work, one breaks them together, so as not to leave the instrument empty; which breaking is to be performed at the discretion of the performer As far as rhythm is concerned flexibility was the rule: 1/Th. Mace Musick's Monument Many Drudge, and take much Pains to Play their Lessons very Perfectly, which when they can do, you will perceive Little Life, or Spirit in them. They do not labour to find out the Humour, Life, or Spirit of their lessons. 2/Jean Rousseau, Traite de la Viole 1687 There are people who imagine that imparting the movement is to follow and keep time; but these are very different matters. 3/Joachim Quantz, Essay 1752 The performance should be easy and flexible. However difficult the passage, it must be played without stiffness or constraint. Obviously it involves the problem of borrowing or steeling time. However whatever we do, the question is not- should we do it- but rather -is it tasteful. And a Good taste is really precious for me. Jaroslaw -Original Message- From: Andrew Gibbs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 10:40 AM To: Stewart McCoy Cc: Lute Net Subject: [LUTE] Re: Playing in time (olim Polish, anyone?) I like these quotes. .but do you think the occasional (and tasteful) spreading of chords is a bad or non-HIP thing? Andrew On 30 Jan 2008, at 17:17, Stewart McCoy wrote: In the last few years, Julian Bream has given master classes at Lute Society meetings in London. He stressed two things: the need to play notes together, (i.e. not to roll and spread chords); and to play in time. He said, I may be old-fashioned, but I like music to be played in time. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] a liste-machine
Strange, I'm not receiving messages I am sending to the Liste - Am I doing something wrog? Jurek To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Arpeggios, anyone?
Arpeggio = in the style of a harp. We harpists do it more or less automatically. Some chords, especially longer notes at the end of a phrase, cry to be arpeggiated. Others are more appropriately played flat. When piddling with my new-to-me theorbo I generally try to play in a style similar to that which I would use on a harp. I cannot imagine a musician of the 17th C playing flat all or most of the time. There is such a nice effect in the spread of the notes that is lost unless the technique is used. BTW, we are finally stringing what I believe to be the oldest original pedal harp in the Americas. Tentatively dated 1782, built by Geo. Blaicher a Paris, we were able to save the original soundboard! Howard Bryan www.hbryan.com To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: a liste-machine
There are many problems related to these lists and rejected emails. I received an email from Wayne yesterday saying I was top of the list of people rejecting my emails - over half of the list members don't see my mails. That might be their choice of course! They might have blocked me deliberately. However, trying to be less egotistical about it...Wayne mentioned that more and more of us are buying software to protect our computers from viruses, and this is causing communication problems. With the majority of subscribers not receiving emails, I would say these lists are no longer functioning properly. We might need to consider alternatives... Thoughts? Rob www.rmguitar.info -Original Message- From: Jerzy Zak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 31 January 2008 22:03 To: lute-cs.dartmouth.edu Net Subject: [LUTE] a liste-machine Strange, I'm not receiving messages I am sending to the Liste - Am I doing something wrog? Jurek To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: a liste-machine
I don't have any problem with this list. or any list... I don't have any antispam/antivirus softwares on my computer. On Feb 1, 2008, at 9:36 AM, Rob wrote: There are many problems related to these lists and rejected emails. I received an email from Wayne yesterday saying I was top of the list of people rejecting my emails - over half of the list members don't see my mails. That might be their choice of course! They might have blocked me deliberately. However, trying to be less egotistical about it...Wayne mentioned that more and more of us are buying software to protect our computers from viruses, and this is causing communication problems. With the majority of subscribers not receiving emails, I would say these lists are no longer functioning properly. We might need to consider alternatives... Thoughts? Rob www.rmguitar.info -Original Message- From: Jerzy Zak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 31 January 2008 22:03 To: lute-cs.dartmouth.edu Net Subject: [LUTE] a liste-machine Strange, I'm not receiving messages I am sending to the Liste - Am I doing something wrog? Jurek To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: a liste-machine
The guy who does my website is into some software called WordPress. I suppose we could call it blogging software, or interactive web software. It means people can post and comment on the posts. We're using this on the Cittern Cafe site, and except for the fact that the cittern crowd isn't that active, it has worked. One can also post images, sound files, etc. This is one solution, but it has its difficulties. One of the main problems, given a very active group, would be space. On Feb 1, 2008, at 8:36 AM, Rob wrote: There are many problems related to these lists and rejected emails. I received an email from Wayne yesterday saying I was top of the list of people rejecting my emails - over half of the list members don't see my mails. That might be their choice of course! They might have blocked me deliberately. However, trying to be less egotistical about it...Wayne mentioned that more and more of us are buying software to protect our computers from viruses, and this is causing communication problems. With the majority of subscribers not receiving emails, I would say these lists are no longer functioning properly. We might need to consider alternatives... Thoughts? Rob www.rmguitar.info -Original Message- From: Jerzy Zak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 31 January 2008 22:03 To: lute-cs.dartmouth.edu Net Subject: [LUTE] a liste-machine Strange, I'm not receiving messages I am sending to the Liste - Am I doing something wrog? Jurek To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
