[VIHUELA] Re: hand plucking position (wasGuitar bridges)
Dear Lex, I agree with Chris: thumb-out does not inhibite playing through both strings of a double course. Neither need (or should) the thumb and finger ends meet using thumb-out as you suppose: the thumb is slightly forward of the fingers. Probably the best historic representation of this from around the time (second half 17thC) is Charles Mouton's hand position (on a lute) in the well known painting and engraving. Martyn --- On Sat, 3/12/11, Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar bridges To: Lex Eisenhardt eisenha...@planet.nl, vl vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu, Ed Durbrow edurb...@sea.plala.or.jp Date: Saturday, 3 December, 2011, 15:28 I have to take issue with the idea that thumb-out will tend toward an upward stroke (if I understand what you mean by thumb-out). Indeed, I've always played thumb-out, coming to Baroque guitar from the modern guitar. One thing I have always trained my hand to do (thumb included) is to push down through the string. I find that I can do this on a double course as well with decent results (well, one needs other judges, doesn't one). I find that I have to modulate that a bit, and reduce the downward stroke. But the point is, with thumb-out I have to cultivate a tendency for an upward stroke, not try to overcome it. Anecdotal, but that's my experience... Thumb-out puts me in the opposite situation from what you describe. cud __ From: Lex Eisenhardt [1]eisenha...@planet.nl To: vl [2]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu; Ed Durbrow [3]edurb...@sea.plala.or.jp Sent: Friday, December 2, 2011 6:12 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar bridges Given that the bourdon in any case will be slightly higher the the treble string as it is thicker it is not difficult to give it prominence where necessary. A plain gut bourdon on the fifth is so thick that it is hard to miss! Ed Durbrow That may seem so, but making use of the thumb outside technique--which I suppose was always done by part of the population, also on the lute--the fingers and the thumb sometimes will come very close to each other. In that situation it will be more difficult to avoid the thumb to strike in a somewhat upward direction (to avoid hitting the next course), and mainly touch the high octave. To play a real bass, which needs a good control of how we balance the two strings of a course, we better make sure to catch the low octave string, and make it sound loud enough. For the same reason it may be easier to play campanelas with thumb out. At least if you would like to single out the high octave strings. Lex To get on or off this list see list information at [4]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- -- References 1. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=eisenha...@planet.nl 2. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu 3. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=edurb...@sea.plala.or.jp 4. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: hand plucking position (wasGuitar bridges)
Hi Martyn, I agree with Chris: thumb-out does not inhibite playing through both strings of a double course. It makes it more difficult to go deeper into the low octave string than the high octave. What I said is that if thumb and fingers are close (at adjacent courses) there is the difficulty of both going deep into the course. If the thumb should go deep, to play a good bass, the fingers can easily miss the second string of the course. That is something Chris also seemed to conclude. In this respect thumb-in is is different. Neither need (or should) the thumb and finger ends meet using thumb-out as you suppose: the thumb is slightly forward of the fingers. Probably the best historic representation of this from around the time (second half 17thC) is Charles Mouton's hand position (on a lute) in the well known painting and engraving. You mean the de Troy painting? What would Mouton have done when the thumb and fingers had to play adjacent courses? Lex To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: hand plucking position (wasGuitar bridges)
Ta Lex, I'm not sure I'm getting this business of the thumb plucking up - I've presumed you mean away from the belly - but have I got this wrong? If it is as I've been thinking you meant (ie plucking the string upwards - away from the belly) doesn't this lead to much slapping of strings onto the fingerboard/belly if plucked with any great vigour? Regarding what Mouton would do when plucking adjacent courses with thumb and fingers: I see no reason to suppose he'd not keep thumb out (as I do). rgds Martyn --- On Sun, 4/12/11, Lex Eisenhardt eisenha...@planet.nl wrote: From: Lex Eisenhardt eisenha...@planet.nl Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: hand plucking position (wasGuitar bridges) To: vl vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu, Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Date: Sunday, 4 December, 2011, 9:34 Hi Martyn, I agree with Chris: thumb-out does not inhibite playing through both strings of a double course. It makes it more difficult to go deeper into the low octave string than the high octave. What I said is that if thumb and fingers are close (at adjacent courses) there is the difficulty of both going deep into the course. If the thumb should go deep, to play a good bass, the fingers can easily miss the second string of the course. That is something Chris also seemed to conclude. In this respect thumb-in is is different. Neither need (or should) the thumb and finger ends meet using thumb-out as you suppose: the thumb is slightly forward of the fingers. Probably the best historic representation of this from around the time (second half 17thC) is Charles Mouton's hand position (on a lute) in the well known painting and engraving. You mean the de Troy painting? What would Mouton have done when the thumb and fingers had to play adjacent courses? 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: hand plucking position (wasGuitar bridges)
I'm not sure I'm getting this business of the thumb plucking up - I've presumed you mean away from the belly - but have I got this wrong? If it is as I've been thinking you meant (ie plucking the string upwards - away from the belly) doesn't this lead to much slapping of strings onto the fingerboard/belly if plucked with any great vigour? Indeed in a slight angle away from the corpus (a guitar has a slender waist). I think I have seen many lutenists and guitarists doing that. This is probably one reason why most baroque guitarists have no clear bass when playing the (octave strung) fourth course. best, Lex To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar bridges
Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar bridges That may be the case with the lute - but it is not true that the thumb has an entirely separate function from the fingers on the guitar. Campanellas are the obvious example but it goes much further than that. I don't want to get endlessly involved in this but just to give some example I have looked at the examples. It is true that melodies are spread over 'high' and 'low' courses (5 4 vs 1,2 3). That is different from the lute, but something similar also occurs on the theorbo. Normally the fingers and the thumb stay in their own domain, on lower and higher courses. Also on the guitar. And yes, Bartolotti has written many melodies going from the 4th or 5th courses to higher ones, as you describe. But it doesn't change anything, in these treble melodies the high octave string can be singled out if you like (or you can play the course in such a way that the high octave will dominate). The point is that we can choose. The 4th and 5th courses can be used as either a bass or a treble. I thought that this was commonly understood. would there be any reason why the bass should not be clearly audible? And played with good tone? In theory perhaps. But I don't think he does very often write a bass in counterpoint to treble melodies although it may seem like it to you! There may be odd places - for example in the E minor gigue on p. 7 of book 2 where there is an imitative entry in bar 6 on the first stave which appears to be in the bass because it is on the 4th and 5th courses. Because of the octave doubling - which even you with whatever strings and technique you are using can't eliminate - sounds to me in the treble with inappropriate doubling in the octave below. So you have misunderstood. With or without doubling in the high octave, the entry is in the bass. (I guess you are only thinking of the first two notes?) Last week I was at a rehearsal with a marimba player. I complained about the overtones in the bass register, an E producing a very loud b (the 3rd harmonic) in a diminished chord E -g - b-flat. He told me that you have that all the time, cannot be avoided but he still loved the instrument. Why I was asking these questions about bridges and such was because I think we tend to approach the problem the wrong way round. The music is the way it is because that is how the instrument was, and the instrument was like that for practical reasons. What practical reasons? Lex To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: hand plucking position (wasGuitar bridges)
Thanks again Lex. But if we pluck THROUGH the course, (ie parallel to the plane of the belly) one can achieve a much greater amplitude without the string slapping rattleing on the fingerboard/belly and thus will have a strong bass (as well as its octave) - as I think, the Old Ones would have generally expected. Martyn --- On Sun, 4/12/11, Lex Eisenhardt eisenha...@planet.nl wrote: From: Lex Eisenhardt eisenha...@planet.nl Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: hand plucking position (wasGuitar bridges) To: vl vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu, Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Date: Sunday, 4 December, 2011, 9:58 I'm not sure I'm getting this business of the thumb plucking up - I've presumed you mean away from the belly - but have I got this wrong? If it is as I've been thinking you meant (ie plucking the string upwards - away from the belly) doesn't this lead to much slapping of strings onto the fingerboard/belly if plucked with any great vigour? Indeed in a slight angle away from the corpus (a guitar has a slender waist). I think I have seen many lutenists and guitarists doing that. This is probably one reason why most baroque guitarists have no clear bass when playing the (octave strung) fourth course. best, Lex -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: hand plucking position (wasGuitar bridges)
But if we pluck THROUGH the course, (ie parallel to the plane of the belly) one can achieve a much greater amplitude without the string slapping rattleing on the fingerboard/belly and thus will have a strong bass (as well as its octave) - as I think, the Old Ones would have generally expected. There is not much disagreement about this. I only would add that striking parallel is perhaps not always the best solution. Probably not in campanelas and, reversely, also not when playing a bass on a baroque guitar. And I think that, on adjacent courses, striking completely parallel (all 4 strings involved) with both thumb and fingers is not really easy. Lex To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar bridges
Sorry - it's not you that is going batty. It is me being careless (well - it was late on Saturday night). I was referring to the Ciaccona which is on p.49 and the actual passage is towards the end - on p.50, the 3rd stave down. The first full 4 bar variation is played on the 4th and 5th couses with alternating thumb and fingers. With octave stringing on the 4th course it is very difficult to play that passage evenly (at least for me) because it is natural to stress the high string with the thumb and the bourdon with the finger. Perhaps Lex can do it perfectly - but I would like to hear him do it. As ever Monica - Original Message - From: [1]Martyn Hodgson To: [2]Monica Hall Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 9:24 AM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar bridges Dear Monica, Your observations below generally seem spot on - except I can't find the bit you refer to when you write this: Following on from what Chris has said in his later message the Ciaccona on p.48 - the first variation on the third stave is to be played alternating the thumb and fingers, the fingers being used for notes on the 4th and 5th courses. I'm clearly going batty but on the third stave of page 48 of the 1640 book, I can see no notes at all on the 5th course.. Or are you meaning the second stave with the 6 4 on the 5th and 4 on the third? If the latter why would one pluck the 6 with the thumb? rgds Martyn --- On Sat, 3/12/11, Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: From: Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar bridges To: Lex Eisenhardt eisenha...@planet.nl Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu, Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com Date: Saturday, 3 December, 2011, 22:42 Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar bridges It is often assumed that after c 1600 most lutenists played thumb out, because of the separated functions of thumb and fingers in most of the music (the thumb playing the bass). I don't think that iconography from the 17th century shows many thumb inside positions on guitar. Which of course doesn't say all. That may be the case with the lute - but it is not true that the thumb has an entirely separate function from the fingers on the guitar. Campanellas are the obvious example but it goes much further than that. I don't want to get endlessly involved in this but just to give some example - the first half of the Allemanda p.71 of Bartolotti's 1st book - - the two semiquavers in the first full bar on the first line, one on the 4th course followed by one on the 1st course (f-g) - the two semiquavers in the second full bar on the first line, one on the 5th course followed by one on the 2nd course (a-b) - the two semiquavers in the first full bar on the second line, one on the 5th course followed by one on the 4th course (c-d) - at the cadence - the changing note figure (e-d-e) in all of these places the notes on the 4th or 5th courses belong to the upper melodic line but will be played with the thumb. There are lots of other similar places. This alternating of the thumb and fingers seems to be derived from playing with a plectrum - the melody is split between the outer courses played with up and down strokes of the plectrum. Following on from what Chris has said in his later message the Ciaccona on p.48 - the first variation on the third stave is to be played alternating the thumb and fingers, the fingers being used for notes on the 4th and 5th courses. If we would suppose for one second that Bartolotti used bourdons (we all seem to consider this an one of the possible stringing options), and has written a bass in counterpoint to treble melodies, would there be any reason why the bass should not be clearly audible? And played with good tone? In theory perhaps. But I don't think he does very often write a bass in counterpoint to treble melodies although it may seem like it to you! There may be odd places - for example in the E minor gigue on p. 7 of book 2 where there is an imitative entry in bar 6 on the first stave which appears to be in the bass because it is on the 4th and 5th courses. Because of the octave doubling - which even you with whatever strings and technique you are using can't eliminate - sounds to me in the treble with inappropriate doubling in the octave below. The entry would be clearest without bourdons on either course. (I listened to both recordings) I have no difficulty in following the counterpoint one way or another. You seem to think that people won't be able to follow the music unless it is spelt out in the most literal way. You are hooked on the idea
[VIHUELA] Re: hand plucking position (wasGuitar bridges)
Just to clarify, I didn't mean to say I had trouble fully playing adjacent double courses. I was talking about trouble when playing pipipi on the same course. If anything (for me, at least), to get an even balance of bordon and treble on a course for p and for i, I would want the surface height to be equal for both courses. In that way, I can plan to brush my fingers and thumb across an equally horizontal surface. With the surface of a bordon higher than the treble, I would have to roll my hand back to try and coax an upward stroke out of the thumb, and a downward stroke of the fingers (relatively speaking). That would be too much for my feeble brain, I'm afraid. It's easier for me to conceive of a plane that has targets to strike, and then adjust how I strike it (more horizontally when playing double courses). But conceptually, the adjustment for a given effect is the same for all fingers (and thumb). When running pipi on the same course, it's pure laziness and bad technique that keeps me from playing the full course. And I pointed out a problem with bordones for that technique, where the finger stroke is accented more than the thumb. Raising the bordon (lowering the treble) would only aggravate that for me. But again, my technique may not be appropriate... I really don't know. I'm just doing what produces a convincing sound *to me*, and hoping it's ate least acceptable to the rest of the world. __ From: Lex Eisenhardt eisenha...@planet.nl To: vl vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu; Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2011 4:34 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: hand plucking position (wasGuitar bridges) Hi Martyn, I agree with Chris: thumb-out does not inhibite playing through both strings of a double course. It makes it more difficult to go deeper into the low octave string than the high octave. What I said is that if thumb and fingers are close (at adjacent courses) there is the difficulty of both going deep into the course. If the thumb should go deep, to play a good bass, the fingers can easily miss the second string of the course. That is something Chris also seemed to conclude. In this respect thumb-in is is different. Neither need (or should) the thumb and finger ends meet using thumb-out as you suppose: the thumb is slightly forward of the fingers. Probably the best historic representation of this from around the time (second half 17thC) is Charles Mouton's hand position (on a lute) in the well known painting and engraving. You mean the de Troy painting? What would Mouton have done when the thumb and fingers had to play adjacent courses? Lex To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html --
[VIHUELA] Re: hand plucking position (wasGuitar bridges)
Well, for the last statement -- plucking adjacent courses -- I would say that it depends on your goal with the body of the right hand. If the goal is as I've been taught, which is to keep the hand as inert as possible (which gives it its weight), then you have no choice but to strike downward with both p and i. It's hard to cultivate the motion, but it's similar to snapping your fingers. You have to really work on it I suppose, but the idea is to make it automatic. In order to pluck upward with p and i at the same I would need to pull up with my hand. For me, that spoils all preparation for the next notes. I really don't know what would have been done in the time, but unless I'm convinced otherwise, I would like to keep with an inert hand (as much as I'm able). As for campanelas, for me the issue goes away because I don't use bordones. The day will come, I suppose, and I'll fight with it then. __ From: Lex Eisenhardt eisenha...@planet.nl To: vl vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu; Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2011 5:21 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: hand plucking position (wasGuitar bridges) But if we pluck THROUGH the course, (ie parallel to the plane of the belly) one can achieve a much greater amplitude without the string slapping rattleing on the fingerboard/belly and thus will have a strong bass (as well as its octave) - as I think, the Old Ones would have generally expected. There is not much disagreement about this. I only would add that striking parallel is perhaps not always the best solution. Probably not in campanelas and, reversely, also not when playing a bass on a baroque guitar. And I think that, on adjacent courses, striking completely parallel (all 4 strings involved) with both thumb and fingers is not really easy. Lex To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html --
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar bridges
Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar bridges I have looked at the examples. It is true that melodies are spread over 'high' and 'low' courses (5 4 vs 1,2 3). That is different from the lute, but something similar also occurs on the theorbo. Well - exactly - and Bartolotti was a theorbo player. Normally the fingers and the thumb stay in their own domain, on lower and higher courses. Also on the guitar. I don't think so. Certainly not in guitar music. Use of alternating finger and thumb over different courses is a feature of the music in Bartolotti's first book and elsewhere. e.g. The Ciaccona on p.49. First of all - the descending bass line is actually in the middle register. It goes C B A G. With a bourdon on the 5th course it goes down to A and then leaps up a 7th and disappears in surrounding counterpoint. A clear example of this is the variation at the beginning of stave 2 on the first page. Without a bourdon in most places it is present as a clearly audible descending scale. Secondly - the passing notes between the chords usually belong to the upper melodic line. This is obvious in a number of places - notably in the two variations at the end of line 2 where the 3-part chords are to be played with the first and second fingers. All the passing notes are split between courses but belong to the melody. There are lots of place in Foscarini - where passing notes on the 4th and 5th courses really belong to the upper melody - the Corrente detta la Fauorita on p.60 for example. In Corbetta 1648 - the second half of the Almanda on p.40 - the passing notes between the chords belong to the melody. (These are all pieces I play - and I have never heard them played by anyone else). But it doesn't change anything, in these treble melodies the high octave string can be singled out if you like (or you can play the course in such a way that the high octave will dominate). The point is that we can choose. The 4th and 5th courses can be used as either a bass or a treble. I thought that this was commonly understood. It may be commonly understood by you and some other players today but that doesn't prove that that is how composers in the 17th century intended the music to be played. You are arguing that because it is possible (although in practice it doesn't seem to me to work very effectively) this proves that the music is not intended to be played with a re-entrant tuning. In his tutor of course James Tyler has not only suggested this but has put a cross under the notes where he thinks the bourdon should be included - rather than omitted - which seems to me to be taking it to absurd lengths. But I know of no evidence at all that that is what players did in the 17th century. There may be odd places - for example in the E minor gigue on p. 7 of book 2 where there is an imitative entry in bar 6 on the first stave which appears to be in the bass because it is on the 4th and 5th courses. Because of the octave doubling - which even you with whatever strings and technique you are using can't eliminate - sounds to me in the treble with inappropriate doubling in the octave below. So you have misunderstood. With or without doubling in the high octave, the entry is in the bass. (I guess you are only thinking of the first two notes?) I actually made a staff notation transcription of the opening bars of this piece some time ago including the octave doubling - and no, I haven't misunderstood.The first four notes sound in the upper register (they do when you play it anyway). Then the intervals of the theme are inverted so that the theme is split into two with a little question and answer which creates some variety instead of having it exactly the same. It doesn't have to belong to the bass at all. Last week I was at a rehearsal with a marimba player. I complained about the overtones in the bass register, an E producing a very loud b (the 3rd harmonic) in a diminished chord E -g - b-flat. He told me that you have that all the time, cannot be avoided but he still loved the instrument. That is a two way argument. You think that octave doubling is something we have to put up with. I think that there is less to put up with with a re-entrant or partially re-entrant tuning and the part writing is often clearer. Why I was asking these questions about bridges and such was because I think we tend to approach the problem the wrong way round. The music is the way it is because that is how the instrument was, and the instrument was like that for practical reasons. What practical reasons? It seems that we don't actually know very much about how guitars were constructed and the instruments we play today and the strings we use may not resemble very closely those which Bartolotti, Foscarini and Corbetta played. I believe your guitar is modeled on the Stradivarius in the Ashmolean made in 1688 but presumably scaled down since the present string length
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar bridges
Normally the fingers and the thumb stay in their own domain, on lower and higher courses. Also on the guitar. I don't think so. Certainly not in guitar music. Use of alternating finger and thumb over different courses is a feature of the music in Bartolotti's first book and elsewhere. e.g. The Bartolotti ciaccona seems to be the one exception. In the rest of the book there are very few right-hand fingerings (with dots), for some single notes on the 4th course. Certainly no p-i-p-i runs, and completely unproblematic with bourdons There are lots of place in Foscarini - where passing notes on the 4th and 5th courses really belong to the upper melody - the Corrente detta la Fauorita on p.60 for example. How do you know? Foscarini used bourdons, and he was not really a campanela man. [about Bartolotti's gigue from the 2nd book, p 7] I actually made a staff notation transcription of the opening bars of this piece some time ago including the octave doubling - and no, I haven't misunderstood.The first four notes sound in the upper register (they do when you play it anyway). Then the intervals of the theme are inverted so that the theme is split into two with a little question and answer which creates some variety instead of having it exactly the same. It doesn't have to belong to the bass at all. This is only true if you have no bourdons at all, as three of the first four notes are on the 4th course. Since you imply that you have listened carefully to my recordings, I fear that your ear is insensitive for lower frequencies. Almost no one who performs Bartolotti's music seems to think that it is written with re-entrant stringing in mind. Stadivarius instruments are apparently regarded as untypical. Bartolotti wouldn't have played one (he was dead by 1688) and may not have had a slotted bridge so wouldn't have been able to make the adjustments you say you make. Bartolotti lived in France. Some Voboams seem to have slots. Who knows who invented those. Besides, I'm sure we don't know all about Italian guitars. And he would have been using plain gut strings not nylgut. Please explain what would be the difference, for voice leading etc. Lex To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Gloomy day, nice sunset, 17th century minimalism, Playford tune
The piece 'Bobel' is in Princess Anne's 'lute' book and I think it was Jocelyn Nelson who identified it as the tune Christchurch Bells, familiar from Playford. Monica transcribed and edited the Playford tunes in Princess Anne's book and they are downloadable from her ning early guitar site. http://earlyguitar.ning.com/profile/MonicaHall This tune is -or exists also as - a round. So might the guitar version have been played as a round? A guitar part with lots of little ornaments and strums is a lot different from a single line. Here's a shot at it. It sounds a bit ragged - but that's probably just me. Nice sunset, though. The rest of the countryside looked dull and dank. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tom6ZYbhqSc Stuart To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
