[LUTE] Re: More Gianconcelli Chilesotti
At 06:16 PM 8/26/2005, you wrote: - Original Message - From: Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] Some people in this lute world are not easily taken in by your silly delusions and require more than just your word for anything. As long as all you can provide is unsubstantiated hearsay and rumors, responsible writers will ignore you. 1. MO, you are the unique individual not taken by Arthur's delusions. Which is why Arthur complained that the Lute reviewer of my Chilesotti edition did not buy into Arthur's fairy tale on the mysterious survival of the manuscript? 2. You are NOT a responsible writer, for the reasons you yourself stated above. What is this, a pissing match between irresponsible writers? Therefore, would you mind taking your hydrogen sulphide someplace else? Let me draw you a picture, in case you still have not understood where I stand on this matter: as long as Arthur continues his campaign against the guitar and against me, and as long as this is an open unmoderated forum, I will continue to point in this forum out that the man is a liar and a fraud, no matter who supports him and who thinks he can be trusted unchallenged. The only way you can stop me from defending myself, here and everywhere else, is by stopping this drunken tantrum that has been going on for well over ten years in this forum. Encouraging it and morally supporting the unsupportable, will only serve to strengthen my resolve to speak out. Poniatno? 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: [LUTE]Madame Robert Sidney Pratten, Victorian guitar virtuosa
Arthur Ness Thu, 25 Aug 2005 07:56:03 -0700 I didn't realize that in addition to being a music hall tenor he was a comedian as well. He must have been tremendously popular. It is Zuth in his Handbuch that says that Shand was an American. I wonder where he got that notion. Same place he got the spelling of Shand's teacher as Sidney-Pratten, and the name and that famous lutenist Bergier, Ungay. A most reliable reference book, uh? Actually if you want to know what Zuth's contemporaries thought of his work you can look it up here: http://www.orphee.com/fryk.htm The text in red, BTW, are the annotations made to Fryklund's text by Kenneth Sparr. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Bone
At 01:55 PM 8/25/2005, Eugene C. Braig IV [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Indeed. It was first published in 1914, Actually, the majority of the major articles in Bone were first published in the US in Cadenza magazine from 1902 to 1906. I have acquired a small run of Cadenza a couple of years ago, but I am not sure if I have the complete run. Peter Danner would know better details. So the 1914 edition began as a compilation of the Cadenza articles. revised in (I believe) the 1950s, 1954. and reprinted in (I believe) the early 1980s 1972. (I'm in the day-job office and away from appropriate references). Unfortunately, it's getting much harder to locate and, once located, copies are asking way more than they should, often multiple hundreds US$. Really? may be I should eBay one of my copies. I have two of them. I used to have two copies of Zuth, but I gave one of them as a present to Arthur J. Ness... I really enjoy Bone so don't let my nitpickery detract from what a monumental achievement this book represented in its time: Bone's work is often criticized for dwelling a little too much on major composers to have only peripherally dealt with guitar and/or mandolin (Beethoven, e.g.) and for tending to be a little too accepting of speculation or hearsay (e.g., note his confident statement that Mertz was a skilled mandolinist who taught and composed for mandolin relatives in spite of nobody having knowledge of such works). He also omits some info that I think is rather important (e.g., he makes no mention of Justin Holland being black; as the entry reads, Holland comes off as a minor figure of potential interest to guitar buffs, but to have achieved what Holland did in the mid-late 1800s US as a black man is nothing short of super hero-like). Perhaps Bone did not know that Holland was black? Judging Holland's work on its merits, one can understand why Bone would not be too enthusiastic about it. After all, he was one of them colonials The major complaint against Bone, one which Arthur also mentioned, was that he did not give precise sources for his information. However, in the many occasions over the last 26 years that I have had to retrace Bone's information to primary sources, he turned out to have been dead right every single time. Bibliographical control in the B.M.G circles of the turn of the last century, were a bit different than they are today in academic circles, As for Mertz and the mandolin, you are right that his involvement with the instrument is not well known. On the other hand, in her PH.d. Dissertation on Mertz, Astrid Stempnik gives some 10 different references to Mertz teaching and writing mandolin music. How these references can support or refute Bone's contentions is a question that needs to be examined closely. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: More Gianconcelli Chilesotti
At 04:01 PM 8/25/2005, Alain Veylit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matanya, This strikes me as an extremely naive attitude. Documental evidence has lead many people to the wrong conclusions, as documented by the thousands (millions, actually) of pseudo-scholarly papers churned out by both private and public research facilities. I'd rather read liner notes by someone who knows what he is doing, because the chances of his being wrong leading to an interesting mistake are much higher. I am sure there is a negative missing someplace in the above sentence... I agree with you that there have been a great deal of pseudo-scholarly papers with the wrong conclusions. But here is the the rub: the only way to know that they were wrong conclusions and that the scholarliness was less than first rate, is by checking the documental evidence provided. Without it, we must resort to trust based on personal admiration to the writer, which is what you seem to be implying here. If that works for you, then of course I wish the best of happiness with the knowledge you obtained. Being an iconoclast heretic, I am not willing to trust anyone, not even myself, on anything. I need to be shown that facts, not somebody's recollections of them. In other words, unless I can lay my hands on the original Codex transcribed by Chilesotti and examine it myself, that Codex does not exist. Even if the story is true and indeed there is some mysterious Italian collector who has it, the mere fact that it is not available for mere mortals like you and me for consultation, renders it into a fairy tale. A pretty one, and no doubt prettier when told by some one you admire and love, but nevertheless, a fairy tale. Of course, I will make a point of getting hold of this O'Dette CD and find out exactly what he says there. By now, it is clear that trusting Arthur Ness to correctly report on stuff he had read someplace, is not a reliable way of learning. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: [LUTE]Madame Robert Sidney Pratten, Victorian guitar virtuosa
At 05:33 PM 8/25/2005, Arthur Ness wrote: wrote: I think it would be a mistake to cite what are additions and corrections to Zuth's work as a demonstration that his work is poor. (Some of that is really obscure information.) For his time, his Handbuch is quite thorough. No argument. But it just so happens that you, speaking from both sides of the mouth at the same time, declared that the book is a reliable reference work for scholars in OUR time, and that it can be trusted and relied upon, and that is why the name of the lady is Sidney-Pratten and not Sidney Pratten. And Matanya knows about the Bergier, Ungay, entry because I told him about it. Indeed. That is the amazing thing is that on one hand you can denounce Zuth for Bergier Ungay, and at the same time praise him for Sidney-Pratten and that yankee Ernest Shand. You got caught with your pants down on this one, and perhaps it ought to teach you the lesson that printed text is never trustworthy and reliable. And if you have not learned this in graduate school, you are carrying this academic phoney title on false pretenses. Ready reference materials were not known in those days. That's why it is such a shame that Ophee published the Codice Lauten-Buch without taking a day or two to track down the composers and correct titles. His edition ignores a century of musical scholarship. That's a goddam lie! All the available scholarship on this Codex was either quoted or made reference to, including your contributions to theHoban book. It's just another Chilesotti Rip-Off. No better than the zillions before his. The only previous publication which deals with the entire Codex, besides the Forni unauthorized facsimnile, was the one by Dick Hoban. Is this the one you are referring to? And besides, even though the book is in the public domain, I did obtain the full agreement and permission of the Breitkopf Haertel. Hence, the charge of a rip-off is a stupid cheap shot. Swift boating me here is not going to get you out of the hole you dug yourself into. My advice to you: stop digging. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] RE: Re: Leonardo Sciulzzo
Fossum, Arthur wrote: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 05:26:35 -0700 I thought Arthur Ness was trolling for you when he brought up the Grand Staff and Piano notation thread... Of course he was. Must have pissed him off that the very paper I read at the Colloque de Luth en Occident in 1998, one event he decided to skip because I was invited, now appeared in a major lute journal. Among others, he confided that he was asked to answer Matanya, as if I asked a question. And the funniest was his silly attempt to drag Weiss and Bach into the story, when these were not transcriptions. Of course, I already pointed out his hypocritical accusations that some guitarists call grand staff notation as Keyboard, where in point of fact it was he, Arthur J. Ness, who so labeled the keyboard fascicles of our MoLA series. Further confirmed by Leonhard Shulz... Confirmed by Madame Robert Sidney Pratten. You forgot the phoney story of the Berlioz' purported quotation. In a nutshell, someone, whose name Arthur does not remember, in a conference Arthur does not remember when and where it took place, told him about a dissertation, which Arthur had never seen, which alleges that Berlioz said in a Journal de Debats article that the guitar is a small orchestra. I did see the dissertation in question. All it did is refer the reader to a book by Jacques Barzun, where there are two minute footnotes referring to the Berlioz article, which Barzun himself had never seen. All he had was translations into German of these articles made by Dr. Joseph Zuth. I got copies of these translations from Columbia University where barzun papers are kept and there is nothing in them about the guitar being a small orchestra. IOW, no one had seen the original Berlioz article and can quote it precisely. That has not stopped this patriarch-scholar of the lute list to spouting off utter sophomoric nonsense as if it was the truth. My problem is that I am not a lute scholar, but I do know a thing or two about the guitar and its history. So if members of this want to accept Arthur's pronouncements on lute issues as the Gospel, they are welcome to them, though on occasion, like the phoney story of the survival of the Chilesotti manuscript, I felt obliged to step in. The story was declared phoney by Stefano Toffolo, the leading Chilesotti scholar, and so confirmed by both Dinko Fabris and the Comandante Bussandri, the owner of the Chilesotti museum in Bassano di Grappa. Would that convince Arthur to either tell lutenists how he knows what he alleges to know about this, or to admit that he did not really know what he was talking about? Would never happen. Either way. Cant we let sleeping dogs lie? This particular dog does not sleep. Arthur cannot forgive me for the fact that in spite of his resignation from the MoLA series in 1993, 12 years ago taking with him both the second edition of the Francesco and the Marco dall'Aquila book, I did publish 3 volumes in the series without his help, and the Series did not instantly crumble. The sad part of all this, is that not only did Arthur shoot himself in the foot under some stupid pretensions, but that the Francesco and Marco projects have thus been condemned to oblivion. Anyone want to discuss my old musicology professor's transcription of El Maestro? ( Charles Jacobs) Now you did it! Charles Jacobs was Arthur's main nemesis and by admitting some connection to him, you instantly placed yourself in Arthur's sights. May be now he will lay off of me 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonardo Sciulzzo
Arne Keller Tue, 16 Aug 2005 10:53:58 -0700 MO wrote: So let me make an offer you cannot refuse: stop your anti-guitar and anti-MO campaign in this forum, and you will never hear from me again. Not you and not your cyber body-guard Turovsky. Do I make myself clear? You do, very clear indeed. How about making yourself clear away? An excellent suggestion, but not very original. Been suggested before. As I said, I will refrain from posting here on subjects that do not concern me directly, but as long as Arthur Ness continues his trolling against me, disguised however he wants, and as long as this ridiculous anti-guitar campaign continues on this list, not only by Arthur but also by a few others, I will offer my rebuttals as best as I can. You can count on that. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: OT: Mozart for guitar
At 12:51 AM 8/15/2005, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is just the kind of nonsense that should be condemned. Are we expected to accept apocryphal stories and a pastel drawing as proof of some historical truth?. Mo is pictured with a guitar sometimes, it is cerrtainly no proof that _he_ plays it. You claim to play the lute, which is also no proof that you actually can play one. My guitar playing is not as good as it used to be, but it is there, warts and all. For example: http://www.orphee.com/rmcg/sokolov.mp3 Now let me hear your lute performance. On the instrument please, not in electronic renditions of your verkakte music. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonhard Schulz
At 01:17 AM 8/15/2005, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: lute, and not just once. In the late 1970's- early 80's. And a few pieces were even written in tabulature. He did? wonderful news. So how come this was never published, never reached the hands of any lutenists and never mentioned before? The works in question were writtten for the Moscow lutenist Aleksandr Suetin. Whether they would be circulated again, that will be decided by Nikita himself, without your participation. Now that makes perfect sense. Suetin must have rejected these pieces as just so much garbage, enough to cause Koshkin to spread rumors about him and his father which would make your scurrilous writings like a pleasant walk in the park. Perhaps I should ask Nikita for permission to publish his e-mail message to me Dated Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:32:29 +0300, detailing his opinions of Suetin. I have a good occasion to pose him this question. I am planning to post on blog later today a part of your message regarding my editions as maculatura, and ask both Koshkin and Gilardino, composers I have published and whose music is included in my free bonus program, if the would agree that your characterization of their music as maculatura is acceptable to them. Also, your newly found love affair with Koshkin, so soon after you denounced me for publishing the music of Koshkin/Myshkin, right here in this forum, is almost a year old by now. How come it had taken him all that time to tell you about his lute compositions? Anyway, a side show of little interest. Not really. At least this is lutenistically relevant, As relevant as all the other hearsay rumors we have been reading recently in this forum. It will become relevant when, and if, it is ever published, and if in fact it was ever composed, which I doubt very much. As one composer who has been distributing copies of his manuscripts years before they were submitted for publication, Koshkin would have surely sent you copies of his lute music as soon as you became his LJ friend. The fact that he did not even tell you about it until now, only means that it does not exist, and therefore, not lutenistically relevant. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonardo Sciulzzo
At 02:50 AM 8/15/2005, Arthur Ness [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With all due respect, I think I know a bit more about the history of guitar than does Matanya. For example, does he know that Madame Robert Sidney-Pratten published a posthumous work by Leonardo Schultz that she played with great pleasure at her recitals? Yes, I do. I even have a copy of it. Or does he know that Giuliani published a book of guitar music in tablature notation, Heck doesn't even mention it in his Giuliani monograph, publ. by Orphee. That's a good one. I am sure Giuliani scholars like Heck and Marco Riboni would love to hear about that. Published where? by whom? and for what possible market during Giuliani's life time? Oh I got it. Giuliani published posthumously, just like that famous contest he had with Sor in London in 1833, four years after his death. Check your Baker's for details. As for your knowledge of guitar history, you can claim anything you want, but without published evidence, it is meaningless boasting. You should know that much from your past academic work. There is nothing in Music Index or OCLC that would even remotely link you to any scholarship on guitar history. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: OT: Mozart for guitar
At 10:38 AM 8/15/2005, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is just the kind of nonsense that should be condemned. Are we expected to accept apocryphal stories and a pastel drawing as proof of some historical truth?. Mo is pictured with a guitar sometimes, it is cerrtainly no proof that _he_ plays it. You claim to play the lute, which is also no proof that you actually can play one. My guitar playing is not as good as it used to be, but it is there, warts and all. For example: http://www.orphee.com/rmcg/sokolov.mp3 Now let me hear your lute performance. On the instrument please, not in electronic renditions of your verkakte music. http://www.polyhymnion.org/tombeau/tombeaux/tom-frob.mp3 Thank you. That's good. Now, do you have something a little more lively so we can tell if you have any chops to speak of? 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonhard Schulz
At 01:17 AM 8/15/2005, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He did? wonderful news. So how come this was never published, never reached the hands of any lutenists and never mentioned before? The works in question were writtten for the Moscow lutenist Aleksandr Suetin. Whether they would be circulated again, that will be decided by Nikita himself, without your participation. Of course. Koshkin knows it only too well, that there is no way in Hell I would invest any more money in his music, for whatever instrument. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonhard Schulz
Roman Turovsky wrote: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 08:00:27 -0700 Now that makes perfect sense. Suetin must have rejected these pieces as just so much garbage, enough to cause Koshkin to spread rumors about him and his father which would make your scurrilous writings like a pleasant walk in the park. Perhaps I should ask Nikita for permission to publish his e-mail message to me Dated Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:32:29 +0300, detailing his opinions of Suetin. I have a good occasion to pose him this question. I am planning to post on blog later today a part of your message regarding my editions as maculatura, and ask both Koshkin and Gilardino, composers I have published and whose music is included in my free bonus program, if the would agree that your characterization of their music as maculatura is acceptable to them. Considering the whopping dozen people that read your blog: post your rotten heart's content. Make our day. 34 people are allowed to post on my blog, and 40 have included it on their Friends List, i.e., they read it every day. Besides, this is one guitar blog that is read daily by thousands of guitarists all over the world. But all of this is besides the point. The post is intended at only two readers, Koshkin and Gilardino, the two composers on LJ whose music for the guitar I published. Your day is made. Also, your newly found love affair with Koshkin, so soon after you denounced me for publishing the music of Koshkin/Myshkin, right here in this forum, is almost a year old by now. How come it had taken him all that time to tell you about his lute compositions? Anyway, a side show of little interest. Not really. At least this is lutenistically relevant, As relevant as all the other hearsay rumors we have been reading recently in this forum. It will become relevant when, and if, it is ever published, and if in fact it was ever composed, which I doubt very much. As one composer who has been distributing copies of his manuscripts years before they were submitted for publication, Koshkin would have surely sent you copies of his lute music as soon as you became his LJ friend. The fact that he did not even tell you about it until now, only means that it does not exist, and therefore, not lutenistically relevant. Would yoy mind making a decision whether to allege EITHER non-existence OR substandard quality. You cannot claim both at the same time. Of course I can, and I did. Knowing Suetin personally, I know well what he thinks of Koshkin, and certainly I know what Koshkin thinks of him. What exactly went on between these two 15 years ago, is not a subject that should interest many here, and if not for your knee jerk reaction to my joke about your Rorschach test responses, we would not be discussing this at all. And your next knee jerk response is... 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonardo Sciulzzo
At 02:50 AM 8/15/2005, Arthur Ness [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: does he know that Giuliani published a book of guitar music in tablature notation, Heck doesn't even mention it in his Giuliani monograph, publ. by Orphee. Which Giuliani? there are 7 Giulianis in the Columbus OH telephone directory, and probably a couple of hundred in New York including one fellow named Rudolph (or Rodolfo if you want). As for early 19th century guitarists named Giuliani, there are at least 10 that we know of. You did not know that, did you? 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: aggression and lute
At 03:04 PM 8/15/2005, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is fine, but the problem is that the aggression comes from a non-lutenist, who cannot fathom that we are simply uninterested in him. You are so uninterested that you seem to respond to every single message I post. And so does your cohort Ness. But the point you raise is interesting. Perhaps you ought to consider that when you and Ness post on rec.music.classical.guitar, as both of you have been doing all morning, you are exhibiting an aggressiveness, which, coming from non-guitarists like, is totally out of place. It's the apex of hypocrisy to accuse my demands for clarifications as aggression and your transferring of the debate to another forum altogether is an altruistic search for truth. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: aggression and lute
At 04:32 PM 8/15/2005, Peter Weiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gasp! These guys are carrying on like this in more than one forum??! Perhaps you ought to consider that when you and Ness post on rec.music.classical.guitar, as both of you have been doing all morning, you are exhibiting an aggressiveness... Better believe it: http://tinyurl.com/9mqur This is Arthur Ness, masquerading as Ricardo from Young Generation Inc., initiating a thread this morning on RMCG. At least Turovsky had the good sense to post under his own name, which was a surprise. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonhard Schulz
At 02:40 PM 8/15/2005, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 34 people are allowed to post on my blog, and 40 have included it on their Friends List, i.e., they read it every day. Besides, this is one guitar blog that is read daily by thousands of guitarists all over the world. But all of this is besides the point. The post is intended at only two readers, Koshkin and Gilardino, the two composers on LJ whose music for the guitar I published. Your day is made. It is really depressing to see that you actually believe that your little ludicrous syllogism is capable of driving a wedge between my friends Angelo, Nikita, and myself. That still remains to be seen. Considering that the wedge between me and Nikita, a composer who achieved his world wide reputation through my personal efforts on his behalf, was generated by a lot less than that. You will soon find who you are really dealing with. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonardo Sciulzzo
At 02:45 PM 8/15/2005, Arthur Ness [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am not going to be drawn into a debate about Madame Robert Sidney-Pratten, the famous guitar virtuosa of the Victorian era. I do not understand why Matanya considers this a proper topic for this lute list. Oops... you have already been drawn, as obvious for the quantity of verbal effluence you have been posting here and in RMCG o the subject, and it was you who introduced this subject into the Lute list. Just like you introduced other OT subjects here like Berlioz and the Guitar, Leonardo Schultz and the guitar. Mozart and the guitar, and constantly been harping about some mysterious guitarists whose ideas you disapprove of. And your hypocrisy regarding the question of the term keyboard to indicate grand staff notation for lute music, when it was you yourself who so decided it should be called in the MOLA series (to refresh your memory, here is this document which you wrote yourself: http://www.orphee.com/RMCG/brochure.html), is downright mind boggling. So let me make an offer you cannot refuse: stop your anti-guitar and anti-MO campaign in this forum, and you will never hear from me again. Not you and not your cyber body-guard Turovsky. Do I make myself clear? 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonardo Sciulzzo
At 09:12 PM 8/15/2005, I wrote: At 02:45 PM 8/15/2005, Arthur Ness [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am not going to be drawn into a debate about Madame Robert Sidney-Pratten, the famous guitar virtuosa of the Victorian era. I do not understand why Matanya considers this a proper topic for this lute list. Oops... you have already been drawn, as obvious for the quantity of verbal effluence you have been posting here and in RMCG o the subject, and it was you who introduced this subject into the Lute list. Just like you introduced other OT subjects here like Berlioz and the Guitar, Leonardo Schultz and the guitar. Mozart and the guitar, and constantly been harping about some mysterious guitarists whose ideas you disapprove of. And your hypocrisy regarding the question of the term keyboard to indicate grand staff notation for lute music, when it was you yourself who so decided it should be called in the MOLA series (to refresh your memory, here is this document which you wrote yourself: ) http://www.orphee.com/RMCG/brochure.html , is downright mind boggling. So let me make an offer you cannot refuse: stop your anti-guitar and anti-MO campaign in this forum, and you will never hear from me again. Not you and not your cyber body-guard Turovsky. Do I make myself clear? 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: OT: Mozart for guitar
At 06:22 AM 8/14/2005, Arthur Ness [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is just the kind of nonsense that should be condemned. Are we expected to accept apocryphal stories and a pastel drawing as proof of some historical truth?. Probably not. But coming from the mouth of one who is so consistent in his discussion of iconography and in more apocryphal stories on lutenists that would feel a large volume, in a forum where iconography and apocryphal stores happens to be some of the major subjects of discussion, I wonder if the left side of your mouth knows what the right side is saying. The Bob Spencer edition was published, as Ophee knows perfectly well, by Chanterelle, not Tecla. I really dislike having my words misrepresented. That's really too bad and I fully sympathize with you. But to refresh your memory, here is what you said: I think Brian Jefferey has published some of these arrangements. Edited by the late Bob Spencer. Many of you probably know the edition. In case you are not quite clear in your understanding of the publishing situation, Brian Jeffery who you mentioned, is the owner of Tecla, not Chanterelle. As for Chanterelle, owned and operated by Michael Macmeeken, they have never published any, and I mean ANY, Schubert songs, arranged or edited by Robert Spencer. This is the result of a search of their on line catalog for Schubert: http://tinyurl.com/9b4l5 All of these editions were published by other publishers, not by Chanterelle, and they only sell them in their mail order business. None of them were edited by Spencer either. The only connection between Schubert, Spencer and Jeffery is the volume of songs Brian published in 1985 http://www.tecla.com/catalog/0044.htm from copies in the Spencer collection. The volume contains exactly three Schubert songs, from a total of 33 songs, and none of them were edited by Bob Spencer, but, as it clearly states on the cover, by Brian Jeffery. All Spencer did is supply the originals. In other words, I have no need to misrepresent your words. You are doing a fine job of it all by yourself. Furthermore the Tecla edition by Tom Heck consists of his own arrangements, not work based on historical examples. Isn't that exactly just what I have said? there _must_ be an echo in here. It was condemned by Ophee in an irrational diatribe. I did? can you remind of when and where? or is this another one of your mysterious hallucinations which come to you often whenever I challenge you to back up your statements with facts? Just let me remind you that you are tottering pretty close to actionable libel. So why don't you take a rest, Matanya, until you can get your facts down correctly. Take an aspirin, and call us back when you're refreshed and your brain is in gear. Thank you so much for your concern for my health. I truly appreciate it. Perhaps I should repay you in kind, but frankly, I am not qualified to offer assistance in the kind of problems you face. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonardo Sciulzzo
At 06:24 AM 8/14/2005, Arthur Ness [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is what I mean about misrepresentation. I did not refer to OPhee's edition because it is so filled with mistakes. Mistakes that were first pointed out by Erik Stenstadvolrt in a review in Classical Guitar magazine. I scandalously usurped nothing of Ophee's. In fact I ignored it deliberately. Now here is a misrepresentation on the grandest scale: The review in CG was of the 1984 printed edition, not on the 1997 on line edition. And thank you for stating the obvious, that you deliberately ignored some thing that you knew very well of its existence, which is exactly what I am talking about. Mistakes or otherwise, you pretended that the you just found the RBS copy, when in fact, the very edition which you chose to criticize 8 years ago, contained the full details on the location of the original, and copies of it were reproduced in my on-line LTTE. [needless repetitions of some bullshit snipped] This first came up on some guitar list with Stenstadvolt participating. That's when I drew the Beethoven comparison,because it explained whAt the correct notes were in the introduction, F-naturals and B flats, not the F-sharps and B naturals favored by Ophee and Erik. Thank you for once again, confirming that you knew all along that this edition existed and that your pretensions of finding it were false. If Schulz (Schultz) wanted to use an Italianized form of his first name,so what? That's not the issue. The issue is that you don't know if Schulz ever wanted to use an Italianized name, there is no contemporary source with him that ever used an Italianized name and, the whole thing is based on some trumped up sick imagination that emanates from you and you alone. There's also some confusion about the spelling of Leonardo's last name. There is no confusion, unless it is in your sick mind. All the sources, including all the dictionaries, newspaper advertisement, catalog entries in the RBS collection, and particularly, all of Schulz' publications, of which there are quite a few, always spell the name as Schulz. Without the T. Thought you'd like to know. This reminds me, RT, that the Bambino guitar that once belonged to Madame Robert Sidney-Pratten, You don't want to bring this canard once again. Trust me. I have prepared a rather large article on this subject last time we went through this, one which proves beyond any shadow of a possible doubt that when it comes to guitar matters you are an incompetent bumbling and moronic idiot. I have been in a charitable mood and refrained from publishing it, but if you are really interested in learning something, I will. In the meantime, just let me acquaint you with the genealogy of the Pratten family. http://www.prattens.co.uk/FAMILIES/PRATTEN/start.html This was brought to my attention by Graham Pratten, a direct descendant. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonardo Sciulzzo
At 06:18 PM 8/12/2005, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IOW, you are assuming that a simple discussion of plagiarism, on which there is no question, would necessarily deteriorate in this forum into personal insults and name calling. You are right, and Roman Turovsky did not waste any time changing the subject into a personal attack on me and on my day job as a music publisher. But the issue for me is real: if Arthur Ness had included the information he ripped off my web site in a school paper, a scholarly article, or a published book, he would have been tarred and feathered and ostracized forever as a scholar. But in this forum, so it seems, he can get away with anything. Yo've got that wrong. THIS IS ONE FORUM WHERE MO CANNOT GET AWAY WITH HIS USUAL ANYTHING. You are probably right. But since there is no moderator, the degree of getting away with something or nothing can only be determined by the number of people who put me in their kill file. This is a number which no one can know for certain, and certainly not you. If you think that resorting to your scurrilous personal attacks on me constitutes a degree of policing this forum, then you are probably right again. I used to worry about your posts, and even put you in a kill file. But once I figured out that you have nothing to say of any real importance, and all that you are capable of is spouting these Pavlovian predetermined responses to the slightest provocation, I removed you from my kill file. I have a few weeks of free time at the present, and I can well devote them to enjoying your predictability. Too bad you do not live closer to me. I can certainly use an artist on the pay roll, and I would love to have you closer to observe. There is a large banner on the front door of my office. It says: Hire the high IQ intellectually challenged buffoons. They are fun to watch. The issue here is that Leonhard Schulz left Vienna at the tender age of 14, never to return, and spent most of his adult life in England where he died in 1860. The number of newspaper reviews of his concerts all over Europe, are far larger than the number of reviews of all his contemporaries combined, and none of them, absolutely none of them, use an Italianized Leonardo. The only place the name appears in this spelling is in the 1934 Diccionario of Domingo Prat, in which _all_ European names have been translated into their Spanish equivalents. To use this spelling in the context of a discussion in English, is to insinuate a false image of this talented guitarist Your little invective has as much relevance on this forum as your daughter's Moroccan eggplant (while the world knows that only Arabs can be trusted with eggplant preparation..) I agree with you about the Arabs and eggplants, but I can do a pretty good babaganouj and imam bayeldi, and my ratatouille provençal is also a dish some people who tasted it still talk about. As for the relevance of my invective to this forum: It should be obvious, even to mental midgets like you, that the relevance of the subject matter of my invective in this forum was established by Arthur Ness' unconscionable introduction of Leonhard Schulz into this forum. Once introduced, the subject is fair game for discussion. Surely you do not mean to suggest that on any subject whatsoever, there is only one point of view that can be allowed here, and that is the view of the current nomenklatura? But of course this is what you mean to suggest! 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonhard Schulz
At 11:14 PM 8/12/2005, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Never fail. You are almost predicable. I was thinking it should be quite easy to compile a list of buzz words which would generate automatically these knee jerk responses. Now let see: I say: Koshkin will never write for the lute you say:__ Actually he might, just to spite you. I'll ask Nikita, he's been a friend, of late. I say: Kuritsa nye ptitsa y Ukraina ne zagranitsa (A chicken is not a bird and the Ukraine is not a foreign country) You say:___ The phrase originally referred to Bulgaria. Vlad Ivanoff might be lurking on this list, to reallly appreciate it Excellent responses. Right on the 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonardo Sciulzzo
At 11:33 PM 8/12/2005, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am listening. Intently. To yourself. Once again, you are exactly right. There is no chance in tarnation that Arthur Ness will ever respond to the challenge, and for two simple reasons: 1. he hasn't a clue of where he got this bastardized form of a historic person's name and does not really know if it exists anywhere or is simply a product of his sick imagination, 2. he is not in a position to admit that he was wrong. Never did before, and will never do again. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonardo Sciulzzo
At 11:55 PM 8/12/2005, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To present this as your recent find, when you knew damn well that I published this piece in paper format in 1984, and when it ran out of print, I posted it on line in 1997, at which time you chose to criticize it on RMCG, in other words, you knew that it was there, is nothing short of a scandalous usurpation of my work. MO, your nipping at Arthur's soles is not getting you anywhere. Right again. I do not expect an intelligent and responsible response from Arthur on the merits of the issues at hand. Dr. Arthur Joseph Stonewall PH.D. is a well known figure in these parts. What I am getting out of this is the simple matter of making a public record which establishes the fact that in spite of his vast knowledge of lute matters, Arthur knows nothing about the guitar and its history, and the sooner he shuts up and not bring up guitar issues in this forum, or elsewhere, the better he will be prepared to deflect the impression of him as a fraud. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonhard Schulz
At 07:11 AM 8/13/2005, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Never fail. You are almost predicable. I was thinking it should be quite easy to compile a list of buzz words which would generate automatically these knee jerk responses. Now let see: I say: Koshkin will never write for the lute you say:__ This is just in, from the horse's mouth: Nikita Koshkin has written for the lute, and not just once. In the late 1970's- early 80's. He did? wonderful news. So how come this was never published, never reached the hands of any lutenists and never mentioned before? Actually, there is a pirate web site in Kazakhstan run by a fellow named Evgeny Tian which includes every single work ever composed by Koshkin, both published and unpublished. No lute music in there. Also, your newly found love affair with Koshkin, so soon after you denounced me for publishing the music of Koshkin/Myshkin, right here in this forum, is almost a year old by now. How come it had taken him all that time to tell you about his lute compositions? Anyway, a side show of little interest. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonardo Sciulzzo / Pirates of Penance
At 01:23 PM 8/13/2005, Arthur wrote: To catch modern day pirates Ophee changes a few notes in his editions of public domain music, so that when someone else publishes the same pieces with his alterations he can charge them with copyright infringement. Of course one can go back to the original public domain piece and publish that, and there is nothing that Ophee can do about it. Which is why I provide the full information on the source used in the edition itself. Right? It does not take long for you to grab on a word expressed by a poster to try to change the subject. The issue is not pirating but your claim that you found the RBS copy of Schulz' Recollections of Ireland Op. 41, when in point of fact you knew about it for more than 8 years by now since I gave you all the information about it. He only has copyright on the edition he publishes, such as Recollections of Ireland with all those mistakes. Anyone can use and even publish the same piece by downloading the pubic domain copy from the Royal Library in Copenhagen, thanks to Coldwell. Anyone can correct all the mistakes in that manuscript, and publish it and obtain their own copyright protection. Is there an echo in here? (Just don't copy from Ophee, or he will get you.) Damn right I will. Last fellow who did that, one Vladimir Mikulka, learned the hard way that when I provide the full information about the source I used for my edition, it is much better and cheaper to go back to the original and do his own edition, completely independent of my work. Mikulka's edition of Bobrowicz' Variations on La Ci Darem La Mano was removed from circulation by its publisher, Lemoine, when I proved that it was a rip off of my edition of the same. That was back in 1992, and since then, people have learned to leave my editions alone. So far, no one had attempted the Mikulka caper. There is no need to. There is so much PD music available, (only I happen to have published some of the best stuff first...) From what he is harping on in this thread seems to suggest he thinks he has some exclusive rights to the piece. He doesn't. That's bullshit. Of course I do not have any rights to the piece. But I do have an inalienable right to the fact that I published this pieces in 1984, posted it on line in 1997, and there is no way in Hell you can come now and pretend to have just found it. And I was under no obligation to refer to his faulty edition, since the piece is readily available from Copenhagen, without Ophee's heavy-handed mis-editing. My editing methodology, and all the decisions I made, are readily available for study on line by anyone. You do not state clearly what are your objections and expect readers to take you at your words. Needless to say, sycophants such as Roman Turovsky take at your words even before you pronounced them. I do not. I am not aware of any published music for the guitar under your editorship, ever making itself known. None. You have never edited guitar music, you do not even play the guitar and never did, and as a matter of fact, you do not even play the lute. As for editing lute music, let's see... the last time you published anything in this field was when? Oh, I get it. 1970. 35 years ago. As far as I can tell, you are very good at making lists of things, but you are simply unqualified to express an opinion on editing guitar music. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonardo Sciulzzo
At 11:18 PM 8/12/2005, you wrote: Arthur wrote: I'll stand on my F naturals, which both MO and ES turn to F sharps. My original printed edition did have the F naturals, and that was the point on which Erik criticized it. Eventually, in our discussions on RMCG, you were the one who told me (Remember, all of this is still on-line in the Google archives of RMCG) that Erik was right and I was wrong, and I should put the sharp back in. As I explain in my on-line article, I eventually made the change not because of what you and Erik said, but for my own reasons. I any case, the critical apparatus attached to the edition clearly spells out the available choices and each guitarist can make up his or her mind without being spoon-fed by you or by me. All of the above is of course exactly 180 degrees off. My original 1984 paper edition had the F#, and that is the point Erik criticized it. (Takes a bit of reflection to get untangled from Arthur's obfuscations...) The current on line edition has the F natural and for Arthur to say that it is a sharp is not only a misrepresentation, but an outright lie. Check it out for yourself: http://www.orphee.com/schulz-1.pdf 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: OT: Mozart for guitar
On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 07:47:31 -0700 Arthur Ness wrote: No one would quarrel with the fact that the guitar enjoyed considerable popularity in Vienna in Beethoven's time. Schubert used the instrument a few times, including in a birthday cantata for his father. I know of no documentary evidence that Schubert played guitar. If he did so, someone would have made note of that fact. Some one did. The name is Umlauff. But even though the Umlauff story may be apocryphal, there is no question of the existence of several Schubert manuscripts of original guitar music. Check your Deutsch. The many Schubert Lieder with guitar accompaniment were usually arrangements by Diabelli, Mertz, Pfeifer, et al. One can imagine that the publishers would rush guitar versions into print to beat the competition for lucrative salon sales. Diaballi is right, Mertz is wrong. What Mertz did was arrange for guitar 6 transcriptions of Schubert lieder made for the piano by Franz Liszt. Strictly instrumental, and not directly from Schubert. What Diabelli did is fully listed in my recent publication of the Thematic catalog of the Guitar Works of Anton Diabelli by Jukka Savioki. I think Brian Jefferey has published some of these arrangements. Edited by the late Bob Spencer. Many of you probably know the edition. I happen to know the edition very well, because it was prepared in my house at 341 Commonwealth Ave., in Boston during the year and half that Brian Jeffery lived there. Spencer had nothing to do with this. The editor was Thomas Heck and the material has nothing to do with the period arrangements published in Vienna. All the accompaniments are the product of Thomas Heck's invention. As a matter of fact, when he went back to England, Brian left behind all the original paste up boards for all the editions he prepared in my house. I still have them, and for the life of me, I don't know why I haven't dumped them years ago. Oh yes, I know why. It has this magnificent transparency of a pastoral scene in which Schubert is shown playing the guitar. Brian used it on the cover of his book. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Leonhard Schulz
Arthur Ness wrote: I even know an Irish fantasia by Leonardo what'is name? that has a harmonic progression very similar to the introduction to Beethoven's Second Symphony. Alas it's in that Danish collection of guitar music, and many accidentals are left out. Also in D minor/major. The guitarist/copyist probably used staff notation as a kind of aide memoire for what was essentially playing by ear. Even though many wrong notes were written on the page, his fingers probably went to the correct frets. I found the piece. It's Recollections of Ireland by Leonardo Schultz (Op.41). It's RiBs ms244c in that immense collection of guitar music at the Royal Library in Copenhagen. You can download it here: http://www.icoldwell.com/robert/music/library/denmark.html The last hjalf ofthe Introduction is one of those misterioso harmonic progressions, emphasizing the tonic minor (here d minor). That is, when the theme appears in measure 13 it is colored by the sudden appearance of the major mode (here D Major). It's a Tierce de Picardy effect. In these progressions the F sharp is withheld until it resolves when the theme is sounded. This procedure is found frequently in Beethoven, but earlier in Mozart as well. In the Introduction under discussion you need these corrections: B flats in m. 7, 8 and 11 F naturals in m. 10 and 11. The fingerings are wrong, a misreading by the amateur,who attempted to correct himself, but got the wrong notes when he made the correction. Surely Schultz had Beethoven inthe ears when he wrote that passage. All that is very good information, but at the same time, it is a misrepresentation. This information was first published on line in 1997 here: http://www.orphee.com/irish.htm A full discussion of the pro and cons of the fingering issues here was also published here: http://www.orphee.com/sten.HTM At the time, Arthur Ness expressed a few critical ideas about this on line edition in the RMCG new group. Obviously he knew about this edition first hand and for him to pretend today that he just found out the RBS availability of the J.G. Holm abschrift, without acknowledging the real source of his knowledge on this subject, me, is not exactly copacetic. As for the availability of this music in Copenhagen, of course I know all about that. I published the complete catalogue of that collection, compiled by its curator Jytte Torpp Larson and edited by Peter Danner who needs no introduction here, already in 1989. One thing always baffled me and that is Arthur's reference to Schulz as a Leonardo. Not the first time, BTW. On the various occasions I asked him to back up his reference with some documental evidence, I did not get a satisfactory answer. Leonhard Schulz was Austrian, born in Vienna, was a protege of Moscheles and in all the available early 19th century sources he is always referred to as Leonhard. If Arthur knows something I do not, I would certainly appreciate the information. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonhard Schulz
At 01:25 PM 8/12/2005, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matanya, An Austrian, Rodolfo [sic!] Soutscheck [sic!!!] trained the Florentine soccer team in 1939. The relevance of this fact, if it is a fact, completely escapes me. If you are saying that some Austrians used Italianized names, you are breaking the lock on an open door. We know that already. If you intimate that just because one Austrian football coach working in Italy had an Italianized name, then an Austrian guitarist who was born in 1818 and was never in Italy could also have an Italianized name, without any evidence that he was so called, then allow me to introduce you to Giovanni Sebastiano Bach, Francesco Haydn, Roberto Schumann, Francesco Dolcevillico (Franz Suessmayr) and Federico Handel. So keep you sticky moneycounting fingers away from Arthur (ever a gentleman). I would not expect you to react any different. If plagiarizing information first generated by me and widely available on line for the last 8 years appears to you to be a gentlemanly thing to do, then of course you are entitled to your fealty to this Sociedad de Ladrones. And as to your reference to my sticky monyecounting fingers: yes, they are indeed sticky and I do have such an uncontrollable urge to wash my hands every time I run into your scurrilous prose. But in this case, it is entirely off base. My posting of Leonhard Shulz' Recollections of Ireland Op. 41 in my web site 8 years ago, was a free offering, and still is. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonardo Sciulzzo
At 04:00 PM 8/12/2005, Alain Veylit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Personally, I think that Michael Thames and Matanya Ophee are one and the same person - the timing is just too weird: one goes, the other one arrives... But I don't recall M.O. mentioning being a luthier or M.T. mentioning publishing. Maybe it's a case of split personality? Cute, but does not adequately explains the flame war last year between me and Michael Thames regarding printed facsimiles, in which, it so appeared, Michael and Roman joined forces to denounce this money grabbing filthy merchant MO, who so much as expects to be paid for his work. It was with a certain degree of amusement that I have been reading Michael's tribulations with Roman more recently. I could have come to his assistance, but frankly, I decided to let him stew in the realization that siding with RT against MO, is no insurance against the venom of this viper. Anyway, the issue here is not RT, but Arturo Ness, Esq. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonardo Sciulzzo
Howard Posner wrote: Get your tickets to this flame war early... IOW, you are assuming that a simple discussion of plagiarism, on which there is no question, would necessarily deteriorate in this forum into personal insults and name calling. You are right, and Roman Turovsky did not waste any time changing the subject into a personal attack on me and on my day job as a music publisher. But the issue for me is real: if Arthur Ness had included the information he ripped off my web site in a school paper, a scholarly article, or a published book, he would have been tarred and feathered and ostracized forever as a scholar. But in this forum, so it seems, he can get away with anything. Sorry, but I do not buy the notion that anyone's reputation and standing is a good justification for usurping the work of others. Matanio Opheo wrote: If you want to follow Arthur's Italianizations, Matanya should be rendered as Teodoro or Matteo. There is no Italianization possibly for Ophee, since this is a transliteration of a made up Hebrew word. If you are saying that some Austrians used Italianized names, you are breaking the lock on an open door. We know that already. If you intimate that just because one Austrian football coach working in Italy had an Italianized name, then an Atrian guitarist who was born in 1818 and was never in Italy could also have an Italianized name, without any evidence that he was so called, then allow me to introduce you to Giovanni Sebastiano Bach, Francesco Haydn, Roberto Schumann, Francesco Dolcevillico (Franz Suessmayr) and Federico Handel. I don't know about them, but Beethoven's original title page for his third symphony said, in his handwriting: Sinfonia Grande Intitolata Buonaparte del Sigr Luigi van Beethoven I can bring thousands of other similar examples and they have no bearing at all on the issue at hand. The phenomenon of the use of the Italian language by musicians at the turn of the 19th century, not only in Austria but all over Europe, is so well known, it would be to belabor the point, or, to use RT's example, to break the lock on an open door. The issue here is that Leonhard Schulz left Vienna at the tender age of 14, never to return, and spent most of his adult life in England where he died in 1860. The number of newspaper reviews of his concerts all over Europe, are far larger than the number of reviews of all his contemporaries combined, and none of them, absolutely none of them, use an Italianized Leonardo. The only place the name appears in this spelling is in the 1934 Diccionario of Domingo Prat, in which _all_ European names have been translated into their Spanish equivalents. To use this spelling in the context of a discussion in English, is to insinuate a false image of this talented guitarist 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonhard Schulz
At 04:36 PM 8/12/2005, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 01:25 PM 8/12/2005, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matanya, An Austrian, Rodolfo [sic!] Soutscheck [sic!!!] trained the Florentine soccer team in 1939. The relevance of this fact, if it is a fact, completely escapes me. It is meant to haunt you, and it will. In other words, you agree it is irrelevant to the subject at hand. Thank you. If you are saying that some Austrians used Italianized names, you are breaking the lock on an open door. We know that already. If you intimate that just because one Austrian football coach working in Italy had an Italianized name, then an Austrian guitarist who was born in 1818 and was never in Italy could also have an Italianized name, without any evidence that he was so called, then allow me to introduce you to Giovanni Sebastiano Bach, Francesco Haydn, Roberto Schumann, Francesco Dolcevillico (Franz Suessmayr) and Federico Handel. And more lutenistically relevant Fortunato Chelleri. So what? Excellent question. The what here is exactly the same what as referred to that football coach you mentioned. Another confirmation of the fact that since you are unable to consider the actual issues at hand, completely over your head, you dispatch your duty to your jerkable knee by spouting Rorschach test responses. Pavlov and Freud would have loved to have you as a test object. And as to your reference to my sticky monyecounting fingers: yes, they are indeed sticky and I do have such an uncontrollable urge to wash my hands every time I run into your scurrilous prose. But in this case, it is entirely off base. My posting of Leonhard Shulz' Recollections of Ireland Op. 41 in my web site 8 years ago, was a free offering, and still is. An awesome thing indeed, a lifechanging event, an occurence of global lutenistic proportions. Whoa.. One freebee in 8 years? My hat off to you. Actually, there are 11 freebies on my web site. See here: http://www.orphee.com/music.htm On top of that, I have a free bonus program which allows people to get a lot of my stock for nothing at all. Some lutenists have been taking advantage of that and acquiring for free a lot of lute books. I mean those of my lute productions that have not been sold out yet... http://www.orphee.com/bonus.htm Come on in, Roman. Will do you good to hold a real printed book in your hands for once... 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonhard Schulz
At 10:16 PM 8/12/2005, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually, there are 11 freebies on my web site. See here: http://www.orphee.com/music.htm 11! Wow... Never fail. You are almost predicable. I was thinking it should be quite easy to compile a list of buzz words which would generate automatically these knee jerk responses. Now let see: I say: Koshkin will never write for the lute you say:__ I say: Kuritsa nye ptitsa y Ukraina ne zagranitsa (A chicken is not a bird and the Ukraine is not a foreign country) You say:___ To be continued at a later time, by me, and by others who have by now learned your style of the SDNT (Self deluding nervous tick). On top of that, I have a free bonus program which allows people to get a lot of my stock for nothing at all. Some lutenists have been taking advantage of that and acquiring for free a lot of lute books. I mean those of my lute productions that have not been sold out yet... http://www.orphee.com/bonus.htm To buy $45 worth of your guitar maculature in order to get a lute freebee You severely underestimate lutenists' intelligence. Not at all. Remember, I am the one with the sticky moneycounting fingers. I am counting it. Not as much as when I charged full price, but I am counting. Intelligence in lutenists is not a tribal quality. It's an individual thing, you know. Dr Pavlov should have told you that. Some lutenists are indeed intelligent, and some, like you, only pretend to be. The fact of the matter is that quite a good number of readers of this group had taken advantage of my offer already, and they surely know that the joke is on you. How are the tickets sales so far for this flame war, Howard? 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Leonardo Sciulzzo
Fri, 12 Aug 2005 15:28:06 -0700 Arthur Ness wrote: I really dislike seeing my words misrepresented on these pages, first by Thames/Haskins, and now Ophee. My sympathy to you. It is indeed difficult to see one's words misrepresented. It is even more difficult to see complete distortion and misrepresentations, not to mention deliberate falsification of historically relevant data being posted on a public forum by people who should have known better, and should have had some measure of shame before posting. A discussion of one of your recent capers in this direction is on the Spanish language forum Guitarra.artelinkado at: http://tinyurl.com/7fj54 Ah, you do not know Spanish all that well? Ask Roman to translate. He knows all the languages. Since my remarks are quite different from those of Ophee and Stenstadvold, they do not constitute plagiarism. Let's get to the misrepresentation issue first, since you are so upset about misrepresentations. Earlier today you said: I found the piece. It's Recollections of Ireland by Leonardo Schultz (Op.41). It's RiBs ms244c in that immense collection of guitar music at the Royal Library in Copenhagen To present this as your recent find, when you knew damn well that I published this piece in paper format in 1984, and when it ran out of print, I posted it on line in 1997, at which time you chose to criticize it on RMCG, in other words, you knew that it was there, is nothing short of a scandalous usurpation of my work. You found nothing. It was presented to you on a silver platter by myself, not only through my publication of the piece, but also through my publication of the RBS catalog. You may not like my edition, which is your right, and you may very well do one all by yourself from scratch, but you cannot ignore my work and pretend it did not exist. People are getting thrown out of graduate school on a lot less than that. Besides, Ophee's edition has so many mistakes, I couldn't refer to it to make my point about Beethoven influences. An interesting point but hardly earth shaking. Schulz was born in Vienna when Beethoven was still alive, so it does not take rocket science to assume a Beethoven influence, but it is a good question if the influence was on Schulz, or on the copyist J.G. Holm sometimes in the 1880s. You do not know that, and I do not know that and to make the assertion of a Beethoven influence on the basis of such an amateurish piece of copyist work, is to beg the question of your understanding of basic paleography. As for the mistakes in my edition: since the J.G. Holm abschrift from which I worked is now available for free download, anybody can compare the two and reach their own conclusions. I am not even prepared to argue with you which are the mistakes you referring to, since no one had ever seen the actual original copy by Schulz himself. Something neither Ophee or E.S. mention. Of course we did not, because both of us, as much as we disagreed with each other, knew damn well that Beethoven was not even in the picture and to bring him in here could only be a figment of a very fertile imagination. I'll stand on my F naturals, which both MO and ES turn to F sharps. My original printed edition did have the F naturals, and that was the point on which Erik criticized it. Eventually, in our discussions on RMCG, you were the one who told me (Remember, all of this is still on-line in the Google archives of RMCG) that Erik was right and I was wrong, and I should put the sharp back in. As I explain in my on-line article, I eventually made the change not because of what you and Erik said, but for my own reasons. I any case, the critical apparatus attached to the edition clearly spells out the available choices and each guitarist can make up his or her mind without being spoon-fed by you or by me. But now that I got your attention: can you please tell me where you got the spelling Leonardo Schultz from? I am listening. Intently. 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 http://www.livejournal.com/users/matanya/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Tabs, Staff and the rest of it. (for Stewart McCoy)
At 11:08 AM 12/11/2003 +, Stewart McCoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Matanya, Yes, I do seem to be contradicting myself, so perhaps I may elaborate a little. I think a lot depends on how much experience one has with any particular notation. For a complete beginner tablature No argument here, except to say that I doubt very if there are complete beginners who come to the lute without first having played another instrument. At the 1998 Colloque de Luth en Occident, Xavier Cahuepe presented a paper on his experience in teaching the lute to children who have not been introduced to other instruments, something like the Suzuki-tablature approach. Whatever the merits of the experiment, I am not aware of anyone else working in this area and even Xavier's work has not been mentioned by anyone in the literature that I know of. Do you have lute beginners who have never played a musical instrument before? will be easier to read, because it by-passes the concept of pitch and goes straight to the fingerboard. And this is the main point here: since the majority of lute beginners are people who are already well conversed with pitch notation, tablature may, or may not be easier to read. And the real obstacle is not so much the relative ease of either system, but the experienced notation reader to accept a new method of reading music. There are no sharps and flats to worry about. But there are new symbols to worry about, symbols which are not in the current vocabulary of the new lutenist. However, with time and lots of playing, those tablature letters acquire a meaning which embraces pitch as well as position on the fingerboard. An experienced player can sing from tablature or (if he is a pianist) play it straight onto the piano. The tuning would have to be a familiar one, otherwise he will be back to square one as a beginner, deducing a position on the fingerboard, but not pitch. My own experience is that the same thing happens in reverse with staff notation. For a beginner the notes of staff notation represent pitch only, and he has to learn where those notes are on his instrument. That would be true if your beginner was someone who is already familiar with pitch notation. But in the case of a guitar beginner who has not learned pitch notation on another instrument before, the notes represent location on the fingerboard, exactly as tablature ciphers do. The more common 19th century guitar tutors approached the fingerboard as if it was a piano, teaching the white notes first, then introducing accidentals according the circle of fifth. This approach was radically altered by Sor an Aguado who treated the fingerboard as one linear unit, not divided by positions. If you are interested in some of the issues involved here, you might wish to read this: http://www.orphee.com/pick/handout.htm Eventually the idea of pitch and position on the fingerboard become so intertwined, that staff notation becomes a sort of tablature. A notation designed to show pitch ends up being one which the player eventually associates with the lay-out of his fingerboard. Exactly my point. With all the exhortations by knowledgeable teachers, few guitarists can actually sight sing a musical score. Thus pitch notation, as complex as it might be, remains basically a pseudo-tablature, particularly when it is adorned with the clutter of thick fingering layer. The difference is that in pitch notation a good reader can recognize instantly the rhythmical values of all the voices in a polyphonic work, and instantly determine, based on the context, where to stop a particular note or chord. Whether this is done by reference to the visual appearance of the notation only, or by reference to the aural significance of the notes, is really not all that important. 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: Size of the lute world
At 06:28 AM 12/11/2003 -0800, C Etter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think you are wrong when you say that For the most part, not only they [classical guitarists] cannot read tablature. My experience as a classical guitarist is that nearly all of the other classical guitarist whom I have ever met, and from whom I learned something of their past musical lives, came to classical guitar from various pop styles, mostly rock. I would guess that the *vast majority* of classical guitarist today are totally comfortable reading standard guitar tab (in spite of its inferiority, i.e., lack of rhythmic notations) because for so many guitar players, that's what they learned first. I cannot possibly argue with your own personal experience. My experience, over the last 48 years and all over the world, is 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: Vance's hypocricy
At 09:02 PM 12/11/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vance, Manyna wrote this,to Roman. Somehow I suspect that you will be able to resist the urge=20 to attack me, once you get more of that second-hand whiff of wind... see = you later, boychik. Actually, what I mean to say is I suspect that you will _not_ be able to resist the urge... Thank you for allowing me to make the correction. Now here, is a MO sighting where he clearly insults gays, by = calling Roman a boychik and I'll translate that for you, it means = Faggot. It is? not in _my_ Yiddish dictionary it ain't. This is one of those instances where Yiddish soaks up the local vernacular. My grandmother, who's never been to Brooklyn, used to call me, when I was about yea big, in her best Minskian Yiddish, a schmendrechik. Boychik is a Brooklyn Yidishism which indicates a very young boy. Period. There is nothing about sexual orientation in the term. This is not some kind of dreamed up theory, like my case. MO = actually said it! Of course I did. My purpose in saying this carefully calculated put down was to indicate to Roman that he is still wet behind the ears, and there is much for him to learn before he gets to my place. It has nothing to do with his sexual orientation. As far as I know he is a married man with a wife and two kids. Now I would have thought that you would burn him at = the stake for that one Dudley, but it seems your hypocrisy knows no = bounds. So is _your_ ignorance of the Yiddish vernacular. 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: Tabs, Staff and the rest of it. (for Stewart McCoy)
At 07:43 PM 12/10/2003 +, Stewart McCoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matanya Ophee has argued that reading from tablature is like playing by rote. I wouldn't quite put it that way, because playing from staff notation can be much the same, if you are on auto-pilot. What I think he means (please correct me if I'm wrong, Matanya) is that it is easier to see and understand musical things like harmony and counterpoint when reading from staff notation. I would agree with that, but I would also say that it is often easier to see technical things like chord shapes and finger patterns when reading from tablature. Both systems have their strengths. As you may have gathered from my exchanges with Howard, I am not all that interested in arguing in favor of one system or the other, if the question is for accomplished players who are familiar with their preferred system of notation. My only interest in this issue is if the insistence on tablature is doing the lute any good by scaring away the non-lutenists. In a previous message, you argued that pitch notation requires two actions to cause the player to execute the movements required to produce the sound, i.e., recognition of the pitch and then translating that pitch to the topography of the fingerboard. Tablature, you said, removes one of these actions and goes directly to the fingerboard. If this is true, then it follows that the only time the lutenist gets to hear the pitch, is _after_ the action has been taken when it is too late to do anything about it. But this can not be entirely true, if, at the same time, you recognize that it is possible to hear the pitch directly from the ciphers. In other words, as far as pitch is concerned, both systems are pretty much the same. Where the difference is in the rhythm, and in the harmonic sense, in the ability to indicate dynamics, accents, timbre and other elements of musical interpretation that are not available in tablature. See for example this: http://www.orphee.com/SOLOS/rubeninc.gif Of course Thomas Schall is correct that some guitarists prefer full fingering and use them as pseudo-tablature. But this is a phenomenon that belongs in the early stages of education. Professional guitarists for the most part, can read the music without any fingering. And of course, even pitch notation is not a precisely scientific way of depicting the actual sound. There is quite a bit that is taken on faith by the player and much of the precise durations of the inner voices cannot be notated correctly. But as in the case of the First Etude by Villa-Lobos (see this discussion of it for details: http://www.orphee.com/yantee.htm) the published pitch notation is pretty much a perfect pseudo-tablature, even without the fingering. Experienced player would be able to negotiate all the chord changes on sight, and beginners will have to hunt and peck one note at a time. 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: Size of lute world
At 12:37 AM 12/10/2003 +0900, Ed Durbrow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From Stan Beuten's website http://www.lutebooks.com/: The Method for the Renaissance Lute sold more than 20,000 copies If most of those buyers were lutenists, then the size of the lute world is bigger than I thought. What the web site is not telling you is how many years it took to sell 20,000 copies, even if you take the number quoted at face value, and how many copies were sold, let's say, during the last 5 years. 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: Staff Notation/Tablature
At 04:25 AM 12/9/2003 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem with standard notation is its lack of specificity. You can standard notate a Cmaj triad and play it many different places on the neck. Now voice leading would give you some clues, but not always, especially if you have many strings like the lute That is not entirely correct. A single Cmaj triad would function as you say. But a Cmaj triad within the _context of a given passage_, may be required to be played in the first position, or in the ninth or even higher. Good sight readers would immediately be able to determine, on sight, exactly where, and with what fingers to press the strings and produce the triad. Even without any fingering indications. The benefit of standard notation is its specificity, At the top of this post your stated that The problem with standard notation is its lack of specificity. So which is it? 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: Staff Notation/Tablature
At 06:02 PM 12/9/2003 +, Monica Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Even Campion could hardly have written all his guitar music using seven different scordature in staff notation. We do not know that. If the music was written in tablature, it could very well have been written in pitch notation as well. The point to consider is that in his own reference to the Novelles Decouverts, Campion said this: Yet, I have conformed to the use of tablature, in a book of guitar pieces that I published, where there are 8 different manners of tuning: in this case the tablature is useful; but those who wish to use it, must first well know their fingerboard by music (Traité d'accompagnement et de composition selon la regle des octaves de musique, Oeuvre second, Paris, 1716). The question, then as now, is not and either/or proposition. Whatever the reason one uses tablature, without a thorough theoretical understanding of the music, you learn to play by rote. 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: Size of the lute world
At 12:32 PM 12/9/2003 -0800, Howard Posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matanya Ophee at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: May be you are right. May be I should have been more specific and say that these comments were an indication of a general feelings [sic] of malaise regarding tablature in France at the specific time frame of 1697 to 1716. And thank you for the [sic]. Fixed it. Even so, I think you'd be making too much of them. It normally takes at least six comments to establish an official general feeling of malaise, but of course it requires a bit more among the French, who are looser with their opinions. I think you got something there, but I am not sure you want to pursue this argument to its inevitable conclusion. The main problem we all have in historical research, is that there are not too many extant sources for any particular issue, and more often than not, conclusions are arrived at by extrapolation of the available data. What was the term for that concept? Postmodern Phenomenological Deconstructivism or something like that. Give you an example. There are a few documentary sources which established that in a double octave course on the baroque guitar, the high octave string was on the side of the thumb. There are no sources which indicate that this course was ever played by itself, without the associated bourdon. That has not stopped an entire movement of baroque guitarists to assume that it was in fact meant to be so played. Are they making too much of it? and then, too much of what? And then take the issue of iconographic evidence in which no one is able to state if the picture was made by the artist in reference to a real live musician, or in reference to a staged model who had no idea about lute technique, or in reference to another picture in which the matter of placing the hands, fingers, course, frets etc, was determined by the artist in what can be best described as artistic licence. There has been a tremendous amount of traffic in this list about such issues, often based on one or two pictures. Are we making too much of it? here is one picture you may not have seen before: http://www.orphee.com/lute/lute-player.jpg I cna just imagine the sort of conclusions that can be made of it. So, with the addition of the Milleran quote furnished by Fred, we now have three commentaries by French musicians about the dangers of tablature to the general musicianship of the player. It could be said, and I would not be able to argue against it, that each of these musicians, Milleran, Perrine and Campion were not talking as witnesses of their time, but only expressing their own personal bias. If we accept this point of view, we then must accept that every single musician of the time was acting as an individual with an axe to grind and not as an impartial observer of society. Accepting such a view would require us to discard about 90% of what we have come to regard as the basic tenets of HIP performance. One analogy would be the periodic copyright/upload/download flareups we have around here. An observer might extrapolate from the heat and number of the posts that it's a huge hot-button issue, but in fact perhaps 95% of the lute listers expressed no opinion at all, and may have no strong opinion on the subject. Excellent analogy. Which, if carried to its logical conclusion, would tell us that we have no way of knowing what was the opinion, performance practice, musical output of all those musicians who never posted anything on the bandwidth of the Renaissance and baroque period. Bach and Weiss are the greatest? of course they are, because they have been some of the more prolific posters of their time. But what do we know about the lute works of lesser figures such as Graupner, Buxtehude, Froberger, etc? and by etc. I mean all those composers whose existence in the time frame is not even known. Some of them manage to sneak through and come up to the surface once in a while, many, and we have no idea how many exactly, never do. They never wrote anything for the lute? perhaps. But we shall never know for sure, What we do know for sure is that no such works by them is known to exist. IOW, they could have been lurkers. I have no statistical data worth knowing. But I can hardly miss things like the increase in lute players making a living performing, mostly as continuo players; the way that theorbos, archlutes and guitars are taken for granted in baroque ensembles and recordings, the publicity push Harmonia Mundi USA has thrown behind Paul O'Dette, or the presence of O'Dette and Stubbs as directors of the Boston Early Music Festival. The increase you notice is not in the number of players, but in the number of early music ensemble. Back in the old days there was the Noah Greenberg group, and not much else. As for the performing and recording lutenists, I would wager that between Michel Podolsky, Eugen Dombois, Suzanne Bloch, Stanley Buetens, Konrad
Re: Size of the lute world
At 04:25 PM 12/9/2003 -0800, Howard Posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Accepting such a view would require us to discard about 90% of what we have come to regard as the basic tenets of HIP performance. No, because a consensus, or a majority, or an institution, or a societal norm, or accepted performance practice, is the sum total of a lot of individual biases and axes to grind. Of course. But we must understand that we draw this consensus today, based on the sources that are available to us today. Since we have no way of knowing anything about the Renaissance and Baroque lurkers, we can never be sure that the consensus we think exists in the available sources, also existed in the exchanges the living lutenists made among themselves. Some of these exchanges survived, most did not. So take Perrine. If you have one late 17th-century French commentator who dislikes tablature, you have one piece of evidence about how tablature was viewed in late 17th-century France. What other evidence is there? If there are volumes of late 17th-century or early 18th-century French solo lute music written in staff notation instead of tablature, they would be evidence that Perrine was observing a trend, or starting one. But the absence of volumes of late 17th-century or early 18th-century French solo lute music written in staff notation instead of tablature is evidence that he was just a guy who didn't like tablature. I agree. But the fact remains that within 19 years after the appearance of the Perrine book, Campion stated that the lute was done for. That is a fairly powerful statement and we really have only one way to verify it. How many lute books in tablature were printed for general consumption between 1697 and 1716? And I would suggest that manuscripts that can be dated to that time period are not a reliable measure of the popularity of the instrument. A manuscript would indicate a single owner, or a succession of a single owners over time. A printed book indicates an existing market. The increase you notice is not in the number of players, but in the number of early music ensemble. Unless one lute player is playing all the gigs with all of the ensembles, there has to be an increase in lute players to go with the increase in the number of ensembles. yea, but do they make a living doing this? As for the performing and recording lutenists, I would wager that between Michel Podolsky, Eugen Dombois, Suzanne Bloch, Stanley Buetens, Konrad Raggosnig, Walter Gerwig, Julian Bream and Narciso Yepes, to mention the better known lutenists of the previous generations, there were just as many professional lute performers then as there are today. I couldn't sleep at night if I took your money on a sucker bet like that. Were I a gambling man (I'm not), I might take bets on whether there are more professional lutenists in London now than there were in the entire world forty years ago. Probably true, if your definition of a professional lutenist in London today depends on counting on anyone who owns a lute and produced a vanity CD. I would suggest that the way to measure this, is to walk into Border's or Tower Records, and see how many lute CDs are available in the bins. Since we cannot walk into similar stores in 1956 or so, we have to go by existing discographies. In 1990, I published a discography of guitar records. It includes a section of lute recordings, mostly LPs that were produced before 1990. The picture it gives is illuminating. 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: Size of the lute world
At 01:24 PM 12/10/2003 +0900, Ed Durbrow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: here is one picture you may not have seen before: http://www.orphee.com/lute/lute-player.jpg I cna just imagine the sort of conclusions that can be made of it. I love it! Left handed no less. The picture is not reversed because the music is the right way. Also the script of the names of the engraver. This is supposed to ve after some painting. Any one knows the original? I can just imagine the artist telling the model how to place his fingers. I would think the model is a she. The real value of this painting is of course the music, if anyone can identify it. Now let's assume, for the sake of argument, that this is the only drawing in existence showing a lute player playing. It would be a smashing proof that lute player never played from tablature, but from pitch notation :-) It may take me a while to incorporate this new hand position. :-) Only advisable if you have good health insurance. BTW, the fact that it is left handed would suggest that the model is the artist herself, looking in a mirror. 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: TIme used well, was: State of Lutenet
At 11:39 PM 12/7/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's a very appropriate reference to a guy who lost half his family in Auschwitz. Thanks Michael Thames. Your true colors are coming out in brighter colors all the time Matanya Orphee... I thought that was a French name. Orphee is not my name. That's the name of my publishing business. But I would not expect you to be able to tell the difference. The Nazi was referring to you hating anyone who disagrees with you. That's an even more inauspicious spin doctoring. First of all, what you know about my dealings in rmcg, is second hand. As you stated yourself, you were told about it by someone else. Howard Posner posted here a couple of days ago some account of what goes on in that NG, on a particular day. Much of what he said does in fact occurs there, but not on 12/6/03. Be that as it may, I do not recall any instance of outright antisemitism there, seeing that the great majority of posters in the NG are Jewish. As for homophobia, yes that does occur once in a while, from one particular source. But you are asserting here is that besides my expression of disagreement, I also _hate_ my opponents. You have no reason to say that. I may feel sorry for them for not seeing the truth the way I do, I may be annoyed by some of the language directed at me, but hate is not part of my emotional make up. You know this whole thing reminds me of when I was the new kid at school and I would get in a fight with all my future best friends. Lets call it quits, and the next time I'm at a GFA or some similar event, we can go have a couple of beers and put this all behind us. I'm serious! After all the epithets that you have directed at me in this medium, I do not believe I would find talking to you in person, on any subject, a pleasant or even interesting pastime. It would take more than a couple of beers to wipe that bad taste out of my mouth. More like a couple-three bottles of vodka, and unfortunately, I do not drink. Period. Not any more. Doctor's orders. 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: Size of the lute world
what. So then you got a lute and learned to read tablature. (I'm guessing two thirds were Bream converts) and found that learning French tab was vastly easier than learning to drive a car or use a computer. Certainly it's easier than learning an instrument or earning the money to buy it and string it. No argument here. I learned to read tablature even without owning a lute, and I have done so already in the late 1950s. As I mentioned before, it was Diana Poulton who got me in touch with a lute maker named Hans Jordan and I ordered one from him. Never got it and life took another turn. But the issue here is not how easy it has been for you and me. The issue here is that this is not going to happen to others unless they get hooked, like you and me, by the music itself. 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: State of Lutenet (was Size of the lute world)
At 03:33 PM 12/7/2003 -0500, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The truce more or less lasted until Doug Smith's campaign against Sautscheck. Thank you for confirming the reason and the rationale for your anti-MO abusive demagoguery. 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: State of Lutenet (was Size of the lute world)
At 03:33 PM 12/7/2003 -0500, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Then MO proceeded to insult Sephardim, and I took an exception to that Interesting perception. Me insulting Sephardim. My brother in law is a Sephardi, my son in law is a Sephardi and my four grand children are Sephardi. So what it was I said about Sephardim that was insulting? do refresh my memory. 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: Size of the lute world
At 02:45 PM 12/7/2003 -0500, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Look,--- if some things like this do not get commercialized to some degree no one would be able to get strings because no one would make them for free, and music would only be available to those near enough to a library that had manuscripts available for us to look at and copy out of. That is not untrue, but Lute is not yet like Piano that takes care of itself economically. The lute has never been like any of the other instrument. It was always on the outside looking in, and as the Sieur Perrine noted in 1697, it will always continue to be there, as long as lutenists insist on a notational system that is not shared by other musicians. There is no reason to believe that the lute in our time will be more successful in reaching the status of the piano, or even that of the guitar, different than it was at any other time in history. It is a quasi-religious thing and it relies on proselytism to perpetuate itself. This is a statement I can easily agree with. The problem is that this proselytizing can never achieve any results when the emphasis is not on the music but on the instrument and its notational peculiarities. Most of the people in this group and in other lute groups have come on to the instrument through the music, not the other way around. Hence the best possible avenue for proselytizing is making the _music_ available to people who can read it and play. Eventually, people become curious and seek out the instrument itself. It happened before. No one becomes a lutenist by having free access to on line facsimiles of lute tablature. The equipment producers must be paid to keep them in existence, but at least some socialist distribution is essential to foment interest and awareness. That is a political point of view which is simply unrealistic. It lies in the basic contradiction between hardware and software. The only reason socialist distribution is applied here to the music, is because it can be done with impunity. Only a few days ago we were told by one enthusiast that the only reason he does not copy Michel Cardin's CDs is because he does not know how to do it. IOW, he has no compunction about producing illegal copies of 9 CDs thus depriving the performer of royalty income to which he is entitled. No one talks about a socialist distribution of instruments and hardware accessories. RT's Add-a-Lutenist pitch is not socialist distribution. It is charity. And as for socialism in general: do tell me how many lutenists there are in Cuba, Vietnam or North Korea? Keeping the equipment producers in existence, and at the same time preaching for socialist distribution, is thus a self cancelling paradigm. You can't have it both ways. 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: State of Lutenet (was Size of the lute world)
At 05:28 PM 12/7/2003 -0500, you wrote: Matanya, Please address this issue privately with RT. I am sorry, but the issue of publishers being ripped off by socialist do gooders is not a personal matter. It is a public issue, and as a publisher yourself it should concern you too. If you do not feel concerned, that's your choice to make. Besides, I resent the insinuation that the I have to do anything with this flame war. It was started by Michael Thames addressing me as Montana and by Romany Turovsky referring to me as a mixture of yeast and fecal matter. If the flame bothers you so much, please address the initial culprits. 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.
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: 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: 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: 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 publishermain distributorsubsidiary distributorsdealers. 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
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
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 publishermain distributorsubsidiary distributorsdealers. 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
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
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
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 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: Facsimeles etc.
At 09:18 AM 12/3/2003 -0500, Doctor Oakroot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That is a book, and it was made from scratch by one person who invested a great deal of time and money in creating it. What a load of crap! Making a book is a manufacturing operation and, per se, does not involve any creativity. So is making a lute. Incidentally, if Michael does not seem to understand the degree of mendacity involved in his stance on this issue, perhaps he ought to look at his own web page where he sells, for good money, plans of historical instruments. He went to museums, obtained official permission from curators, spent many hours in drawing these plans, and perhaps not a small amount of money in travel and lodging expenses. He charges $40.- per plan which is not a large amount of money, but certainly not one a poor lute maker in the Ukraine or Zimbabwe can afford. So what will be Michael's reaction if someone bought the plans from him and proceeded to post them on the WEB for free download by indigenous lute makers? Surely Michael Thames cannot possibly claim copyright or patent protection of the design of a Venere lute? 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.
At 12:32 AM 12/3/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: where did I publicly declare that I intend to rip him off Those are you words. They are indeed. Considering your proposal, a rip-off operation is actually a mild and forgiving expletive. At no time did I say I would post the facsimiles regardless of Albert's wishes, and quite frankly I won't, based not so much on legality, but to respect his wishes. You still do not seem to understand that Albert's wishes in this point are entirely besides the point. Many of us, scholars, publishers, performers, teachers, who have had occasion in the past to request permission from libraries, always had to accept a condition imposed by the library that the material will be used specifically for the purpose for which it was obtained, and under no circumstances one could make copies for other people, without the library's permission and agreement. This is not a legal condition, but a practical one. Those who defy the library's wishes, shoot themselves in the foot as they will surely black listed for any future material. Besides, each time this happens, the fee for bona fide researchers goes up. years ago I used to get copies from the British Library for a couple of shillings a page. Now the fee is 25 GBP per page. Albert cannot possibly give you permission to do what you want to do, since this would be a violation of his agreement with the library. Neither can Frank Koonce give you permission to copy _his_ facsimile of the same manuscript. The only person who can give you such permission is the librarian. What's so difficult about writing a letter and asking for it? In the end I don't want to piss off anymore human beings,than I have to, except you! I asked some alarming questions again out of my naivety which you seem to enjoy pointing out. Your questions were not alarming. They were plain stupid because they implied scavenging the work of someone else. Let me give you a taste of what this sounds like: Would you mind if I bought from you a set of plans for the Venere lute and posted it on my web site for free download by indigenous poor lute makers world wide? Also, concerning young guitars students, I have noticed that hardly any of them play baroque or ren music these, it's mostly modern. Thank you for stating the obvious. I have been in this business for 48 years by now and I am acutely aware of this. But this is not the forum to discuss this issue. I suggest you log on to rec.music.classical.guitar and check out their archives (on Google Groups) for the last ten years, and see how many times I, and many others, have discussed this issue. 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
Arrangements (Was facsimiles)
At 10:43 AM 12/3/2003 -0500, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, but you are believed to be a publisher of commercial ARRANGEMENTS. I do not wish to open a second can of worms, but earlier I have expressed an opinion that an arrangement, although it is not a facsimile, should carry only a minimal price tag, because it is basically someone else's music, usually from public domain. Tying the price of an edition to its PD status or lack of it is not a realistic expectation. The only difference between publishing an original work or an arrangement (transcription etc), is the fact that the publisher must pay the composer a royalty on paper sales. The normal level of such royalties in the US, is about 10% of money taken in. So if I sell an original work for $10.-, my average net receipt is about $3.- and the composer's share in this is 30 cents. If I sell a PD edition of the same size and list price, my costs of production are exactly the same, the receipt is the same, and I still must pay the same level of royalty to the _editor_ who did the work for me. Some of these editors are members of this group. Sometimes, not very often, the editor is me. I enjoy those 30 cents I receive for my work. 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.
At 10:53 AM 12/3/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I Agree, Monkey, they cost me $20.00 to Xerox, buy a tube and ship worldwide, not mention the cost of travel, expertise involved, in drawing them up. But the shocking part Mr. Monkey is there's NO COPYRIGHT written anywhere on those plans. You buy one set, and that's all you pay, I don;to charge people 10% every they make a lute. So that means you are free to make copies and give them to your friends. So you see I am being true to my ideals, And if you would like a set I will send them to you free of charge. That's very noble of you. Let me suggest that if indeed you are true to your ideals, you post them for free on _your_ web site. You don't know how to fit them on standard printer paper? I'll be happy to help you there. And for the record, there kind of like baseball cards I trade them for other lute plans, I've never sold a set to anyone, as a matter of fact I've given both the Boston Museum of Fine arts and Yale copies to sell as a donation to their foundations. I've also given them to 4 or 5 other lutemakers, so as not to hold a monopoly on them, like you. I call on you to do the same! you hypocrite! Sorry, I have no idea what baseball cards are. Outside my frame of reference. In 38 years in this US of A, I still do not understand what's happening on a baseball field and what's involved around that game. And what monopoly do I hold that you are referring to? 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.
At 01:00 PM 12/3/2003 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a good friend who runs a major library nearby and hear these same concerns all of the time. My concern is where the need to make lute music available and this funding crisis intersect. Some of the prices I've been quoted to obtain a license from these libraries is really outrageous. To the point that I don't see how any publisher can make money or break even paying these fees. So, this licensing practice discourages lute music from being published, especially obscure sources. Thank you for understanding the issue. This is a vicious circle. Lutenists balk at having to pay for books, preferring free photocopies ripped off publishers editions. Libraries are thus deprived of money they consider is due to them, so they raise the fee for making their material available, to the point that publishers no longer can afford it, thus cease publishing. No more lute music. All this is fine when the entire repertoire is known and exists in some form that can be exchanged for free. But should new material come to light, there is no chance it will enter into general circulation any time soon. Viz. the availability to the Francesco Castelfranco new discoveries. And this is only one of the more recent discoveries that will be a long time in hiding from the lute community. Hernan Mouro just gave us a perfect picture how this cycle killed the entire Argentine publishing industry. It will happen here too. Just give it time and enough phoney altruists. 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.
At 05:12 PM 12/3/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: never owned a set of facsimiles of the Bach-Weyrauch myself. All I have are those included in the Koonce edition. OK then those will do just fine. You don't need me for that. You can buy this book from all the usual sources. In case of difficulty, you can buy it directly from the publisher at: http://www.kjos.com/ 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.
At 07:53 PM 12/3/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 05:12 PM 12/3/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: never owned a set of facsimiles of the Bach-Weyrauch myself. All I have are those included in the Koonce edition. OK then those will do just fine. You don't need me for that. You can buy this book from all the usual sources. In case of difficulty, you can buy it directly from the publisher I thought we were exchanging free downloads, yours for mine. YOU HYPOCRITE!!! Better watch it fellow, your scatological delusions are getting ahead of you. You cannot possibly expect me to commit what I consider a crime, by photocopying a page from a book published by a friend of mine, who happens to be a member of this here list, and send it to you in exchange for a download that does not exist yet on your web site and for which I have absolutely no need whatsoever. I am not a lute maker, and I am not even a guitar maker. I am a guitar collector. I buy my guitars from people like you. Just got a new one a couple of weeks ago from a young man in Quebec for whom I predict a great future. Name is Jean Rompré. Care to hear what it sounds like? go to my web site and look in GALI for Articles with Music. So I guess if you want a copy of the the Bach-Weybrauch manuscript, and you care to tangle with a large American corporation, you'll just have to pay up front $24.95. You can afford it. 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.
At 06:32 PM 12/2/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My interest in old things also applies to Facsimiles of lute music. My only crime has been my naivety in wanting to share this wonderful experience with others, some of whom, it may not have occurred to them to even look for such a thing. That's nonsense. Of course there are people who may not have occurred to them top look for such a thing. And then there are so many others who have already. Albert Reyerman is not the first, and certainly not the last person to publish this manuscript. Old hat. Young guitarists, who Albert, are the future lute players you will be selling your editions to someday. Your naivete is far more extensive than that. There are at least 40-50 editions of guitar transcriptions of the Bach Lute suites on the market today, many of which, like the well known edition by Frank Koonce, include a facsimile of the Bach-Weyrauch manuscript, as well as many other relevant facsimiles. IOW, you are not going to be doing young guitarists any favor of which they or their teachers do not have more than enough already. I assure you, young guitarists have no need for your bumbling incursions into a field you know nothing about. Quite frankly, I'm not threaded by your lawyers. And it seems by most accounts, you wouldn't have a legal leg to stand on if I decided to post Bach's facsimiles. That's paranoia speaking now. Albert did not threaten you with his lawyers. He simple provided you the address of the German lawyers who give _him_ the copyright advise he needs to run his business. Relax. There is no chance that a German lawyer will sue you in the US. Not enough money in it... 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.
At 09:56 PM 12/2/2003 -0600, Michael Thames [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Relax Montana, That can work both ways, distorting people's names intentionally. But I will resist the urge to engage in this juvenile silliness. I see you have quite alot of baggage with this issue, to go after me with your well known guile, and considering remarks. You truly take the prize for vileness, your reputation precedes you. Glad you noticed. Again, glad to be the scapegoat for you Publishing kind of guys, but as you say this is getting old, isn't it. If I were your mother I'd take you over my knee and give a good whacking! But since this is your only source of income I'll forgive you! That's bullshit number one. Publishing is not my source of income at all. It is only the source of my _losses_ over the years. If had to live the way I do from music publishing, this business would have gone down the drain decades ago. Do check my biography more carefully. Lets put all exchanges of pleasantries aside, Please tell me the crime I'm guilty of, what have I done other than ask a few uncomfortable questions. I've already admitted I'm stupid, and you've pointed that out again just in case everyone forgot. Is WANTING to post a facsimile a crime? No it isn't a crime. And legalities have nothing to do with what Albert is talking about. Fairness is the issue. He invested a great deal of time and money in creating this book, and you publicly declare that you intend to rip him off. That was not a crime, but a stupid thing to do. Take example from your like-minded perps. There are quite a few of them around. Say nothing and do what you have to do. If what you did stinks, you'll have to live with it. As I stated, I asked Albert's permission. Wrong person to ask. He does not own the manuscript. He paid money for the permission to publish it, and this is exactly what you should do: apply to the library and ask for permission, and pay the fee. Then you do whatever you want to do. Albert even gave you the address and the name of the person to write to. So instead of sniffling about legalities, do what all of us are doing: get it DIRECTLY from the source. But come to think of it, as of yet I haven't heard his answer. Just between you and me Montana what do you think He'll say? He already said it. Loud and clear. Montana, if there are 50 or so editions of the Bach lute suites why are you uncomfortable with one more? I am not uncomfortable at all. Even Albert clearly stated that he has nothing against your doing another edition. The only time I am uncomfortable with this, is when someone asks me to publish _his_ edition of the Lute Suites. I have rejected more than one such project in the past. You want to do a new edition of the lute suites? be my guest. It is your time and money. But let's do it on a plain level field. Just like everybody else. And please, don't be so pretentious as to know with whom I'm well connected with in the guitar world. Huh? I know nothing about you and I have no idea who you are connected with. Never heard your name before this thread. You make guitars? lutes? I don't recall ever hearing about your instruments from any one, and I do get around. And above all , you can have Bach, but keep your greedy hands off of Weiss. Too late. I published the Moscow Weiss manuscript years before I even heard your name. As for Bach, you can check my on-line catalogue for my Bach transcriptions. You will not find the lute suites there. Look here fellow: the issue is not me, and the issue is not Albert Reyerman. the issue is that the lute world is way too small. No instrumental discipline ever survived without publishers, and it does not matter if the publisher is a private person who is doing this for the love of the lute, or the lute society or large commercial publishers who can support the losing proposition of publishing lute music by publishing a lot of other commercial fodder. You want to join the crowd and become a publisher yourself? That's commendable and I will be happy to assist you in any way I can, and so would Albert. But one thing you must understand: anytime you benefit by scavenging the work of others, the stench goes sky high. And don't give me this bullshit about posting this music on your web site as an altruistic service to the young. Your purpose is to attract surfers to your web site, where they can also view the instruments you have for sale. All you want is another advertising tool. Nothing wrong with that and we all do it. But please do it on your own nickel, not Albert's. 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
The Koenigsberg Manuscript
For some reason, I am not getting mail from the list anymore, not even my own postings. This was posted on the http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg01137.html By Stewart McCoy. Dear Matanya, I would very much like to know more about the other lute manuscript. So would I. According to Silinskas, that manuscript was deposited in the KGB Archives because, so he said, someone there decided that it was some kind of a CIA/Western/Bourgeois/decadent secret code. He knew about its existence, but never saw it himself. Even today, people shy away from any contact with that organization and its descendants. It is too much for us in the West to figure out what had happened to the Lithuanian KGB archives. Most probably, they are still buried deep someplace, to cover up for all those who used to work for the organization and are still around. Until manuscripts are copied in some form, be it Graham hand-copying Straloch, Chilesotti transcribing and publishing his Da un Codice in staff notation, microfilms of Hirsch, or photographs of Welde, the existence of that precious, irreplaceable music is utterly precarious. Of course originals are important in their own right, but Minkoff, SPES, Boethius, and yourself with Editions Orphée, have all provided a safety net. If the original is destroyed, at least we still have the music safely tucked away in our facsimiles and transcriptions. This is exactly the point I made in the Lvov manuscript thread only last week. It is desperately sad that you and Arthur, who worked together to produce the Koenigsberg facsimile (and have thus guaranteed the preservation of its contents) have fallen out. Not only sad, but actually highly detrimental to all concerned. The two major victims of this falling out, the second edition of the Francesco, and the Marco book, are still not printed and made available to all, almost _ten_ years after Arthur walked away from the MoLA series. If you are interested in the details of this affair, they are spelled out here: http://www.orphee.com/RMCG/odette.html I very much appreciate what you have both done over the years, together and separately, to help the rest of us in our tiny world of lutes. There is a time to work together, and a time to go separate ways. Whatever your differences now, I hope you will both regard that particular project as a success. I am sure we both do. Arthur already said that it was his best work, and I'll take his word for it. It was also one the best things I ever did. The only reason I was able to understand that the mysterious Vilnius Academic Library mentioned by Silinskas in his letter to Diana Poulton, was actually the Biblioteka Akademia Nauk, was because I am fairly well acquainted with the Russian language. Silinskas himself, always insisted on keeping this information to himself, refusing to divulge it to anyone. Not to Diana, not to me and definitely not to Daniel Benko, the person who told Paul O'Dette about this. He did not hide the notion that he considered this manuscript his own private property, and that he was entitled to reap whatever he could from his discovery. He wanted his name on it, and that is what we did when we published the book. As for his qualifications as an editor and lute scholar, you only have to look at the few transcriptions from the book he published with Editio Musica in Budapest to understand why I rejected him as an editor. This silly campaign to deny me this little bit of credit of finding the actual location where Silisnkas found it, and arranging for the rights to publish this book, is, to put it mildly, beyond the pale. For the life of me, I cannot understand what is the purpose of this. Original manuscripts - our sources of lute music - are a finite resource. Sooner or later everything which happens to have survived over the centuries will have been discovered. It is possible that we have already found all we can in Western Europe, but I suspect there are still sources of lute music yet to be discovered in Eastern Europe. It would be tragic, if, having survived for three or four hundred years, they should now vanish for good. The Etwall Hall Lute Book was mentioned in the 19th century, but no-one knows where it is now. Will that be the same fate for the other manuscript you mentioned in connection with Koenigsberg? Hard to tell. One day the political situation may change. All the ex-KGB agents still in important positions in the Lithuanian government would have died off, and the archives would open up. I don't expect this to happen in _my_ life time, and probably not even in yours. 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: Koenigsberg Manuscript
At 01:00 PM 10/29/2003 +, Tim Crawford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MOpheeCareful. The concordances were _mainly_ compiled by Tim Crawford, not by you. TOTAL NONSENSE, Matanya. Please check your facts before making a stupid assertion of this kind. My contribution was almost totally negligible, as Arthur states. My facts are the correspondence I received from Arthur Ness at the time. He obviously misrepresented the facts to me, as he had done continuously since then on many different other issues, including this scandalous assertion that I claimed to have discovered the manuscript.
Re: MO's attacks
At 10:30 AM 10/14/2003 +0200, arielabramovich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Once I've stop taking part, You did? what are you still doing in this thread? added MO's address to = my blocked list, he keeps insulting me, even in messages posted out of = the debate. Which should tell you how stupid it is to put anybody's name into a kill file. 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: David Harris, lutenist in the 1960s
At 02:27 PM 10/14/2003 -0500, Hoban, Dick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am trying to locate David Harris, one of the founders of the Lute Society of America, on behalf of a member. Does any one know where he is now? Hopefully, in a better place. He died in 1998 in Charleston SC. 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: MO's attacks
At 12:50 PM 10/13/2003 -0400, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you, Eugene!!! This should make any further debate on this pointless. I surely would join in this congratulation! but perhaps not on the same parts of Eugene's post Roman is congratulating him for. This is the part I like: To wantonly copy from facsimiles only increases a publisher's risk in printing facsimiles, making publishers less likely to do so in the future...and I personally don't want to have to pay extremely expensive fees to a holding library to access such stuff when publishers stop taking that risk. Well said. According to Roman's world view it is morally acceptable to copy anything that is in the public domain, even if that material has been brought before the public through the efforts and investment of somebody else. It is easy to find rationales for exploiting the work of others, but the short-sighted instant gratification urge to do so, completely ignores that doing so, is to damage the entire system of access to sources we have lived with for decades, and replacing it with nothing of equal value of or utility. A data base of lute material? administered by whom? collected by whom? maintained by whom, and at what cost? how big a coin would you have to pay the editor of this material, and who would pay for it? And what would you use for sources? The Complete Works of Dowland as published by Diana Poulton, or so one's else work doing the same research from scratch? Wishful thinking of the kind Ariel is engaging in is easy to come by when you are an impressionable pipsqueek who is overwhelmed by his present unfavorable economic situation. But deliberate fraud of the kind Roman is promoting is something else altogether. In that campaign the end Justifies the means, including of slanderous innuendos about my private dealings with Russian composers, which are none of Roman's business and definitely OT for this list, anything goes. Problem is that the End Roman is seeking, the complete destruction of the print music industry, and definitely the destruction of those publishers who have the gall to ask for money in exchange for lute books, is not going to hurt Roman's prospects at his day job. He will continue to support his family, as he should, no matter what happens to the lute. Consider this next time you kiss his poetic civil ass. One more thing: the entire thesis would have been plausible from _Roman_'s point of view, if all the known lute books that ever existed and are known to exist today, would have been published in facsimiles that he can rip off. Unfortunately for him and for his misguided predatory philosophy, that is far from being the case. We should be grateful to him and his ilk for the fact that the Franko University Library in Lviv, the Ukraine, refuses to allow anyone to have copies of the Lviv Manuscript or even to acknowledge its existence. Do prove me wrong, if you 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
Re: Enlightenment Sought
At 04:23 PM 10/12/2003 -0500, BobClair or EkkoJennings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: despite 30 years of experience with computers and 50 years experience speaking English, I find myself unable to parse the following phrase: Polyhymnion is a stupid pretension to a simple Internet function Why don't you take a look at the page in question: http://polyhymnion.org/superdirectory.html As far as I can tell, it is, at best, a list of links to pages by people who are approved by Roman Turovsky as having an acceptable level of intelligence, culture, philosophical this or that, or qualify to his world view of himself as an elitist super hero of culture. In short, a list of Roman Turovsky's own list of sycophants. There is nothing particularly unusual for a list like that, and there are virtually thousands like it on the Internet. What I find obnoxious, and a discharge of hot air, is the pretension, enunciated by RT several times in this group and elsewhere, that being listed on that page somehow relegates the listee to a special status of excellence. I would posit that whatever excellence any one of those listed has is entirely independent of the fact that they are listed by Roman Turovsky. a simple Internet function remains a mystery, Nothing as complicated as your extensive parsing would show. I have only 19 years of experience with computers, mainly as a user, and only 48 years experience with the English language, my third language. If my statement was not clear, I hope the above commentary would satisfy your curiosity. 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: MO's attacks
At 12:21 PM 10/11/2003 -0400, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem is that MO professes a set of ethics that is entirely inconsistent with his own conduct, i. e. he is a common hypocrite. Roman insists on repeating this accusation, without any particulars of what this conduct may be. Some vague statements about somebody in Moscow who does not like me, which does not surprise me a bit, and some obscure references to my less than immaculate treatment of provincial composers, whatever the hell that means. Of course I have given some Russian composers the boot, after looking at their crap. Of course I keep on receiving, in spite of that, reams and reams of manuscripts by Russian composers who wish to be included in my Russian Collection, and of course I keep on rejecting most of it. And there are guitarists who think that just because I financed, out of my own private pocket, Alexei Zimakov's trip to the US in 1991, together with his teacher Nikolai Komolyatov, I would be doing that again and again because every guitarist and lutenist in Russia knows they have a rich uncle in the US and his name is Matanya Ophee. Roman is very careful to avoid specifics. For two reasons: he does not know anything about my actual dealings with composers, and should he make one specific claim here that he could not substantiate, he knows I could take him to the cleaners. Some explanation of this Sharomyzhnik expletive Roman used in my regard. It refers to a beggar who comes and asks for food. I accept this charge with pride and honor. It was through my begging and pleading that I was able to discover the whereabouts of the Koenigsberg manuscript, a place that was kept secret from John Ward and Diana Poulton by the fellow who found it. It was through my importuning and pestering of several Russian guitarists that I was able to unearth the Ten Etudes of Giulio Regondi, a work that has now been recorded in its entirety by 4 guitarists, and is in the repertoire of many more. And my dealings with Russian museums to secure the rights for the Swan Manuscript and the Moscow Weiss, were not exactly an exercise in genteel diplomacy. Should I get an inkling of who might have some other materials I am looking for, rest assure that I will do whatever it takes, including groveling in the dust at the feet of whoever has it, to obtain the music. I have defended the man in private FOR YEARS, Why, thank you. First I hear of this. And what exactly were you defending me against? until I met him in cyberspace and realized what he really is, a soulless type, for whom poetry equals scabrous, and his petty self-interest is the overriding factor in any issue considered, culture included. Same condescending piece of elitist crap we have heard from you before. You are the Cultured One, the Artist, the Poet, and all the rest of us are not in your hallowed circle. The truth of the matter is that when you met me in cyber space, you met me in an altercation regarding your Sautscheck fraud. Of course this was to you a soulless affront, mainly because I was willing to put into words what many of your soi-disant friends were afraid to pronounce. Since then, you came out as a true vindictive stalker, attacking me for everything and anything you can find. When my only real crime was that I refused to kiss your culture poetic ass. As for my petty self-interest: can you please explain why Ariel's petty-self interests, so eloquently argued here, is acceptable to you, and my petty-self interests are not? Why should I be reluctant to protect that in which I invested more money than you can imagine and many years of hard labor? what's wrong with arguing for maintaining the _potential_ of this publishing venture against the onslaught of thieves? yes, I know. In your pervert morality, asking money for a book is wrong. Asking money for playing a live concert or for an instrument is not. And why asking money for a painting is OK? why don't you share the fruits of your work for free? Who is the hypocrite then? 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: MO's attacks
At 11:31 AM 10/11/2003 +0200, arielabramovich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't play for both: fascists, and people like you. There's no price for that. Interesting. When you play in Spain, do you check the political credentials of anybody who comes in the door? How do you know that you have not in fact played in front of people who still remember Francisco Franco fondly? As for people like me, I agree with you. You have never played in front of me, and since there is no one in the whole wide world who is like me, I am one of a kind, sui generis, you have never played in front of people like me and never will. You're the one with the particular moral, so let the stupid out of fashion idealists-Marxists-whatever like me be decent and poor. Well put. You have your morality and I have mine. Get a life, you sound too frustrated. Not at all. I have had along and productive life, and I am basically a very happy man. I do what I want to do and I do it well. Like your friend Roman told you, I am only trying to protect my domain, my investment in time and money and inspiration and creativity, against the onslaught of thieves like you who will find any rationale possible to defend the indefensible. Mrs. Minkoff is not exactly a close friend of mine. I used to be a dealer for her books many years before OMI came into being, and for quite some time she was a dealer for my editions in Switzerland and France. She is a colleague and a former business associate. All I know about her business is that some books I used to sell, like the Saizenay Manuscript, are no longer in print and no chance it will ever be reprinted, no matter what it says on her web site. The Danby manuscript, prepared for her by Tim Crawford, has been in the planning stage for years by now and if she is reluctant to throw good money after bad, and the music is NOT available to you because of that, you can start thinking of why this is happening, and if you and your feebleminded morality have anything to do with that. And BTW, I bought from her practically every single guitar and lute book she ever published. When I was a dealer, I got a regular dealer's discount. And when I stopped being a dealer, I paid the full price. I have on hand some 60-70 books published by Minkoff. Some of the best purchases of books I have ever made in my life. They will remain in my collection a long time after I have gone. 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: MO's attacks
At 06:02 PM 10/11/2003 -0400, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I accept this charge with pride and honor. It was through my begging and pleading that I was able to discover the whereabouts of the Koenigsberg manuscript, a place that was kept secret from John Ward and Diana Poulton by the fellow who found it. Discover? Paul O'Dette told you where it was. Like hell he did. This is one of the big lies spread by you know who. Sigitas Silinskas wrote to Diane Poulton, in the mid 70s, telling her that the manuscript was in the Academic Library in Vilnius, and sent her a photocopy of the first page. It was her student Tim Crawford who identified that photocopy as the first page of the Koenigsberg manuscript. She wrote to John Ward with these news. I have a copy of her letter. No one knew where was the Academic Library in Vilnius, since there is no such listings in any directory of libraries. When I told John Ward that Silinskas offered me some arrangements of his from that manuscript, he told me that there is only one thing he wishes to see before he dies, and that's the Koenigsberg manuscript. On my next visit to Esztergom, Silinskas asked me to introduced him to Daniel Benko in Budapest. I drove him myself, made the introduction, and was present when Silinskas gave to Benko that piece of paper which the latter passed on to O'Dette. I have a copy of that too. I did not discover the manuscript, Silinskas did, but would not say to anyone where it was. My contribution was simply to understand that the words Academic Library refer to the Biblioteka Akademia Nauk, and to find a way to that library, during Soviet times, bypassing Silinskas. Jonas Tamulionis who made that bypass possible was at the time the Secretary of the Vilnius branch of the Soviet Composers Union and I don't need to tell you what a powerful position that was. If O'Dette truly believes that he is the one who brought the news about the location of the manuscript to the world, he is gravely mistaken, and holding such a view is a cowardly insult to the memory of Diana Poulton. You may do that to your own. And with this you go to my kill-file. Thank God for small favors. Get you quick-thrills on Classical Guitar NG or somewhere else. Which is why you, who doe snot even own a guitar, hangs around there? And if you ever insult or use vulgarity against any member of Polyhymnion You will do what? 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: MO's attacks. Final, para mi
At 11:02 PM 10/11/2003 +0200, arielabramovich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gentlemen, My two days holiday is about to end, and I guess this debate could go on for ever, which in any case can perfectly happen without me. Best news I heard all day. the less you post here about your lofty morality, the better off this would be, IMHO. A matter of discussion's method: you can defend your opinion without attacking any specific individual and without taking the argument to a personal terrain, at least in the lute world. So now you want to control the method of debate? I have news for you. Never works in an unmoderated discussion group. If you do not like the way some people express their opinions, you may consider that some people may not like the way you express yours. No matter what you personally believe, there is no way one way of expression is more correct than another. That's what MO has been doing, after what I had to defend myself, until I've realized how much I was wasting my time. He was rude from the begin, and he actually recognized that with pride. Exactly right. When you express ideas that goes against the very foundation of my existence as a publisher, I will defend myself and my colleagues any which way I can. On the other hand, with some other people there was quite a fair and reasonable exchange (Eugene, for example, although we do not agree either). Mr. Mayes just took the word to call me thief and some other things, when if he agrees 100% with MO he could have only said that. We weren't talking about whether Ariel is making or not copies or trying to be the new Robin Hood or Mao, but in general, defending a general appreciation about something. If we can do it that way, if we can't do abstractions, let's forget holding any future conversation about thinks in which we might disagree. Miss Manners is not welcome in these here parts. If you can't stand the heat of some discussions, the door out is that away MO has right now replied to a private mail I've sent to him. Shall I keep on going? It was? sorry about that. I thought I told you specifically that I do not wish to communicate with you privately. I would strongly advise you to refrain from sending me any private mail. I would consider this as harassment I will leave this debate now, because our perception of reality and things is so different that I don't think we can even find a common definition for morality or thief. You have that right. Keep your inane politics to yourself. If you have anything cogent to say about lute music, I am sure you would be welcome. In the meantime, hasta la vista, baby. 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: MO's attacks
At 06:02 PM 10/11/2003 -0400, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And with this you go to my kill-file. Get you quick-thrills on Classical Guitar NG or somewhere else. And if you ever insult or use vulgarity against any member of Polyhymnion Well, don't make me hurt your feelings. This is a practical question: if you put me in your kill file, how would you know who I insult and how? So this is a test, based on Roman's declaration that he put me in his kill file: Polyhymnion is a stupid pretension to a simple Internet function, and anybody who falls for it is a naive sycophant of Roman Turovsky. (You see, I got my sycophants, you got yours). Now let' see what happens. 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: MO's attacks
the economics of book production, in today's world, the one we live in. If you could then offer me some pointers on how to produce lute books that can be sold at what _you_ can consider reasonable prices, I'd be delighted to listen to you. For me the gratification comes from music, and music can't be in private = hands. We are not talking about the music. We are talking about the books in which it is contained. Finally, if you want to carry on the discussion, be kind to write me = privately. Like hell I will write to you privately. This issue is a matter of public concern. Some people here, Roman Turovsky in particular, have been preaching this stupid Marxist propaganda for years. There are others who do not see it quite that way and there are still others who agree with me 100%. You made it public by posting it here, and that's where it shall remain. It is absurd for the rest of the people in the list to have to deal with = this. Anyone who who does not wish to deal with this can punch the Delete key without reading. No one has to deal with it if they do not wish to. 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: MO's attacks
At 06:00 PM 10/10/2003 +0200, arielabramovich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear all, I think I had too much. But you keep coming for more... I'll ignore your comments about Marxist's propaganda. even better: I'll ignore the whole email, and your existence. That's your choice to make. I can also promise you that I shall not ignore you and your existence. Anytime you come in here with the expression of your petty pecuniary concerns and try to teach others about what's right or wrong, rest assured I will come down on you like a ton of bricks. I'll cheat myself, and I'll try hard to believe that people like you doesn't exist in this world . You're not a rival to argue with me about politics, as you ignore much more than what you know, but you don't even see it that way. What I see is that this is not a forum for the discussion of world politics, but lute music. Your political concerns are of no concern to me, and I suspect, to many others in here. You'll keep printing, I'll keep buying what I think is fair, and copying what I don't think is convenient. If you go out of business, I' ll be sad for you. You're right Roman, I shouldn't waist a single second with this Clinton's fan. What Clinton got to do with all this? 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: MO's attacks
At 01:17 PM 10/10/2003 -0400, Roman Turovsky I got it. Must be the pimp. Reread: We all understand that MO sermon on morality is equivalent to one given on chastity by a professional whore. What's questioned is your immaculate business practices, specifically: procurement of materials. Ch'ja b korova mychala, a tvoja b molchala. And what may be these procurements of materials you may be referring to? I would strongly advise you to be sure of your facts before you say anything that might turn out to be libelous. If you get my drift... And saying nothing at all, would amount to slander by innuendo. let's hear it now... 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: MO's attacks
At 08:16 PM 10/10/2003 +0200, Peter Paeffgen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good reliable reprints are expensive, Matanya, that's for sure. I know that. One facsimile I did, in half tone, the Swan Manuscript from St. Petersburg, cost me over $16,000 to produce. In 1994. I sold a grand total of 135 copies of it since then. That's an average of 15 copies a year. No copies at all have been sold in the last 4-5 years. The editors, Tim Crawford and Pierre-François Goy, have worked for a long time preparing this edition. I can well understand their frustration on the low level of royalties they got in the past for this, and on the complete lack of royalties in the last few years. The cash outlay for the Koenigsberg Manuscript was not as high, as the micorfilms were supplied by the Vilnius Library in exchange for printed copies of the book, and the information about the location of the manuscript, were secured from a local Lithuanian composer, Jonas Tamulionis, in exchange for a subscription of the American Journal of Succulents and Cacti and the publication of some of his music in the Russian Collection V. Moreover, the editors, Arthur J. Ness and John M. Ward, have donated their services to the project. If I counted the hundred of hours I personally spent in the dark room preparing the plates from one of the worst microfilms I have ever seen (before computers and scanners and Photoshop), at the standard rates for this kind of work, it was just as expensive to produce, particularly as it was a hard cover edition. Technically speaking, I made a lot of money on this book, money I lost entirely as soon as I got into the MoLA series. It all evens out. 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: MO's attacks
At 10:01 PM 10/10/2003 +0200, arielabramovich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The whole = political discussion came because of some very particularly agressive = messages posted by MO. In other words, since you had no reasonable retort on the merits of the issue, you brought in world politics. Makes perfect sense, I guess. If some really poor institution would ask for my service and I agree = with what they do (I wouldn't play for free for a fascist small gang), I = would then play for free. I've done it several times, and I can tell = interesting stories about that experiences. Again, you are not unique. But let's suppose that a fascist small gang offered you a really big honorarium, the kind that would allow you to buy the entire Minkoff catalogue and not bat an eye, would you play the gig? And suppose it was a big fascist gang and _they_ offered you an honorarium which would have allowed you to buy Minkoff, would you then take the gig? No need to answer. As George Bernard Shaw once said, we are not discussing who you are, we are only discussing the price. Quite a difference. What Cezar produces is hundred per cent product of = his effort, A printed book by Minkoff is also 100% a product of their efforts. The raw material is different. and on the other hand I do have options, while with many of = the books I don't, in many ocassions. As Gordon told you, you always have options. Except that the options of going straight to the source are far more expensive than buying the book. And what about all the other unlucky with no libraries near from = them? Have heard of the Post Office? asking for copies by mail? 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: looking for a lutar - forwarded
At 01:15 PM 10/7/2003 -0400, David Rastall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To my mind it's just a guitar with a lute-like body and pegboard. So it was in vogue for a while in 19th-century Germany, it probably doesn't hold much interest for those who are interested in the renaissance or Baroque lute. Why should it? It should not. You are right about that. But this is not the purpose of the original poster. Besides, it could interest those who are interested in the renaissance or Baroque lute, by the same token that they are interested in baroque guitar, vihuela and other historical instruments. There is no particular redeeming attributes for one historical period over another. The German movement is far enough removed in time to qualify for historical relevance, just as is the cognate Swedish lute from which it sprang. What's the difference between a century ago, or three centuries ago? only time. Tuning? we have heard here of lutes tuned in e. Single stringing? we know about lute-like instruments with single stringing. Construction methods? metal frets against tied frets? These are all technical details which you can find all over the historical spectrum. What really matters is the music. If you are interested _only_ in renaissance or Baroque music, then that is what you should play. No argument. But if one is interested in the repertoire of the Swedish lute and the German laute, an instrument that still survives today, there can be no pretension that this is an inferior repertoire, played on an inferior instrument, solely on the basis of the distance in time from us. History is anything that happened before yesterday. 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: vallet
At 04:38 PM 10/6/2003 +0200, arielabramovich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't enjoy stealing books [snip] I don't think photocopying for personal use is dishonest Photocopying a book without permission of the owner is stealing. Stealing is dishonest. It is also illegal. The only reason you can steal books by copying, is that the laws against the practice are not enforceable easily. (not more than the use of someone else's intellectual production for personal benefits) To use someone else's intellectual property for personal benefit without permission is also stealing. And it matters little of the personal benefit is monetary or otherwise. , and I would have no reason to do it if I could buy all the books I need. About your sentence concerning the right of charging whatever you want for whatever you offer/have, I must say some as simple as this: the fact that that's the way some things are in the world we live, doesn't make them necessary fair, morally acceptable or simply good for everyone. That same sentiment can work the other way around. The more people steal books from Minkoff, the less incentive the company has to produce new ones, or to reprint the old ones once they run out. It has been a constant complaint in this list of why several important lute books have gone out of print and are no longer available, and why some new projects have been held up forever. By stealing a book you are not only committing a crime, but also committing a grave offence against the lute scholars who collaborate with Minkoff in the production of its lute books, many of them are members of this list. I don't know what's the impression I can give you with my deficient use of the English language, but I find a bit underestimating the advice about the possibility of not buying the book if I disagree with the price. Very good and sensible advice. Pay attention to it. If you can't afford the price of a lute by a good maker, if you can't afford the price of the computer you want, if you can't afford that snazzy new car, or a new present for your significant other, you do not buy them. Period. There is no reason why printed books should be in a different category. I find actually quite curious the fact that many people perfectly understand why a gifted and well known lute player gives up professional life because of the critical situation we all have to deal with, That is not what Rob said. He gave up the lute because of his own personal circumstances. To what extent these personal circumstances are related to the critical situation the lute world find itself in, a critical situation that has changed little in 400 years, is not something you can, or have the right to stick your nose into. but don't necessary feel any empathy with a colleague making an observation about another absurd aspect of this small market. We do not find empathy with you, because you are not the first newbie to come and cry about the price of books. This subject has been re-hashed in this list so many time in the past, it becomes a bit of a nuisance to read the words of an innocent who thinks there is some parallel between lute books and Kazaa. There are some people here who will understand your plight and sympathize with you, but the majority of sensible lutenists understand by now how destructive to the discipline is the exchange of freebies. However, if someone does has some music in pdf, fronimo or django, I would appreciate if he/she can send it to me. Of course, I'm be happy to share with all of you the whole material I have. What I'd rather avoid is to keep on going with discussions that aren't necessary interesting for everyone, They are very interesting to those of us who care about the future of the lute and the support it may or may not get from publishers. There is more at stake than the instant free gratification you desire. Generations of lute scholars have spent hundreds of hours in finding the material, preparing it for publication, making them available to all. The least you can do is bow your head in shame and say thank you to them. Without them, there would not be anything for you to steal. 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: vallet
At 04:50 PM 10/6/2003 -0400, Roman Turovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MO, your own business practices are so far removed from being kosher, that your moralization is nothing more than a joke that outlived its punch-line. Yes I know. I admit it and I hang my head down with abject shame. I am just a low down snickering greedy capitalist who actually has the gall the ask for money in return for printed books. How can I ever atone for this grievous sin? oops... Yom Kipur just passed... too late. 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: Baroque pitch
At 09:30 AM 9/24/2003 -0700, Howard Posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wouldn't be surprised if the latest Grove's has some detailed article on pitch. There is. By Bruce Haynes and Peter R. Cooke. There was also an extended articles on the subject in most previous editions of Grove's. 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
