[NSP] Re: Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks
Richard, We don't really know what Peacock meant by the trill marks. It's even been suggested that Mr Wright, the publisher, was wholly responsible for the transcriptions, and, not being a piper, gave it his best shot. We don't know for certain that Peacock was musically literate (correct me if I'm wrong). I've found through playing the Peacock repertoire that I tend to use vibrato where a trill is marked - perhaps that's what was intended, who knows??? The pieces certainly work fine without the trills. Clough's comments on the Fenwick tutor would suggest that the classical definitions of some of these embellishments were quite alien to the piping tradition. Don't let it put you off persevering with the Peacock collection - it's really not as difficult as it may seem at first glance. There are common note patterns and sequences, and if you can master one Peacock variation set you're well on the way to conquering them all! For those of you who'd like something slightly more accessible, Clough's variations on Oh Dear What Can The Matter Be follow the Peacock pattern, albeit with some keyed variations thrown in for good measure. Chris -Original Message- From: Richard York [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 September 2008 10:17 To: NSP group Subject: [NSP] Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks After all the recent fireworks I hesitate to ask this but here goes anyway; not to be provocative, just wanting to know. In Peacock's facsimile (I don't know what happens in the re-edition) there are a number of tunes where he gives " tr" marks. For example, no 10, "My Ain Kind Dearie" has these, and also quite specific small grace-notes, written in elsewhere in the tune. While these "tr" marks are most frequently over longer notes, such as the dotted one of a pair of beamed notes, some of the markings (bar 14) are over semiquavers. OK, it's not a breakneck speed tune, but these are still going to be fairly short notes in the first place. I don't suggest he's suggesting more than a quick twiddle, rather than a full scale finished trill, but there are going to be at least 3 notes involved here. I'd be interested to know whether these are to be interpreted as separately fingered, whether you think the middle note would be above or below, or whether a dreaded quick lift of the finger above is even implied. Or whether, given that he puts these over pairs of semiquavers which are also slur marked, he's simply nicked a fiddler's version, and isn't thinking smallpipes at all; though.to be honest, one could do the [c-word] and slur onto the next note which was then lifted short before starting the next pair, on the nsp's. Well, someone with more technique than I have could, anyway :-) . With thanks, Richard. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html The information contained in this e-mail may be subject to public disclosure under the NHS Code of Openness or the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Unless the information is legally exempt, the confidentiality of this e-mail and your reply cannot be guaranteed. Unless expressly stated otherwise, the information contained in this e-mail is intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient you must not copy, distribute, or take any action or reliance upon it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender. Any unauthorised disclosure of the information contained in this e-mail is strictly prohibited.
[NSP] Re: Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks
On 22 Sep 2008, Ormston, Chris wrote: > We don't really know what Peacock meant by the trill marks. It's even > been suggested that Mr Wright, the publisher, was wholly responsible > for the transcriptions, and, not being a piper, gave it his best shot. To Chris' comments I'd just like to add that the original title was "A Favourite Collection of Tunes with Variations adapted for the Northumberland Small PIpes Violin or Flute" ...so presumably some of the markings arguably refer to these other instruments, for which they would be eminently suitable. We believe that Peacock played the fiddle. I think it was Ian Bain (the Bewick expert) who suggested that Mr Wright did the transcription, and his opinion was that the blocks would have been produced elsewhere - I think Birmingham or London, rather than the North-East. Early in my publishing career I wrote that the trill sign could be interpreted as an inverted mordent, which was my understanding at the time. At the risk of raising yet another firestorm, I now don't think this was either correct or appropriate. I would follow Chris's advice, or just take most of these marks to mean that "something" (to the performer's taste) should be done at these points. Hope this helps Julia To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks
Thanks, both Julia & Chris. Pretty much like lots of C18/19 marks on music then! And in the case of a run of semi-quavers on the nsp I suppose it also has the possibility of "do nothing extra" ? Best wishes, Richard. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 22 Sep 2008, Ormston, Chris wrote: We don't really know what Peacock meant by the trill marks. It's even been suggested that Mr Wright, the publisher, was wholly responsible for the transcriptions, and, not being a piper, gave it his best shot. To Chris' comments I'd just like to add that the original title was "A Favourite Collection of Tunes with Variations adapted for the Northumberland Small PIpes Violin or Flute" ..so presumably some of the markings arguably refer to these other instruments, for which they would be eminently suitable. We believe that Peacock played the fiddle. I think it was Ian Bain (the Bewick expert) who suggested that Mr Wright did the transcription, and his opinion was that the blocks would have been produced elsewhere - I think Birmingham or London, rather than the North-East. Early in my publishing career I wrote that the trill sign could be interpreted as an inverted mordent, which was my understanding at the time. At the risk of raising yet another firestorm, I now don't think this was either correct or appropriate. I would follow Chris's advice, or just take most of these marks to mean that "something" (to the performer's taste) should be done at these points. Hope this helps Julia To get on or off this list see list information at [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks
On 22 Sep 2008, Richard York wrote: > in the case >of a run of semi-quavers on the nsp I suppose it also has the >possibility of "do nothing extra" ? Just getting them sounding as they should (peas in a pod), is quite sufficient challenge for most of us, I think. Otherwise you could apply the "leavitoutement" - an obscure but very useful early music ornament, which to the best of my knowledge was either invented by, or at least publicised by, Philip Gruar in his early music manifestation. Cheers Julia To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks
Inverted mordents, *if played detached*, can be quite effective for some of these 'trills'. They would sound better if I was good enough But most seem to be where you want to put vibrato. John -Original Message- From: Richard York [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 September 2008 13:01 To: NSP group Subject: [NSP] Re: Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks Thanks, both Julia & Chris. Pretty much like lots of C18/19 marks on music then! And in the case of a run of semi-quavers on the nsp I suppose it also has the possibility of "do nothing extra" ? Best wishes, Richard. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 22 Sep 2008, Ormston, Chris wrote: We don't really know what Peacock meant by the trill marks. It's even been suggested that Mr Wright, the publisher, was wholly responsible for the transcriptions, and, not being a piper, gave it his best shot. To Chris' comments I'd just like to add that the original title was "A Favourite Collection of Tunes with Variations adapted for the Northumberland Small PIpes Violin or Flute" .so presumably some of the markings arguably refer to these other instruments, for which they would be eminently suitable. We believe that Peacock played the fiddle. I think it was Ian Bain (the Bewick expert) who suggested that Mr Wright did the transcription, and his opinion was that the blocks would have been produced elsewhere - I think Birmingham or London, rather than the North-East. Early in my publishing career I wrote that the trill sign could be interpreted as an inverted mordent, which was my understanding at the time. At the risk of raising yet another firestorm, I now don't think this was either correct or appropriate. I would follow Chris's advice, or just take most of these marks to mean that "something" (to the performer's taste) should be done at these points. Hope this helps Julia To get on or off this list see list information at [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks
But there was at least one decent engraver in Newcastle! And he liked pipe music too. John -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 September 2008 11:56 To: NSP group Subject: [NSP] Re: Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks On 22 Sep 2008, Ormston, Chris wrote: > We don't really know what Peacock meant by the trill marks. It's even > been suggested that Mr Wright, the publisher, was wholly responsible > for the transcriptions, and, not being a piper, gave it his best shot. To Chris' comments I'd just like to add that the original title was "A Favourite Collection of Tunes with Variations adapted for the Northumberland Small PIpes Violin or Flute" ..so presumably some of the markings arguably refer to these other instruments, for which they would be eminently suitable. We believe that Peacock played the fiddle. I think it was Ian Bain (the Bewick expert) who suggested that Mr Wright did the transcription, and his opinion was that the blocks would have been produced elsewhere - I think Birmingham or London, rather than the North-East. Early in my publishing career I wrote that the trill sign could be interpreted as an inverted mordent, which was my understanding at the time. At the risk of raising yet another firestorm, I now don't think this was either correct or appropriate. I would follow Chris's advice, or just take most of these marks to mean that "something" (to the performer's taste) should be done at these points. Hope this helps Julia To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks
The whole recent choyting "debate" has mostly reinforced my opinion that it's better to try to teach people how to think musically than to answer specific questions about what is correct or incorrect... No, indeed we don't know what Peacock's trill signs meant, and the vagueness that was mentioned earlier about ornamentation in 18th C "classical" music sources is even more pronounced in 18th C fiddle mss and collections, which would probably have been the model for the Peacock coll. But it is worthwhile taking a careful look at those trills, because you can usually figure out what they meant musically, and they therefore add some insight into the timing, accentuation and interpretation of the tunes. Hints though: the trills are not added at all methodically, they mean different things in different places, and "My Ain Kind Dearie" is a total outlier... Dick HensoldSt. Paul, MN 651/646-6581 Traditional Folk Music, Early Music, and Cambodian Music Northumbrian smallpipes, recorder, Medieval greatpipes,Swedish sackpipa, & beyaw. [1]www.dickhensold.com On Sep 22, 2008, at 4:17 AM, Richard York wrote: After all the recent fireworks I hesitate to ask this but here goes anyway; not to be provocative, just wanting to know. In Peacock's facsimile (I don't know what happens in the re-edition) there are a number of tunes where he gives " tr" marks. For example, no 10, "My Ain Kind Dearie" has these, and also quite specific small grace-notes, written in elsewhere in the tune. While these "tr" marks are most frequently over longer notes, such as the dotted one of a pair of beamed notes, some of the markings (bar 14) are over semiquavers. OK, it's not a breakneck speed tune, but these are still going to be fairly short notes in the first place. I don't suggest he's suggesting more than a quick twiddle, rather than a full scale finished trill, but there are going to be at least 3 notes involved here. I'd be interested to know whether these are to be interpreted as separately fingered, whether you think the middle note would be above or below, or whether a dreaded quick lift of the finger above is even implied. Or whether, given that he puts these over pairs of semiquavers which are also slur marked, he's simply nicked a fiddler's version, and isn't thinking smallpipes at all; though.to be honest, one could do the [c-word] and slur onto the next note which was then lifted short before starting the next pair, on the nsp's. Well, someone with more technique than I have could, anyway :-) . With thanks, Richard. To get on or off this list see list information at [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. http://www.dickhensold.com/ 2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks
"pegment sans appui" I'm not familiar with the term. Is this what purists might call a "dégringolement"? c To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks
The Henry Atkinson MS has several commonly notated ornaments - * A pair of vertical lines over a note: || * A pair of diagonal lines over a note: \\ * A pair of diagonal lines through the vertical of a note. These are easy to distinguish and are often used together, eg in the Reed House Rant. What did they mean? Does anyone know, or was it ambiguous then? John -Original Message- From: Philip Gruar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 September 2008 21:33 To: nsp@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [NSP] Re: Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NSP group" Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 1:09 PM Subject: [NSP] Re: Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks > Otherwise you could apply the "leavitoutement" - an obscure but very > useful early music ornament, which to the best of my knowledge was > either invented by, or at least publicised by, Philip Gruar in his > early music manifestation. I wish I had invented it - I certainly use it regularly. Unfortunately I can't lay claim to it, or to any of the others (like squeakement - an ornament very well-known to pipers) which have long been going the rounds among people who regularly have to cope with all the genuine French Baroque ornaments. Another one, "pegment sans appui" is perhaps better known to string-players. If it's of any use I'll add my early-music twopennorth. (note to other Baroque-music specialists out there - this is inevitably simplified and probably contentious, but I hope you'll agree with the broad gist) Although the French composers in particular were very precise in their notation of ornaments, often giving a table of what they all meant at the beginning of a publication, other composers were extremely vague. For example the little cross often found over notes in 18th century music frequently means just some indeterminate ornament - probably a short trill, but just as readily a mordent or whatever suits the music at that point. In the eighteenth century much more was usually left to the players' discretion, even in "classical" music (that is, not "traditional" or "folk") than later became the rule. SO - we don't need to search for an exact interpretation of the Peacock "trill" sign, and we probably don't have to take all the notes as absolute gospel either. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks
Dunno for sure, but when I was editing, largely self-taught, a MS I found of an early 18th century gent's favourite "flute" (i.e. recorder) tunes, he had a whole plethora of marks, spirals, cirles with dots, the lot. I looked in the "Division Recorder Book" for help, where there are some suggestions, and also talked to one or two people, and it all confirmed what's already been said - a) it's not certain what each particular person may have meant by these decorations - and b) as has already been suggested, music at that time was perhaps more free in its interpretation, so whether you played the same decorations or even the same notes each time depended on what mood you were in. Best wishes, Richard. Gibbons, John wrote: The Henry Atkinson MS has several commonly notated ornaments - * A pair of vertical lines over a note: || * A pair of diagonal lines over a note: \\ * A pair of diagonal lines through the vertical of a note. These are easy to distinguish and are often used together, eg in the Reed House Rant. What did they mean? Does anyone know, or was it ambiguous then? John -Original Message- From: Philip Gruar [[1]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 September 2008 21:33 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [NSP] Re: Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks - Original Message - From: [3]<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NSP group" [4] Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 1:09 PM Subject: [NSP] Re: Fool, fearing to tread, aka Peacock marks Otherwise you could apply the "leavitoutement" - an obscure but very useful early music ornament, which to the best of my knowledge was either invented by, or at least publicised by, Philip Gruar in his early music manifestation. I wish I had invented it - I certainly use it regularly. Unfortunately I can't lay claim to it, or to any of the others (like squeakement - an ornament very well-known to pipers) which have long been going the rounds among people who regularly have to cope with all the genuine French Baroque ornaments. Another one, "pegment sans appui" is perhaps better known to string-players. If it's of any use I'll add my early-music twopennorth. (note to other Baroque-music specialists out there - this is inevitably simplified and probably contentious, but I hope you'll agree with the broad gist) Although the French composers in particular were very precise in their notation of ornaments, often giving a table of what they all meant at the beginning of a publication, other composers were extremely vague. For example the little cross often found over notes in 18th century music frequently means just some indeterminate ornament - probably a short trill, but just as readily a mordent or whatever suits the music at that point. In the eighteenth century much more was usually left to the players' discretion, even in "classical" music (that is, not "traditional" or "folk") than later became the rule. SO - we don't need to search for an exact interpretation of the Peacock "trill" sign, and we probably don't have to take all the notes as absolute gospel either. To get on or off this list see list information at [5]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 2. mailto:nsp@cs.dartmouth.edu 3. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 4. mailto:nsp@cs.dartmouth.edu 5. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
