[VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
Thank you for this Eloy.
But, of course, it might be said that 6 guitars, percussion and conch
shell is already excessive. The question is: what evidence do we have
that such instruments, and in such numbers, were expected by JG de
Padilla and his auditors in contemporary performances of his setting of
Missa Ego flos campi.
Perhaps they were commonly employed, but are there any early records of
this?
Martyn
--- On Thu, 15/12/11, Eloy Cruz eloyc...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Eloy Cruz eloyc...@gmail.com
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to
earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
To: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Date: Thursday, 15 December, 2011, 19:35
Of course, like you, I doubt whether the Pope would have expected
a
strummed guitar in Palestrina's Messa Papae Marcelli. Indeed, is
there
even any evidence for the excessive strumming in some modern
fashionable performances of South American sacred settings?
Probably not as much as players today like to think - but Eloy
perhaps could
tell us more about that if he is not too busy.
Well, I know no excessive strumming in some modern fashionable
performances
of South American sacred settings. The only example that comes to my
mind
is the Missa Mexicana CD by the Harp Consort: it's a setting of Missa
Ego
flos campi by JG de Padilla. The list of performers includes 6 guitar
players and 3 percussion players, one of whom also plays conch shell. I
think this CD could really be called fashionable: in between the Missa
movements, it mixes some dance-songs, villancicos and even a vocal
version
of Murcia's Cumbees alla Swingle Singers.
The liner notes only explain that the guitar was the most significant
instrument of Spanish baroque music, and mention that a set of 6
matched
Veracruz baroque guitars was specially made for this project. Anyway,
I
can't hear any excessive strumming in any of the tracks.
Cheers
eloy
We also agree on the excessive strumming ('thrashing about') often
found in some modern performances of solo songs.
Yes indeed!
Monica
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: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
Thanks Monica,
It is a realisation of the bass line but, because of the requirements
of the instrument, not always with the written bass part as the lowest
note on the guitar: I guess we'll just have to agree to differ on
this.
Incidentally, the practical considerations for the theorbo also applies
to earlier music (eg Monteverdi et als) as well as Locke and later.
regards
Martyn
--- On Thu, 15/12/11, Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk wrote:
From: Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return
to earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
To: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Date: Thursday, 15 December, 2011, 20:17
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 3:25 PM
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to
earlier
question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
Hmmm... Does a realised bass part always have to contain the bass
exactly as written in the staff notation as its lowest line? Of
course, ideally yes (and on the keyboard always yes) but many
theorbo
continuo realisations, for example, are obliged to adapt the bass
because of lack of chromatic notes in the instrument's lower
register
(or other reasons) and so must take the realised bass higher than
some
of the other lower parts in the work. Thus, in a couple of Locke
anthems I have in front of me at this moment, the occassional low
Eb
will have to be taken at the octave higher (and above the second
and
third choir sung bass lines) if I'm going to play a natural E
elswhere
in the work.
I don't think this is really relevant as we were discussing the very
early
17th century Italian repertoire - specifically alfabeto accompaniments.
A guitar playing an Alfabeto realisation will similarly have the
bass
note somewhere in the chord - hopefully at the bottom if the guitar
has
bourdons on both bass courses (as my continuo guitar does) - but if
not
then elsewhere in the full chord.
The point is that it that it may not do. The bass is the lowest
part.
We, and others, have often pointed
out that the peculiar stringing of the guitar (with high octaves
outwards etc) when strummed produces block chord sounds rather than
a
contrapuntal accompaniment - I see no practical reason why this
isn't a
realisation (ie a conversion into sound, a making known of) the
harmonies implied/required by the bass.
That may your interpretation of realizing a basso continuo part but I
don't
think that it is anyone elses.
Of course, a melodic bass
instrument is these situations is a bonus: but also note the
discussion
sometime ago about Marini's songs and the use of a seperate bass
with
the guitar...
I think I made it quite clear when we discussed this before that I do
not
think that the separate bass line is intended to be performed with the
alfabeto - indead if it were in some instances it would create
problems.
Here is his observation Note that in some places
you will find that the alfabeto does not fit with the bass line.
This
is because it is the wish of the author to accompany the voice in
as
many ways as possible rather than while, by paying heed to the
requirements of one instrument, he is constrained by those of the
other, since the guitar lacks many proper consonances.
I sense he thinks it a valid 'realisation' - if imperfect.
It may be a valid realization depending on the way you chose to define
realization but it is not a realization of the bass line.
Regards
Monica
.
--- On Thu, 15/12/11, Monica Hall [1]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk wrote:
From: Monica Hall [2]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return
to
earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
To: Martyn Hodgson [3]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
Cc: Vihuelalist [4]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Date: Thursday, 15 December, 2011, 14:37
- Original Message - From: Martyn Hodgson
[1][5]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
To: Monica Hall [2][6]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Cc: Vihuelalist [3][7]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu; Lex
Eisenhardt
[4][8]eisenha...@planet.nl
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 9:13 AM
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to
earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
The Corradi 1616 collection contains pieces for one, two and
for
three
voices along with an intabulated part for 'chitarrone', the
guitar
alfabeto and a staff notated bass line ('da sonare nel
[VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
I thought one of the significant points of the period was a transition
to harmonic vs voice thinking. And that the guitar was well
positioned, if not instrumental, within that transition. So whether we
call it bajo continuo per se, it's consistent in my mind to consider
alfabeto a realization (stylized, perhaps) of the bass.
Of course, the alfabeto can often oversimplify that realization. I
look at it much the way I look at the song books you can get today,
with guitar chords that gloss over interesting harmonic progressions.
The same music played by the 8th graders I taught would sound very
different from what I would choose to do.
One thing I hear almost everywhere I go is that by and large the
published guitar music is a performance suggestion, not writ.
Everybody I've worked with has blessed changes to fingering, addition
or changes of notes, and encouraged improvisation. The Sanz book is
viewed as a lesson book, not a book of pieces that are to be played
exactly as written, for example. With Roncali I was chastised for not
improvising. So why would alfabetos be any different?But does that
make them any less realizations of the bass? If we're talking about
pre-harmonic thinking, where else would the alfabetos come from?
cud
__
From: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
To: Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 3:41 AM
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to
earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
Thanks Monica,
It is a realisation of the bass line but, because of the requirements
of the instrument, not always with the written bass part as the
lowest
note on the guitar: I guess we'll just have to agree to differ on
this.
Incidentally, the practical considerations for the theorbo also
applies
to earlier music (eg Monteverdi et als) as well as Locke and later.
regards
Martyn
--- On Thu, 15/12/11, Monica Hall [1]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk wrote:
From: Monica Hall [2]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return
to earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
To: Martyn Hodgson [3]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
Cc: Vihuelalist [4]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Date: Thursday, 15 December, 2011, 20:17
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 3:25 PM
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to
earlier
question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
Hmmm... Does a realised bass part always have to contain the bass
exactly as written in the staff notation as its lowest line? Of
course, ideally yes (and on the keyboard always yes) but many
theorbo
continuo realisations, for example, are obliged to adapt the bass
because of lack of chromatic notes in the instrument's lower
register
(or other reasons) and so must take the realised bass higher than
some
of the other lower parts in the work. Thus, in a couple of Locke
anthems I have in front of me at this moment, the occassional low
Eb
will have to be taken at the octave higher (and above the second
and
third choir sung bass lines) if I'm going to play a natural E
elswhere
in the work.
I don't think this is really relevant as we were discussing the very
early
17th century Italian repertoire - specifically alfabeto
accompaniments.
A guitar playing an Alfabeto realisation will similarly have the
bass
note somewhere in the chord - hopefully at the bottom if the
guitar
has
bourdons on both bass courses (as my continuo guitar does) - but
if
not
then elsewhere in the full chord.
The point is that it that it may not do. The bass is the lowest
part.
We, and others, have often pointed
out that the peculiar stringing of the guitar (with high octaves
outwards etc) when strummed produces block chord sounds rather
than
a
contrapuntal accompaniment - I see no practical reason why this
isn't a
realisation (ie a conversion into sound, a making known of) the
harmonies implied/required by the bass.
That may your interpretation of realizing a basso continuo part but I
don't
think that it is anyone elses.
Of course, a melodic bass
instrument is these situations is a bonus: but also note the
discussion
sometime ago about Marini's songs and the use of a seperate bass
with
the guitar...
I think I made it quite clear when we discussed this before that I do
not
think that the separate bass line is intended to be performed with
[VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
Thanks Chris.
Your observation that '...whether we call it bajo continuo per se,
it's consistent in my mind to consider alfabeto a realization
(stylized, perhaps) of the bass..', certainly coincides with my view on
guitar basso continuo using alfabeto. And, it seems to me, reflects
Marini's position too.
regards
martyn
--- On Fri, 16/12/11, Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com
wrote:
From: Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return
to earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
To: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk, Monica Hall
mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Date: Friday, 16 December, 2011, 14:08
I thought one of the significant points of the period was a transition
to harmonic vs voice thinking. And that the guitar was well
positioned, if not instrumental, within that transition. So whether we
call it bajo continuo per se, it's consistent in my mind to consider
alfabeto a realization (stylized, perhaps) of the bass.
Of course, the alfabeto can often oversimplify that realization. I
look at it much the way I look at the song books you can get today,
with guitar chords that gloss over interesting harmonic progressions.
The same music played by the 8th graders I taught would sound very
different from what I would choose to do.
One thing I hear almost everywhere I go is that by and large the
published guitar music is a performance suggestion, not writ.
Everybody I've worked with has blessed changes to fingering, addition
or changes of notes, and encouraged improvisation. The Sanz book is
viewed as a lesson book, not a book of pieces that are to be played
exactly as written, for example. With Roncali I was chastised for not
improvising. So why would alfabetos be any different?But does that
make them any less realizations of the bass? If we're talking about
pre-harmonic thinking, where else would the alfabetos come from?
cud
__
From: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
To: Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 3:41 AM
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to
earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
Thanks Monica,
It is a realisation of the bass line but, because of the requirements
of the instrument, not always with the written bass part as the
lowest
note on the guitar: I guess we'll just have to agree to differ on
this.
Incidentally, the practical considerations for the theorbo also
applies
to earlier music (eg Monteverdi et als) as well as Locke and later.
regards
Martyn
--- On Thu, 15/12/11, Monica Hall [1]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk wrote:
From: Monica Hall [2]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return
to earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
To: Martyn Hodgson [3]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
Cc: Vihuelalist [4]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Date: Thursday, 15 December, 2011, 20:17
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 3:25 PM
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to
earlier
question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
Hmmm... Does a realised bass part always have to contain the bass
exactly as written in the staff notation as its lowest line? Of
course, ideally yes (and on the keyboard always yes) but many
theorbo
continuo realisations, for example, are obliged to adapt the bass
because of lack of chromatic notes in the instrument's lower
register
(or other reasons) and so must take the realised bass higher than
some
of the other lower parts in the work. Thus, in a couple of Locke
anthems I have in front of me at this moment, the occassional low
Eb
will have to be taken at the octave higher (and above the second
and
third choir sung bass lines) if I'm going to play a natural E
elswhere
in the work.
I don't think this is really relevant as we were discussing the very
early
17th century Italian repertoire - specifically alfabeto
accompaniments.
A guitar playing an Alfabeto realisation will similarly have the
bass
note somewhere in the chord - hopefully at the bottom if the
guitar
has
bourdons on both bass courses (as my continuo guitar does) - but
if
not
then elsewhere in the full chord.
The point is that it that it may not do. The bass is the lowest
part.
We, and others, have often pointed
out that the peculiar stringing of the
[VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
Hello-
I'm almost too late into the conversation, but this topic does pertain
to one of my current projects, so I'll put it out there
It seems to me that the debate centers on whether or not the simple
alfabeto chords will suffice as an accompaniment, without additional
instruments to play the written bass line. It is my opinion that some
composers (although perhaps not all) would have been quite content to
hear their secular songs accompanied by the guitar alone, and that the
alfabeto framework provided would give an adequate harmonic structure
for the voice.
However, I have had very little success in finding any recordings of
performances of early 17th century secular song that doesn't truck out
a veritable football team of continuo players! I am not immune to the
charms of the hammered dulcimer, but I do find it difficult to
understand how these interpretations could ever be considered to be
closer to what Grandi had in mind than what I have been doing myself as
a singer and guitarist.
So the question remains: Is the accompaniment provided by the alfabeto
symbols lacking? And, to my mind even more importantly: Is the
freedom that results from a self-accompanied performance (that simply
wouldn't be possible with a 3-4 member continuo group) worth enough to
outweigh any perceived shortcomings in the realization?
I have recorded three songs as a demo for a grant application, and have
posted them on a hidden page of my personal website, for those who
might be interested in this debate. One aria each by Grandi, Landi, and
Kapsberger, with scores and translations included.
The link is:
[1]http://www.budroach.com/baroque_guitar.html?r=20111216104205
I welcome your comments (either here or on my contact page) and thank
you for your scholarship!
Bud Roach
--- On Fri, 12/16/11, Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
From: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to
earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
To: Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com
Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Received: Friday, December 16, 2011, 9:17 AM
Thanks Chris.
Your observation that '...whether we call it bajo continuo per se,
it's consistent in my mind to consider alfabeto a realization
(stylized, perhaps) of the bass..', certainly coincides with my view
on
guitar basso continuo using alfabeto. And, it seems to me, reflects
Marini's position too.
regards
martyn
--- On Fri, 16/12/11, Chris Despopoulos
[2]despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com
wrote:
From: Chris Despopoulos [3]despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was:
Return
to earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
To: Martyn Hodgson [4]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk, Monica Hall
[5]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Cc: Vihuelalist [6]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Date: Friday, 16 December, 2011, 14:08
I thought one of the significant points of the period was a
transition
to harmonic vs voice thinking. And that the guitar was well
positioned, if not instrumental, within that transition. So whether
we
call it bajo continuo per se, it's consistent in my mind to consider
alfabeto a realization (stylized, perhaps) of the bass.
Of course, the alfabeto can often oversimplify that realization. I
look at it much the way I look at the song books you can get today,
with guitar chords that gloss over interesting harmonic
progressions.
The same music played by the 8th graders I taught would sound very
different from what I would choose to do.
One thing I hear almost everywhere I go is that by and large the
published guitar music is a performance suggestion, not writ.
Everybody I've worked with has blessed changes to fingering,
addition
or changes of notes, and encouraged improvisation. The Sanz book is
viewed as a lesson book, not a book of pieces that are to be played
exactly as written, for example. With Roncali I was chastised for
not
improvising. So why would alfabetos be any different?But does
that
make them any less realizations of the bass? If we're talking about
pre-harmonic thinking, where else would the alfabetos come from?
cud
__
From: Martyn Hodgson [7]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
To: Monica Hall [8]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Cc:
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 3:41 AM
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to
earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
Thanks Monica,
It is a realisation
[VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
Dear Martyn
Yes, 6 guitars is a very peculiar continuo band.
As I said, I remember no evidence of such a band, or particularly guitars,
playing at the cathedral in Padilla's times. But now that you mention it,
many years ago, an american musicologist told me something about the music
chapel of Puebla inviting some popular musicians to join them for the
performance of some villancicos or something like that. I'm trying to
confirm this reference, but Dr. Stanford is apparently not available at this
time. Whenever I get some info I'll let you know
Greetings
eloy
El [FECHA], [NOMBRE] [DIRECCION] escribió:
Thank you for this Eloy.
But, of course, it might be said that 6 guitars, percussion and conch
shell is already excessive. The question is: what evidence do we have
that such instruments, and in such numbers, were expected by JG de
Padilla and his auditors in contemporary performances of his setting of
Missa Ego flos campi.
Perhaps they were commonly employed, but are there any early records of
this?
Martyn
--- On Thu, 15/12/11, Eloy Cruz eloyc...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Eloy Cruz eloyc...@gmail.com
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to
earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
To: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Date: Thursday, 15 December, 2011, 19:35
Of course, like you, I doubt whether the Pope would have expected
a
strummed guitar in Palestrina's Messa Papae Marcelli. Indeed, is
there
even any evidence for the excessive strumming in some modern
fashionable performances of South American sacred settings?
Probably not as much as players today like to think - but Eloy
perhaps could
tell us more about that if he is not too busy.
Well, I know no excessive strumming in some modern fashionable
performances
of South American sacred settings. The only example that comes to my
mind
is the Missa Mexicana CD by the Harp Consort: it's a setting of Missa
Ego
flos campi by JG de Padilla. The list of performers includes 6 guitar
players and 3 percussion players, one of whom also plays conch shell. I
think this CD could really be called fashionable: in between the Missa
movements, it mixes some dance-songs, villancicos and even a vocal
version
of Murcia's Cumbees alla Swingle Singers.
The liner notes only explain that the guitar was the most significant
instrument of Spanish baroque music, and mention that a set of 6
matched
Veracruz baroque guitars was specially made for this project. Anyway,
I
can't hear any excessive strumming in any of the tracks.
Cheers
eloy
We also agree on the excessive strumming ('thrashing about') often
found in some modern performances of solo songs.
Yes indeed!
Monica
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: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
- Original Message -
From: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
To: Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com
Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 2:17 PM
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to earlier
question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
Thanks Chris.
Your observation that '...whether we call it bajo continuo per se,
it's consistent in my mind to consider alfabeto a realization
(stylized, perhaps) of the bass..', certainly coincides with my view on
guitar basso continuo using alfabeto. And, it seems to me, reflects
Marini's position too.
Sorry - but I think that you are both mistaken. You seem to be trying to
argue that any form of accompaniment can be regarded as realizing a bass
line. Interpreting terminology and practice in this way is meaningless.
A basso continuo is what is says it is - a continuous, clearly
identifiable bass line from which the accompaning intervals (rather than
triads) are calculated. Occasionally, as you say the notes, which appear in
the bass part may not always be reproduced exactly for practical reasons,
but there is always a clear bass part - not one concealed or implied
incidentally in a series of major and minor triads.
It is probably true that because the baroque guitarists did think solely in
terms of basis triadic harmony that it had some influence in the way that
understanding of harmony developed in the early 17th century.But that is
a different matter.
Regards
Monica
--- On Fri, 16/12/11, Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com
wrote:
From: Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return
to earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
To: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk, Monica Hall
mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Date: Friday, 16 December, 2011, 14:08
I thought one of the significant points of the period was a transition
to harmonic vs voice thinking. And that the guitar was well
positioned, if not instrumental, within that transition. So whether we
call it bajo continuo per se, it's consistent in my mind to consider
alfabeto a realization (stylized, perhaps) of the bass.
Of course, the alfabeto can often oversimplify that realization. I
look at it much the way I look at the song books you can get today,
with guitar chords that gloss over interesting harmonic progressions.
The same music played by the 8th graders I taught would sound very
different from what I would choose to do.
One thing I hear almost everywhere I go is that by and large the
published guitar music is a performance suggestion, not writ.
Everybody I've worked with has blessed changes to fingering, addition
or changes of notes, and encouraged improvisation. The Sanz book is
viewed as a lesson book, not a book of pieces that are to be played
exactly as written, for example. With Roncali I was chastised for not
improvising. So why would alfabetos be any different?But does that
make them any less realizations of the bass? If we're talking about
pre-harmonic thinking, where else would the alfabetos come from?
cud
__
From: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
To: Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2011 3:41 AM
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to
earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
Thanks Monica,
It is a realisation of the bass line but, because of the requirements
of the instrument, not always with the written bass part as the
lowest
note on the guitar: I guess we'll just have to agree to differ on
this.
Incidentally, the practical considerations for the theorbo also
applies
to earlier music (eg Monteverdi et als) as well as Locke and later.
regards
Martyn
--- On Thu, 15/12/11, Monica Hall [1]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk wrote:
From: Monica Hall [2]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return
to earlier question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
To: Martyn Hodgson [3]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
Cc: Vihuelalist [4]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Date: Thursday, 15 December, 2011, 20:17
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 3:25 PM
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Strumming as basso continuo {was: Return to
earlier
question: {was: Agazzari guitar [was Re: Capona?]}
Hmmm... Does a realised bass part always have to contain the bass
exactly as written in the staff notation as its lowest line? Of
course, ideally yes (and on the keyboard always yes) but many
theorbo
continuo realisations, for example, are obliged
