[VIHUELA] Re: Invertible counterpoint
Dear Stewart, I agree with some of what you say (in particular perhaps Sanz was expressing a desire for the most 'modern' style even if still composing some pieces with bourdons) but I think you overlook an obvious possibility when you write 'Why should the lower string of an octave pair on the baroque guitar be placed on the treble side? This is the other way round from the lute, and seems counter-intuitive. There must be a difference in sound, or guitarists would not have strung their guitars that way. The only reason I can think why it was done, was so that players could catch just the high octave with their right-hand thumb, which would be a huge advantage when playing campanellas.' The other reason for the disposition of the pair, and one which I think is more significant, is that the string struck first with the thumb tends to predominate. So that on the lute, where a more procrustean adherence to the rules of counterpoint/voice leading might have been expected, it is the bass (the lower) of the octave pair which predominates whereas on the guitar with its peculiar tuning, the upper of the pair tends to be heard primarily thus allowing an ambiguity which can deceive the ear. I'm really not convinced about selecting which octave of a pair to pluck, not so much that it can't be done - it clearly can - though with trouble if the passage is rapid, but on the basis that there seems to be no evidence that this was early practice. Or have I missed a vital source? - I'm sure I'll be told if so. rgds M --- On Sat, 5/2/11, Stewart McCoy lu...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: From: Stewart McCoy lu...@tiscali.co.uk Subject: [VIHUELA] Invertible counterpoint To: Vihuela List vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Saturday, 5 February, 2011, 16:46 Dear Monica, Just for the record, I have played Sanz' Pavanas por la D on my baroque guitar. I have done so with bourdons and without, and I have to say that I find the piece unconvincing without bourdons. The campanella passage following it is a different kettle of fish, and sounds fine without bourdons. In a recent email you mentioned Gordon Ferries' recording of this piece. I have looked out the CD, La Preciosa, DCD34036, and listened to his performance of Pavanas por la D, and come to the same conclusion: the Pavanas is unconvincing without bourdons. There is a passage towards the end of the piece, where Sanz takes the melody up the neck on the lowest strings. The effect is lost without bourdons. You are right to say that the upper octave notes of the 4th and 5th courses will sometimes sound at the same pitch or above notes on the other strings. However, this is more of a problem if bourdons are not present, because, if these notes are heard only at the high octave, they can only be heard as a second treble. If bourdons are present, you hear the high octave notes in a different way. They are heard as the first harmonic of the bourdons, and hence become part of a bass line. This reduces the impact of any interference with the treble notes. Lute players used octave stringing, of course, and although this troubled Dowland (see his comments in Varietie), it doesn't seem to have bothered anyone else. When you have the 4th, 5th and 6th courses of the lute in octaves, as was the norm in the 16th century, you sometimes have the effect you describe. It doesn't matter too much though, as long as the real bass notes are present. Imagine how the music of Hans Newsidler or Francesco da Milano would sound, if there were no bourdons on the 4th, 5th and 6th courses. Why should the lower string of an octave pair on the baroque guitar be placed on the treble side? This is the other way round from the lute, and seems counter-intuitive. There must be a difference in sound, or guitarists would not have strung their guitars that way. The only reason I can think why it was done, was so that players could catch just the high octave with their right-hand thumb, which would be a huge advantage when playing campanellas. Unfortunately there will still be times when the bourdon will sound in campanellas, which is presumably why Sanz and others gave up bourdons altogether. Sanz rightly pointed out that bourdons do not help trills. I come back to the question in my last email: how often do we see ornament signs notated on the 4th and 5th courses of the guitar, and could this give us a clue about how the instrument was strung. Best wishes, Stewart. -Original Message- From: [1]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:[2]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Monica Hall Sent: 05 February 2011 12:49 To: Lex Eisenhardt Cc: Vihuelalist Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Invertible counterpoint I was not thinking of the type of strummed
[VIHUELA] Re: Invertible counterpoint
The other reason for the disposition of the pair, and one which I think is more significant, is that the string struck first with the thumb tends to predominate. So that on the lute, where a more procrustean adherence to the rules of counterpoint/voice leading might have been expected, it is the bass (the lower) of the octave pair which predominates whereas on the guitar with its peculiar tuning, the upper of the pair tends to be heard primarily thus allowing an ambiguity which can deceive the ear. Would it have been the aim to deceive the ear? Ambiguity, yes. But no doubt it can be heard (and played) as belonging to the lower voice. I'm really not convinced about selecting which octave of a pair to pluck, not so much that it can't be done - it clearly can - though with trouble if the passage is rapid, but on the basis that there seems to be no evidence that this was early practice. That would only matter if we would try to completely eliminate the unwanted note. Selecting just one of the two strings is perhaps not what it was all about. Lex To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Invertible counterpoint
Lex wrote... What kind of evidence are we looking for? Visee and Corbetta (and most likely many players who played their music) probably had reverse stringing on the fourth course. Nevertheless it is mentioned nowhere in their books. You have no evidence that that was what they did. What they don't say in their books you just think you can make up! Rafael Andia on his recording of de Visee's music has the bordon on the thumb side and this doesn't seem to have an appreciable effect on the music. The only reference to reverse stringing is in Ruiz de Ribayaz in 1677. You and numerous other people are happy to argue that because the earliest mention of the French tuning is in 1670 and much of the Italian repertoire was composed before that date it can't possible have been used before that date or by Italian guitarists. On that basis reverse stringing can't have been used before 1677 - and then perhaps only in Spain - as a compromise since Spaniards usually used octave stringing. You just interpret the evidence to suite yourself. This brings us back to Bartolotti, who was the first to publish a book of elaborate music with (real) campanelas. It is highly unlikely that he dropped his bourdons. What you mean of course is that his is the earliest surviving book which features elaborate music etc... But of course you don't know whether he used bordons in the first place. It may well have been he who popularised the French tuning. That would have ruined his music. Whether or not it ruins his music is entirely a matter of personal taste - which was the point I was trying to make when I mentioned the different views on stringing suitable for Santiago de Murcia. With him I vote for reverse stringing of the fourth and fifth courses. If we are going to have a vote on it I think it should be by secret ballot. You have no right to claim categorically that you, and only you know Bartolotti's ideas on the matter. Monica To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Invertible counterpoint
Thanks Lex, Yes of course it can be heard if one is looking out for it (as we all are in an exchange like this...), but by deceiving the ear I meant the ambiguity or uncertainty of the octave in which the principal of the note lies. M. --- On Sun, 6/2/11, Lex Eisenhardt eisenha...@planet.nl wrote: From: Lex Eisenhardt eisenha...@planet.nl Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Invertible counterpoint To: Vihuela List vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Sunday, 6 February, 2011, 9:16 The other reason for the disposition of the pair, and one which I think is more significant, is that the string struck first with the thumb tends to predominate. So that on the lute, where a more procrustean adherence to the rules of counterpoint/voice leading might have been expected, it is the bass (the lower) of the octave pair which predominates whereas on the guitar with its peculiar tuning, the upper of the pair tends to be heard primarily thus allowing an ambiguity which can deceive the ear. Would it have been the aim to deceive the ear? Ambiguity, yes. But no doubt it can be heard (and played) as belonging to the lower voice. I'm really not convinced about selecting which octave of a pair to pluck, not so much that it can't be done - it clearly can - though with trouble if the passage is rapid, but on the basis that there seems to be no evidence that this was early practice. That would only matter if we would try to completely eliminate the unwanted note. Selecting just one of the two strings is perhaps not what it was all about. Lex To get on or off this list see list information at [1]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Invertible counterpoint
You have no evidence that that was what they did. What they don't say in their books you just think you can make up! Rafael Andia on his recording of de Visee's music has the bordon on the thumb side and this doesn't seem to have an appreciable effect on the music. You have a very interesting point here. By saying that they probably had reverse stringing I referred to what is generally assumed today. A theory about stringing/tuning should inevitably be based on inference as well as evidence. Are you proposing here that Visee and Corbetta had the bourdon at the thumb side? What you mean of course is that his is the earliest surviving book which features elaborate music etc... But of course you don't know whether he used bordons in the first place. It may well have been he who popularised the French tuning. Also French tuning has one bourdon. Even if Bartolotti popularised it (any evidence for that?), would you suggest that he had the bourdon at the thumb side? If we are going to have a vote on it I think it should be by secret ballot. You have no right to claim categorically that you, and only you know Bartolotti's ideas on the matter. You read anything I say with great suspicion. Lex To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Invertible counterpoint
On 06/02/2011 09:26, Monica Hall wrote: Rafael Andia on his recording of de Visee's music has the bordon on the thumb side and this doesn't seem to have an appreciable effect on the music. How interesting! I thought there was a sort of 'universal assent' (of our times) on this - the 'French tuning' for De Visee. Was there a low octave on fourth and on the fifth? Stuart To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Invertible counterpoint
Dear Martyn, Thanks for your message. I agree with what you say about the effect of reverse stringing, that it causes the upper octave to be more in evidence than it would be with a more conventional (i.e. lute) stringing. Yet why should a guitarist have wanted the high octave to predominate? It must be that he wanted to hear the high octave as a note in its own right - a melody note - rather than merely enhance a bass note on a duff gut string. There are instances in lute music, where the upper octave of a course is used melodically. My favourite example is the opening of Haray tre amours from Spinacino (Bk 2, 15v) which is notated as --|- --|--2-- --|- --2--4--5--4--5--4--2--4--|- --|- --|- but sounds as --|- --|--2-- --|- --2--4--5--4--5--4--2--4--|- --|--0-- --|- The high octave of the 5th course acts as a bass and a treble at the same time. Seventeenth-century guitarists wanted to exploit this possibility, but unfortunately there were times when they wanted notes to be heard only at one octave. Either they wanted just the low octave for a bass note, and had to put up with the high octave interfering with the treble line (as described recently by Monica), or they wanted just the high octave, and had to tolerate unwanted bourdons creeping in below. The various ways of stringing the baroque guitar are attempts to overcome this basic dilemma. It seems that composers writing serious pieces for the guitar wanted to exploit the melodic possibilities of the upper octave notes, but felt hampered by the bourdons. Reverse stringing, having no bourdon at the fifth, or at the fourth and fifth courses, are all attempts to purify the sound. As Monica says, quoting Sanz, removing the bourdons will sweeten the sound. We cannot tell from Sanz whether or not it was a new idea, but it certainly implies that at least some guitarists were using bourdons in the 1670s. Unfortunately we have little evidence to know what each guitarist did. I am grateful to Monica for writing: The only reference to reverse stringing is in Ruiz de Ribayaz in 1677 .. the earliest mention of the French tuning is in 1670 ... Is that really all we have to go on? Is there nothing written about stringing before 1670? If that is the case, no wonder there is so much controversy. Without evidence, we are forced to rely on our intuition, and to try to glean what we can from the music itself (hence my question about trills notated at the 4th and 5th courses, and my mention of high notes on the 4th and 5th courses in Sanz' Pavanas). Sometimes the answer is obvious. For example, in his recording of music by François Campion (Arion ARN68483) Michel Amoricis unfortunately has a bourdon at the fifth course, which wreaks havoc with the campanellas. Other times it is less clear what we should do. By coming to different conclusions, we may be duplicating what actually happened in the 17th century, when guitarists will have had their own preferences, depending on what music they were playing. Best wishes, Stewart. -Original Message- From: Martyn Hodgson [mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk] Sent: 06 February 2011 08:55 To: Vihuela List; Stewart McCoy Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Invertible counterpoint Dear Stewart, I agree with some of what you say (in particular perhaps Sanz was expressing a desire for the most 'modern' style even if still composing some pieces with bourdons) but I think you overlook an obvious possibility when you write 'Why should the lower string of an octave pair on the baroque guitar be placed on the treble side? This is the other way round from the lute, and seems counter-intuitive. There must be a difference in sound, or guitarists would not have strung their guitars that way. The only reason I can think why it was done, was so that players could catch just the high octave with their right-hand thumb, which would be a huge advantage when playing campanellas.' The other reason for the disposition of the pair, and one which I think is more significant, is that the string struck first with the thumb tends to predominate. So that on the lute, where a more procrustean adherence to the rules of counterpoint/voice leading might have been expected, it is the bass (the lower) of the octave pair which predominates whereas on the guitar with its peculiar tuning, the upper of the pair tends to be heard primarily thus allowing an ambiguity which can deceive the ear. I'm really not convinced about selecting which octave of a pair to pluck, not so much that it can't be done - it clearly can - though with trouble if the passage is rapid, but on the basis that there seems to be no evidence that this was early practice. Or have I missed a vital source? -
[VIHUELA] Some recodrings
Hi all... For what it's worth, I posted a few more recordings on my web site: [1]http://cudspan.net/baroque These include the first Fuga by Sanz, on a fully re-entrant instrument, and the Prelude of Roncalli's Suite 1 in G Maj, also re-entrant. I'm afraid it gets a bit boring because I stuck to pretty much a single mood. Sorry about that. Enjoy (or not), and comments welcome... Cheers cud -- References 1. http://cudspan.net/baroque To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Ambiguity
Dear Stewart, Again I agree with much of what you say, but my stance is rather towards 'institutional' ambiguity in 17th century guitar stringings. In short because the range of the instrument is so limited (and purposefully so since clearly suitable lute bass string technology existed), passages often break-off and ascend (or descend) an octave, so that the octave stringing - with the upper on the thumb side - provides a degree of ambiguity which may, or may not be reinforced by more selective plucking (incidentally I don't like the newly fashionable 'reverse' stringing - at first I thought it meant the reverse of ordinary guitar disposition!). I think your suggestion of 'either a melody note or a bass note' is unnecessarily stark - I'm often impressed how a note (or its octave) of this music functions as a melodic AND a harmonic (bass) line. Incidentally, earlier in this discussion I asked if there was any early source which mentioned selective plucking of individual strings of an octave pair - no response so far. Ther is, of course, a few references and examples of selective plucking of individual strings of an octave bass pair on the 'baroque' lute (eg Mouton, von Radolt, et al) but this seems to have always been notated and used for special effect, but I suppose it might have been employed even when not notated - rather like vR's damping sign //. rgds M. --- On Sun, 6/2/11, Stewart McCoy lu...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: From: Stewart McCoy lu...@tiscali.co.uk Subject: [VIHUELA] Invertible counterpoint To: Vihuela List vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Sunday, 6 February, 2011, 12:47 Dear Martyn, Thanks for your message. I agree with what you say about the effect of reverse stringing, that it causes the upper octave to be more in evidence than it would be with a more conventional (i.e. lute) stringing. Yet why should a guitarist have wanted the high octave to predominate? It must be that he wanted to hear the high octave as a note in its own right - a melody note - rather than merely enhance a bass note on a duff gut string. There are instances in lute music, where the upper octave of a course is used melodically. My favourite example is the opening of Haray tre amours from Spinacino (Bk 2, 15v) which is notated as --|- --|--2-- --|- --2--4--5--4--5--4--2--4--|- --|- --|- but sounds as --|- --|--2-- --|- --2--4--5--4--5--4--2--4--|- --|--0-- --|- The high octave of the 5th course acts as a bass and a treble at the same time. Seventeenth-century guitarists wanted to exploit this possibility, but unfortunately there were times when they wanted notes to be heard only at one octave. Either they wanted just the low octave for a bass note, and had to put up with the high octave interfering with the treble line (as described recently by Monica), or they wanted just the high octave, and had to tolerate unwanted bourdons creeping in below. The various ways of stringing the baroque guitar are attempts to overcome this basic dilemma. It seems that composers writing serious pieces for the guitar wanted to exploit the melodic possibilities of the upper octave notes, but felt hampered by the bourdons. Reverse stringing, having no bourdon at the fifth, or at the fourth and fifth courses, are all attempts to purify the sound. As Monica says, quoting Sanz, removing the bourdons will sweeten the sound. We cannot tell from Sanz whether or not it was a new idea, but it certainly implies that at least some guitarists were using bourdons in the 1670s. Unfortunately we have little evidence to know what each guitarist did. I am grateful to Monica for writing: The only reference to reverse stringing is in Ruiz de Ribayaz in 1677 .. the earliest mention of the French tuning is in 1670 ... Is that really all we have to go on? Is there nothing written about stringing before 1670? If that is the case, no wonder there is so much controversy. Without evidence, we are forced to rely on our intuition, and to try to glean what we can from the music itself (hence my question about trills notated at the 4th and 5th courses, and my mention of high notes on the 4th and 5th courses in Sanz' Pavanas). Sometimes the answer is obvious. For example, in his recording of music by Franc,ois Campion (Arion ARN68483) Michel Amoricis unfortunately has a bourdon at the fifth course, which wreaks havoc with the campanellas. Other times it is less clear what we should do. By coming to different
[VIHUELA] Re: Where to end?
I just posted some recordings, and thankfully I did so before reading this: I have no problem with the pavanas played without bourdons. Try listening to Gordon Ferries - or Chris on this list perhaps has recorded it. Just bear in mind that the opening phrase will be doubled in octaves. Why thankfully? Because I didn't end up trying to record this piece, and I can direct you to the following: [1]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHblaa849Z8 By Xavier Diaz-Latorre. I think it's much better than any example you'd get from me. If you haven't listened to his reading of Sanz, I highly recommend it (you can buy the MP3s on Amazon). Keep in mind, this video clip is recorded in his spare bedroom (or something like that) -- he released an album with Pedro Esteban on which he conceives of this piece with rather somber percussion as its flooring. Presumably, Pedro knows what's to be had for percussion in a Pavana. Anyway, las pavanas de Sanz -- sin bordones. cud -- References 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHblaa849Z8 To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Where to end?
Yes - it is a beautiful recording and the ornamentation is exquisite. It just shows what you can do with such a simple piece. But don't be discouraged from playing it yourself Chris. Monica - Original Message - From: [1]Chris Despopoulos To: [2]Monica Hall ; [3]Stewart McCoy Cc: [4]Vihuelalist Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 3:31 PM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Where to end? I just posted some recordings, and thankfully I did so before reading this: I have no problem with the pavanas played without bourdons. Try listening to Gordon Ferries - or Chris on this list perhaps has recorded it. Just bear in mind that the opening phrase will be doubled in octaves. Why thankfully? Because I didn't end up trying to record this piece, and I can direct you to the following: [5]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHblaa849Z8 By Xavier Diaz-Latorre. I think it's much better than any example you'd get from me. If you haven't listened to his reading of Sanz, I highly recommend it (you can buy the MP3s on Amazon). Keep in mind, this video clip is recorded in his spare bedroom (or something like that) -- he released an album with Pedro Esteban on which he conceives of this piece with rather somber percussion as its flooring. Presumably, Pedro knows what's to be had for percussion in a Pavana. Anyway, las pavanas de Sanz -- sin bordones. cud -- References 1. mailto:despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com 2. mailto:mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk 3. mailto:lu...@tiscali.co.uk 4. mailto:vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu 5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHblaa849Z8 To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Invertible counterpoint
You have a very interesting point here. By saying that they probably had reverse stringing I referred to what is generally assumed today. A theory about stringing/tuning should inevitably be based on inference as well as evidence. I agree with that in principle but I think we should be careful to differentiate between what we infer and what is supported by documentary evidence. We can all infer what we like. Are you proposing here that Visee and Corbetta had the bourdon at the thumb side? I am suggesting that we don't actually know for certain as they don't say and in practice having the bordon on the thumb side of the course with the French tuning might be slightly less problematic than with the 5th course. However I had forgotten that there is this Italian manuscript with the tuning instructions which could be interpreted as indicating the French tuning and in the drawing the bordon appears to be on the side nearer the first course. I was told by the person who originally sent me a copy of this that in the manuscript itself this is more apparent but I would be a bit cautious about taking it at face value. It is a very crude drawing. Also French tuning has one bourdon. Even if Bartolotti popularised it (any evidence for that?), It can be inferred just as readily as any alternative. As a matter of interest have you discovered a source of reference that describes how Scaramouche strung his guitar? If you haven't in what way is the fact that he was in Paris relevant to this topic? would you suggest that he had the bourdon at the thumb side? I would say we don't actually know, but probably not. It is an interesting question though. As far as I am aware the first person to draw attention to sources which indicate that the treble strings are on the thumb side of the course was Donald Gill in his 1975 article in Early Music. Sylvia Murphy doesn't mention it all all. I am not sure what players did before that. I have got old LPs from the 60s where the players seem not to have high octaves strings at all. But certainly when I got my guitar in 1978 the treble strings were on the thumb side. If we are going to have a vote on it I think it should be by secret ballot. You have no right to claim categorically that you, and only you know Bartolotti's ideas on the matter. You read anything I say with great suspicion. Unfortunately the same is true of the way you read what I say. We are both just of a very suspicious turn of mind. Our exchanges remind me of Mr Darcy and Elizabeth in Pride and prejudice but perhaps you are not familiar with that jewel of English literature. They lived happily ever after in the end - well we are not actually told that they did and several other people have written sequels in which they continued to spar with one another so perhaps there is no hope for us. Monica To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Invertible counterpoint
Rafael Andia on his recording of de Visee's music has the bordon on the thumb side and this doesn't seem to have an appreciable effect on the music. How interesting! I thought there was a sort of 'universal assent' (of our times) on this - the 'French tuning' for De Visee. Was there a low octave on fourth and on the fifth? No - sorry - should have made it clear it was only on the 4th course. Monica To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Ambiguity
Incidentally, earlier in this discussion I asked if there was any early source which mentioned selective plucking of individual strings of an octave pair - no response so far. No - the only source which mentions it is Corrette in -can't remember the exact date - 1760 or there abouts. I think the fact that Sanz doesn't mention this as an option is of some significance. His solution is to change the stringing. Incidentally when practicing Bartolotti's Ciaccona from Book 1 this morning I noted that there are three trills on the 4th course and one on the 5th but obviously because of the left-hand fingering there are fewer opportunities to fit in ornamentation. Monica From: Stewart McCoy lu...@tiscali.co.uk Subject: [VIHUELA] Invertible counterpoint To: Vihuela List vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Sunday, 6 February, 2011, 12:47 Dear Martyn, Thanks for your message. I agree with what you say about the effect of reverse stringing, that it causes the upper octave to be more in evidence than it would be with a more conventional (i.e. lute) stringing. Yet why should a guitarist have wanted the high octave to predominate? It must be that he wanted to hear the high octave as a note in its own right - a melody note - rather than merely enhance a bass note on a duff gut string. There are instances in lute music, where the upper octave of a course is used melodically. My favourite example is the opening of Haray tre amours from Spinacino (Bk 2, 15v) which is notated as --|- --|--2-- --|- --2--4--5--4--5--4--2--4--|- --|- --|- but sounds as --|- --|--2-- --|- --2--4--5--4--5--4--2--4--|- --|--0-- --|- The high octave of the 5th course acts as a bass and a treble at the same time. Seventeenth-century guitarists wanted to exploit this possibility, but unfortunately there were times when they wanted notes to be heard only at one octave. Either they wanted just the low octave for a bass note, and had to put up with the high octave interfering with the treble line (as described recently by Monica), or they wanted just the high octave, and had to tolerate unwanted bourdons creeping in below. The various ways of stringing the baroque guitar are attempts to overcome this basic dilemma. It seems that composers writing serious pieces for the guitar wanted to exploit the melodic possibilities of the upper octave notes, but felt hampered by the bourdons. Reverse stringing, having no bourdon at the fifth, or at the fourth and fifth courses, are all attempts to purify the sound. As Monica says, quoting Sanz, removing the bourdons will sweeten the sound. We cannot tell from Sanz whether or not it was a new idea, but it certainly implies that at least some guitarists were using bourdons in the 1670s. Unfortunately we have little evidence to know what each guitarist did. I am grateful to Monica for writing: The only reference to reverse stringing is in Ruiz de Ribayaz in 1677 .. the earliest mention of the French tuning is in 1670 ... Is that really all we have to go on? Is there nothing written about stringing before 1670? If that is the case, no wonder there is so much controversy. Without evidence, we are forced to rely on our intuition, and to try to glean what we can from the music itself (hence my question about trills notated at the 4th and 5th courses, and my mention of high notes on the 4th and 5th courses in Sanz' Pavanas). Sometimes the answer is obvious. For example, in his recording of music by Franc,ois Campion (Arion ARN68483) Michel Amoricis unfortunately has a bourdon at the fifth course, which wreaks havoc with the campanellas. Other times it is less clear what we should do. By coming to different conclusions, we may be duplicating what actually happened in the 17th century, when guitarists will have had their own preferences, depending on what music they were playing. Best wishes, Stewart. -Original Message- From: Martyn Hodgson [mailto:[1]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk] Sent: 06 February 2011 08:55 To: Vihuela List; Stewart McCoy Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Invertible counterpoint Dear Stewart, I agree with some of what you say (in particular perhaps Sanz was expressing a desire for the most 'modern' style even if still composing some pieces with bourdons) but I think you overlook an obvious possibility when you write 'Why should the lower string of an octave pair on the baroque guitar be placed on the treble side? This is the other way round from the lute, and seems counter-intuitive. There must be a difference in sound, or guitarists would not have
[VIHUELA] Re: Ambiguity
Not surprisingly, Sanz indicates trills or mordents for the two lower courses in the first two books: * Marionas in two separate pieces * El que gustare de falsas ponga cuidado en estos cromaticos * Gallardas * Espanoletas #3 * Pasacalles por la O * Clarines y Trompetas __ From: Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk To: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Sun, February 6, 2011 11:41:41 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Ambiguity Incidentally, earlier in this discussion I asked if there was any early source which mentioned selective plucking of individual strings of an octave pair - no response so far. No - the only source which mentions it is Corrette in -can't remember the exact date - 1760 or there abouts. I think the fact that Sanz doesn't mention this as an option is of some significance. His solution is to change the stringing. Incidentally when practicing Bartolotti's Ciaccona from Book 1 this morning I noted that there are three trills on the 4th course and one on the 5th but obviously because of the left-hand fingering there are fewer opportunities to fit in ornamentation. Monica From: Stewart McCoy [1]lu...@tiscali.co.uk Subject: [VIHUELA] Invertible counterpoint To: Vihuela List [2]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Sunday, 6 February, 2011, 12:47 Dear Martyn, Thanks for your message. I agree with what you say about the effect of reverse stringing, that it causes the upper octave to be more in evidence than it would be with a more conventional (i.e. lute) stringing. Yet why should a guitarist have wanted the high octave to predominate? It must be that he wanted to hear the high octave as a note in its own right - a melody note - rather than merely enhance a bass note on a duff gut string. There are instances in lute music, where the upper octave of a course is used melodically. My favourite example is the opening of Haray tre amours from Spinacino (Bk 2, 15v) which is notated as --|- --|--2-- --|- --2--4--5--4--5--4--2--4--|- --|- --|- but sounds as --|- --|--2-- --|- --2--4--5--4--5--4--2--4--|- --|--0-- --|- The high octave of the 5th course acts as a bass and a treble at the same time. Seventeenth-century guitarists wanted to exploit this possibility, but unfortunately there were times when they wanted notes to be heard only at one octave. Either they wanted just the low octave for a bass note, and had to put up with the high octave interfering with the treble line (as described recently by Monica), or they wanted just the high octave, and had to tolerate unwanted bourdons creeping in below. The various ways of stringing the baroque guitar are attempts to overcome this basic dilemma. It seems that composers writing serious pieces for the guitar wanted to exploit the melodic possibilities of the upper octave notes, but felt hampered by the bourdons. Reverse stringing, having no bourdon at the fifth, or at the fourth and fifth courses, are all attempts to purify the sound. As Monica says, quoting Sanz, removing the bourdons will sweeten the sound. We cannot tell from Sanz whether or not it was a new idea, but it certainly implies that at least some guitarists were using bourdons in the 1670s. Unfortunately we have little evidence to know what each guitarist did. I am grateful to Monica for writing: The only reference to reverse stringing is in Ruiz de Ribayaz in 1677 .. the earliest mention of the French tuning is in 1670 ... Is that really all we have to go on? Is there nothing written about stringing before 1670? If that is the case, no wonder there is so much controversy. Without evidence, we are forced to rely on our intuition, and to try to glean what we can from the music itself (hence my question about trills notated at the 4th and 5th courses, and my mention of high notes on the 4th and 5th courses in Sanz' Pavanas). Sometimes the answer is obvious. For example, in his recording of music by Franc,ois Campion (Arion ARN68483) Michel Amoricis unfortunately has a bourdon at the fifth course, which wreaks havoc with the campanellas. Other times it is less clear what we should do. By coming to different conclusions, we may
[VIHUELA] Re: Ambiguity
Not surprisingly, Sanz indicates trills or mordents for the two lower courses in the first two books: Also, in his Regla quarta del trino Sanz offers this advice: I want to give a famous rule so that you know where a trill sounds good, and you can always do it even though it is not written down. In the first place, the open first, and second courses, trill them if you have a free finger, even though the trill is not written down. Also the fourth and fifth courses on the second fret, and all fourth frets. The reason is, because they are flats, or sharps, and in music this name corresponds to the trill Peter -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Ambiguity
Excellent work by both of you. Monica - Original Message - From: [1]Peter Kooiman To: [2]Chris Despopoulos Cc: [3]Vihuelalist ; [4]Monica Hall ; [5]Martyn Hodgson Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 5:37 PM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Ambiguity Not surprisingly, Sanz indicates trills or mordents for the two lower courses in the first two books: Also, in his Regla quarta del trino Sanz offers this advice: I want to give a famous rule so that you know where a trill sounds good, and you can always do it even though it is not written down. In the first place, the open first, and second courses, trill them if you have a free finger, even though the trill is not written down. Also the fourth and fifth courses on the second fret, and all fourth frets. The reason is, because they are flats, or sharps, and in music this name corresponds to the trill Peter -- References 1. mailto:pe...@crispu.com 2. mailto:despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com 3. mailto:vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu 4. mailto:mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk 5. mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Invertible counterpoint
As a matter of interest have you discovered a source of reference that describes how Scaramouche strung his guitar? If you haven't in what way is the fact that he was in Paris relevant to this topic? Did I mention Scaramouche (in relation to any topic) here? I feel this needs a bit of explanation. In my article 'Bourdons as usual', published in 'The Lute' 47, there is a footnote (63) which reads: 'In France I believe there were also guitarists who would have preferred the bourdon tuning. At that time there were many foreigners in Paris associated with the guitar: Italian actors (such as Tiberio Fiorelli, known as Scaramouche) and Spanish courtiers, associated with the guitar.' The footnote relates to the situation in Paris 1640 -1680, where there probably existed a rich variety in stringing. As appears from the publications of Amat, Sanz, Ribayaz and Guerau the bourdon tuning was fairly usual in Spain. And, as far as sources concern, also in Italy the tuning with bourdons is indicated/implied by far the most. It is my conviction that re-entrant tuning was in the minority in Spain and Italy. I suppose that for accompaniment (compare Sanz), which is what the guitar was used for in the commedia dell'arte, bourdons were normally used. Scaramouche is always pictured with the guitar. I don't know of every individual Spaniard or Italian what their preferences have been, but it is very likely that among these groups there were players who kept the tuning they had been using at home. Lex To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
