[LUTE] Theorbo/prop; youtube solves mystery, Thanks.
Thanks for the youtube links. I didn't remember that front shot of the instrument from 1991 (?). It is obviously an attiorbato being fake played by an actor. After all these years, the fingering is even more distracting than I remember.--Especially St. Colombe in that scene. I guess Mr. Sovall had his work cut out for him and couldn't possibly hope to teach a bunch of scene actors to convincingly fake it. Thanks, MB To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] the sign for 'c'
Dear all, I'm sure this has been a subject before, but can't remember when. In intabulations, why is the 'v' sign used instead of the 'c' ? Actually, I am asking two questions: - why 'c' is not used ? - what letter is that 'v' ? 'V' as in velvet ? Is it a greek 'n' ? Yesterday I did explain the differences between intabulation and stave notation to a friend, a very good graphic designer and calligrapher, and he was very interested in the 'v' sign. Saludos from Barcelona, Manolo -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo/prop; youtube solves mystery, Thanks.
I seem to remember hearing that in one scene, Jordi Savall was actually behind Gérard Depardieu doing the fingering, so at least that shot should be in sync - also that Guillaume did learn a bit of gamba in order to be more convincing - it's along time since I saw the film - Jean-Marie might be able to confirm this. - Original Message - From: Michael Bocchicchio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008 9:07 AM Subject: [LUTE] Theorbo/prop; youtube solves mystery, Thanks. Thanks for the youtube links. I didn't remember that front shot of the instrument from 1991 (?). It is obviously an attiorbato being fake played by an actor. After all these years, the fingering is even more distracting than I remember.--Especially St. Colombe in that scene. I guess Mr. Sovall had his work cut out for him and couldn't possibly hope to teach a bunch of scene actors to convincingly fake it. Thanks, MB To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: the sign for 'c'
It is actually an r sign. c and e were thought to be sufficienly similar as to be confusing, so r was used in place of c. Jim On Sat, Feb 02, 2008 at 09:28:43AM +0100, Manolo Laguillo wrote: Dear all, I'm sure this has been a subject before, but can't remember when. In intabulations, why is the 'v' sign used instead of the 'c' ? Actually, I am asking two questions: - why 'c' is not used ? - what letter is that 'v' ? 'V' as in velvet ? Is it a greek 'n' ? Yesterday I did explain the differences between intabulation and stave notation to a friend, a very good graphic designer and calligrapher, and he was very interested in the 'v' sign. Saludos from Barcelona, Manolo -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: G Theorbo or movie prop+Jean-Marie Poirier?
Ed, Here is my personal photo of L'Ensemble Phal=E8se Consort (The Little Big-Band), Pascal Gallon is directing on the left, and Jean- Marie Poirer, is second from the right in the front row (taken at a music festival in Caen, where Jacob Heringman was the guest). You will see that he is indeed left-handed. http://tinyurl.com/35ewba Jean-Marie, as Lina Messina says has at least two very interesting web sites. He also uses, at least some gut on his lute, as he told me he still has some of the original loaded strings in use on one of his lutes. http://poirierjm.free.fr/ http://le.luth.free.fr/ I hope your trip to the museum of music goes well. Regards Anthony Le 2 fevr. 08 =E0 08:10, Edward Martin a ecrit : At 10:25 PM 2/1/2008 -0800, howard posner wrote: All that said, the answer to the original question is that the lute player is really playing a real liuto attiorbato, in sync. I don't think it's Lislevand, because he plays left-handed (unlike the theorbo player in the orchestra scenes). I did not think that Lislevand plays left handed, or are you referring to the player in the movie? It does not appear anything like Lislevand. Is there not a law, or rather a contract issue with non-actors (i.e., musicians) acting in movies? ed Edward Martin 2817 East 2nd Street Duluth, Minnesota 55812 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice: (218) 728-1202 To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html --
[LUTE] Re: G Theorbo or movie prop+Jean-Marie Poirier?
I think I had problems sending this message, sorry if it is duplicated... Thanks Tony, Anthony and Lino for the kind words and link to my webpage. Don't be mistaken : Lino is also a talented player, the only thing is he is right-handed; nobody's perfect... ;-))) ! Well, Tony, if I remember well - the film was shot in 1991...- I think there is one scene where we can see the hands of Jean-Louis Charbonnier when JP MArielle is doing Air Viol the rest of the time (as someone said before). JL,Charbonnier was in charge of teaching the actors how to hold a viol and move their arms to give the impression they could really play...You can appreciate the results. Some were obviously more gifted than others, weren't they ? I fake play on the song Une jeune fillette but it's true I played along and Marielle didn't for the simple reason that I'm a lute player and he is NOT a viol player, but an excellent actor anyway. In the scene with the two Sainte Colombe girls, I play a lute made by the English maker John Gorrett in 1980. It isn't a copy an Italian model but was inspired by different models, Sellas included. It is not a faithful copy of an extant instrument really. I still use this instrument as an archlute and it works quite well indeed. I think that's it for my memorabilia ;-). Tony, hope to see you at our concert on Saturday ! Best to eveybody, Jean-Marie Poirier [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02-02-2008 To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] My apologies Mr. Poirer
I made an assumption from what I thought I was seeing on youtube. I was wrong and should have looked into the matter before responding. I am sorry. Best, Mike To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: the sign for 'c'
In the handwriting of the period (in England, at any rate, where Secretary hand was usual), c was written like modern r (or a bit like a v--I assume that's what you're talking about). That is, it's a c, not an r or a v. Tom Manolo Laguillo wrote: Dear all, I'm sure this has been a subject before, but can't remember when. In intabulations, why is the 'v' sign used instead of the 'c' ? Actually, I am asking two questions: - why 'c' is not used ? - what letter is that 'v' ? 'V' as in velvet ? Is it a greek 'n' ? Yesterday I did explain the differences between intabulation and stave notation to a friend, a very good graphic designer and calligrapher, and he was very interested in the 'v' sign. Saludos from Barcelona, Manolo -- 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2008 12:50:27 +
(GMT)
From: Martyn Hodgson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Theorbo in G? Plus some guidelines
To: howard posner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks for this; I now better understand your position with which, you won't
be surprised, I don't agree and I'll carefully explain why not. But just before
responding, to ensure we don't write at cross purposes, let me take you down
the short by-lane of the history of this thread.
It came about after someone wrote saying they were obtaining a theorbo and
asked views as to wether the nominal A or G tuning was the most useful. A
number of people responded including David Tayler who additionally said that
normally theorbos in the A or G tuning should have string lengths in the range
77-82cm which seemed bizarre to say the least and contrary to what I believed
most players understood (even if they actually played smaller instruments for
convenience). Indeed, he went on to make the astonishing claim that 'anything
over 82cm is a speciality instrument for people with huge hands'. I
therefore asked him for early evidence of such small theorbos in the A or G
tuning with both the first and second courses an octave down ('double
reentrant'), since the overwhelming early evidence (see below) was for such
theorboes to be in the high 80s to 90s. I'm still waiting for
it perhaps you have some?
In subsequent messages I gave more information (you must have missed it): -
how such small instruments were strung (just top course an octave down or at a
much higher nominal pitch eg D), - early written evidence of theorbo sizes, -
examples of solo music for such instruments - and gave Lynda Sayce's website
and Bob Spencer's article as providing more information. You may say that I
only refer to these articles because they support the position on theorbo sizes
which I take - which it is true they do - but I'd welcome any contrary evidence
to test the case. It is important to come to these matters with an open mind
and a willingness to look at the actual evidence available, such as it is,
rather than merely indulging in empty rhetoric.
To return to your email:
SOME HISTORICAL EVIDENCE
As already said, I'm still waiting for David Tayler's and your own evidence
that small theorboes (say mid 70s to low 80s) in the A or G tuning were
generally strung as double reentrant. Regarding evidence to support the case
that such stringing only generally applies to larger instruments (say mid 80s
to high 90s), I had hoped the sources I gave were sufficiently well known to
avoid me having to do more than refer to them, but obviously not.
The ones that come to mind include:
Praetorius (1620): Lang Romanische Theorbo:Chitarron). Scaled engraving
showing an instrument with six fingered and 8 long bass courses, fingered
string length 90/91cm. Tuning given as the theorbo G tuning (double reentrant).
Talbot MS (c 1695): English Theorboe A tuning (double reentrant), detailed
measurement and tunings given. Fingered string length 88/89cm (you tell us that
you have other information on the string length of this instrument - I'd be
grateful for it)
Talbot MS: Lesser French theorbo in D (double reentrant) string length 76cm.
Spencer's paper covers much of the evidence for theorbo stringing and sizes
(all this) and he does, in fact, mention that the long string length of the
early chitarrone obliged the first and second course to be lowered an octave
ie would have exceeeded the breaking stress (EM Oct 76, p. 408)
Regarding extant iconographic representations generally, clearly the larger
of the theorbos depicted are double reentrant but they can tell us little as to
where the precise cut-off point for single rentrant (small) theorbos occurs. It
is, nevertheless, interesting to note that when professional theorbo players
are depicted (eg The Musicians of Louis XIV (1687) Francois Puget, in the
Louvre) the instruments shown are generally large.
'POWER'
I'm really not sure if I quite follow your argument here, but you seem to
suggest that loudness and/or projection is not (and was not) an important, if
not crucial, feature of the theorbo. Leaving aside the practicalities of your
suggestion (how is one heard in ensemble? - as much an issue for the 'Old Ones'
as us today [see Lynda Sayce's website]), it runs directly counter to our
common experience that a longer bass string at the same tension and pitch as a
shorter will sound more 'powerful'. This is generally taken as the reason for
increasing the pitch of bass lutes (as Piccinni 1623 reports) which in turn
obliged the first course and then the second course to be lowered an octave; in
short, if there was no increase in 'power', why bother - why not just use a
lute in A or G?
DOUBLE STRUNG THEORBOES
[LUTE] Re: the sign for 'c'
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008, Jim Abraham wrote: It is actually an r sign. c and e were thought to be sufficiently similar as to be confusing, so r was used in place of c. Jim Is it a coincidence that the r looks like the Gothic c? Peter. the next auto-quote is: Peace and justice are two sides of the same coin. (Dwight D. Eisenhower) which explains why we're out of coin ... /\/\ Peter Nightingale Telephone (401) 874-5882 Department of Physics, East Hall Fax (401) 874-2380 University of Rhode Island Kingston, RI 02881 To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Vuestros ojos
Only 800 views in over 5 months??? This performance is outstanding and deserves to be much better known: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJ81bbG-khM Daniel Heiman To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Vuestros ojos
On Feb 2, 2008, at 7:14 AM, Daniel F Heiman wrote: Only 800 views in over 5 months??? This performance is outstanding and deserves to be much better known: Indeed, but the camera movement is pretty violent, and those inclined toward motion sickness might want to listen with closed eyes, or with open eyes on an empty stomach. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJ81bbG-khM -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Nigel North - Dowland, volume 3
The third volume has now been released on Naxos, and it is available ( I just received my copy in today's post). The number is 8.570449I have not yet heard it, but if it is up to the standards of volumes 1 and 2, it will be fantastic. ed Edward Martin 2817 East 2nd Street Duluth, Minnesota 55812 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice: (218) 728-1202 To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Nigel North - Dowland, volume 3
For the iTunes inclined: http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewAlbum? id=269806750s=143441 DS On Feb 2, 2008, at 3:59 PM, Edward Martin wrote: The third volume has now been released on Naxos, and it is available ( I just received my copy in today's post). The number is 8.570449 I have not yet heard it, but if it is up to the standards of volumes 1 and 2, it will be fantastic. ed Edward Martin 2817 East 2nd Street Duluth, Minnesota 55812 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice: (218) 728-1202 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: In subsequent messages I gave more information (you must have missed it): - how such small instruments were strung (just top course an octave down or at a much higher nominal pitch eg D), - early written evidence of theorbo sizes, - examples of solo music for such instruments - Again, there was no information; just your own conclusion that smaller theorbos were not tuned double reentrant. You may be confusing these posts (I've just reread them) with your post about guitar stringing, which actually contained information. and gave Lynda Sayce's website and Bob Spencer's article as providing more information. You may say that I only refer to these articles because they support the position on theorbo sizes which I take - which it is true they do - But they don't. Spencer doesn't correlate single-reentrant stringing with size. Linda Sayce does, but like you, states only her conclusions. As already said, I'm still waiting for David Tayler's and your own evidence that small theorboes (say mid 70s to low 80s) in the A or G tuning were generally strung as double reentrant. Regarding evidence to support the case that such stringing only generally applies to larger instruments (say mid 80s to high 90s), I had hoped the sources I gave were sufficiently well known to avoid me having to do more than refer to them, but obviously not. It's not that the sources aren't well known. It's that your conclusion doesn't follow from your premises. It boils down to big theorbos were strung double reentrant because they had to be; smaller theorbos didn't have to be, therefore they never were. This makes sense only if you assume that necessity was the only reason for double reentrant, an assumption which is hardly justifiable (If it's correct, you've proved that the tiorbino never existed). Players obviously liked its possibilities and gleefully exploited it in solo music. The ones that come to mind include: Praetorius (1620): Lang Romanische Theorbo:Chitarron). Scaled engraving showing an instrument with six fingered and 8 long bass courses, fingered string length 90/91cm. Tuning given as the theorbo G tuning (double reentrant). Talbot MS (c 1695): English Theorboe A tuning (double reentrant), detailed measurement and tunings given. Fingered string length 88/89cm (you tell us that you have other information on the string length of this instrument - I'd be grateful for it) The Talbot MS doesn't actually give the total length, does it? David van Edwards calculated the Talbot English Theorbo at 77 cm. See his explanation at http://www.vanedwards.co.uk/47.htm He made a Talbot theorbo for Linda Sayce. I gather from her web site that its fingerboard strings are 80cm (thus scaled up or down from the original, depending on your point of view) and she strings it single reentrant in G. Talbot MS: Lesser French theorbo in D (double reentrant) string length 76cm. If we have one 76cm French theorbo in double reentrant D and one 77cm English Theorbo in double reentrant A, we scarcely have a small- theorbo trend, let alone overwhelming evidence. 'POWER' I'm really not sure if I quite follow your argument here, Simply that it was not universally the only consideration in building or stringing a theorbo. This is not to say that it wasn't important. As I said, players and builders must have had a wide range of desires and motivations. And not everyone had to be heard in choruses in the Paris opera or with trombones in San Rocco in Venice. there is no evidence to support A or G double rentrant theorbos between the mid 70s and low 80s. And no evidence against it. There may be all sorts of practical or artistic reasons for drawing conclusions about smaller theorbos, but the appeal to history comes up empty. This whole discussion has glossed the complicating question of pitch. I have made the point before that we would expect an instrument designed to be played at AF6 to have strings about 83% the length of an instrument designed to be played at A=390. If so, all other things being equal, you'd expect that a 76cm instrument designed for AF5 to be tuned the same way as a 92cm instrument designed for A=390. Whether this was historically the case is a matter of speculation. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: G Theorbo or movie prop?
All that said, the answer to the original question is that the lute player is really playing a real liuto attiorbato, in sync. I don't think it's Lislevand, because he plays left-handed Ehm... No, he doesnt... But he does play a very small right-handed theorbo. The reason he chose a small instrument is simply practical. A small instrument is easier to bring on an airplane! Are 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 have made the point before that we would expect an instrument designed to be played at AF6 to have strings about 83% the length of an instrument designed to be played at A=390. If so, all other things being equal, you'd expect that a 76cm instrument designed for AF5 to be tuned the same way as a 92cm instrument designed for A=390. Whether this was historically the case is a matter of speculation. This got garbled in transmission; some server somewhere translated my [equals sign] 4 as an F something. I'll try to do an immune version here: we would expect an instrument designed to be played at A equals 466 Hz to have strings about 83% the length of an instrument designed to be played at A=390. If so, all other things being equal, you'd expect that a 76cm instrument designed for A equals 466 to be tuned the same way as a 92cm instrument designed for A=390. Whether this was historically the case is a matter of speculation. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
