[VIHUELA] Re: four-course guitar music 'plus diminuees'
Thank you for this Jocelyn. I don't know anything specifically in these French 4 course guitar books that indicates they're aimed at the 'professional' player (ie one paid for playing) rather than for the 'amateur' market which would provide a relatively large, and therefore lucrative, outlet for these publications. In this context I use the word 'amateur' as a convenient shorthand (and certainly not to be taken pejoratively) for those who were not paid 'professional' players. I do so agree we always need to be careful in drawing general conclusions but I suggest 'amateur' (one who loves the art and undertakes it for that sake rather than for payment) is a useful distinction appropriate then as now. More than half a century after these French books the instructions in the first Italian 5 course guitar books (Foscarini, Colonna, Bartolotti's 'Libro Prima') seem concerned with teaching from scratch with long and detailed Rules in the case of Foscarini and rather fewer for B (see Monica Hall's website for some excellent papers) and, I suggest, were directed at the same sort of lucrative 'amateur' market as the earlier French books. Similarly another interesting, and fairly recent, paper on English lute song performance by Liz Kenny in Vol 36 of Early Music (May 2008) is relevant here; she also uses the convenient distinction between 'amateur' and 'professional'. The paper is too long to paraphrase but one conclusion that seems to be drawn is that professional players had little need of the realised tablature accompaniments found in the printed English song books, which were aimed at the amateur market, but rather improvised their own accompaniments often with much more florid vocal lines than in the printed books as found in many contemporary MS sources which preserve just the voicel and bass line. Although 40/50 yrs after the French books I suggest the earlier books were also primarily aimed at the same sort of lucrative 'amateur' market and not at the professional player. Finally regarding the music being virtuosic: only, I suggest, if the dance speed is maintained throughout - hence we come full circle to the earlier suggestion that some relaxation of the tempo might well be appropriate (and expected) for the rapid divisions. MH --- On Mon, 30/3/09, Nelson, Jocelyn wrote: From: Nelson, Jocelyn Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: four-course guitar music 'plus diminuees' To: "Martyn Hodgson" , "Stuart Walsh" , "Daniel F Heiman" Cc: "vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu" Date: Monday, 30 March, 2009, 6:06 PM Hi Martyn, Are the French 4-course guitar books specifically aimed at the amateur market? For that matter, does aamateura have the same connotations of skill for us as it did for them? I like to be cautious with commonly accepted modern generalities such as the amateur market idea for early published music. I donat remember any primary evidence that these French books from the 1550s were strictly pedagogical or for players with less ability than others. But my French isnat so hot, so Iad really appreciate anyoneas correction on this point about these French books in particular. (For that matter, I could have missed something in English, or any other language, too.) I do see plenty of internal evidence, however, that much of this 4-course material is virtuosic: besides the diminished dances, try those battle pieces, or the de Rippe fantasies, etc. Regarding speed: NPR has a story about a steroid scandal among musicians; hereas the link, below, in case list users havenat heard this shocking story yet (once youare on the NPR site, click alisten to this reporta). Itas nearly 5 minutes long, but this important story is worth the length ; D [1]http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4572575 Best, Jocelyn -- Jocelyn Nelson, DMA Teaching Assistant Professor Early Guitar, Music History 506 School of Music East Carolina University 252.328.1255 office 252.328.6258 fax nels...@ecu.edu ___ From: Martyn Hodgson Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 11:56:36 -0400 To: Stuart Walsh , Daniel F Heiman , "Nelson, Jocelyn" Cc: Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: four-course guitar music 'plus diminuees' If the music is primarily meant to accompany dancers, then no doubt there's clearly much in the position that the speed remains constant. However, to take the example of, say, the developed English lute galliard with divisions suggests a significantly slower speed than most dancers fi
[VIHUELA] Re: four-course guitar music 'plus diminuees'
If the music is primarily meant to accompany dancers, then no doubt there's clearly much in the position that the speed remains constant. However, to take the example of, say, the developed English lute galliard with divisions suggests a significantly slower speed than most dancers find satisfactory - does ayone take these at dancing speed these days? The tendency for dance forms to become slower over time, and very often to do with increasing numbers of notes, is clear. Perhaps the rot sets in when these rapid divisions start to be introduced... I'd also suggest that since these publications were primarily aimed at the amateur market the sort of speed O'Dette, and presumably the early virtuosi, might achieve is surely unlikely for this market. MH --- On Mon, 30/3/09, Nelson, Jocelyn wrote: From: Nelson, Jocelyn Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: four-course guitar music 'plus diminuees' To: "Stuart Walsh" , "Daniel F Heiman" Cc: "vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu" Date: Monday, 30 March, 2009, 2:33 PM Hi Stuart and List, I think these plus diminuees need to be played up to tempo, even though it's such a challenge. When I think about tempo with these plus diminuee movements, I take the dance aspect seriously. Here are a couple of my favorite quotes from the author of the 16th c dance tutor, Orchesography: "I learned [a galliard] on the lute which I enjoyed seeing danced by my companions as I knew how to play and sing it. And it also seemed to me that the steps were well accented by those who danced it." And "Only you should be told now that some dancers divide up the double that follows the two simples, and instead of the double comprising only four bars with four semi-breves, they introduce eight minims or sixteen crotchets, resulting in a great number of steps, passages and embellishments, all of which fit into the time and cadence of the music." Thoinot Arbeau, Orchesography (Langres: 1589; reprint, New York: Dover, 1967, translated by Mary Stewart Evans, introduced and annotated by Julia Sutton), pp 66 and 91 (page references are to reprint edition). Le Roy himself seems to imply a tempo with the diminutions: . . . decke other songes or daunses, with like flowers and ornamentes: in whiche he shall bee forced sometyme, for the better grace and pleasying of the eare, to leave out someone note of the accorde, of some one of the partes: not so much for all that for necessitie, as for the pleasauntness of the sounde: yea, and that with full recompence of the lacke of the note, whiche shalbee omitted, by the puttyng to of runnyng poinct or passage, wherein lieth all the cunnyng. Adrian Le Roy, A Briefe and Plaine Instruction. London: Rowbotham, 1574, quoted in Adrian Le Roy, Adrian Le Roy; French Renaissance Guitar Songs, Charles Wolzien, ed. (Quebec: Doberman-Yppan, 2002), 10. Yes, the speed is very challenging, and I think musicality is even harder with some of these more extreme versions. One of my favorite tracks on Michael Craddock's recording is the Le Roy prelude, which has that dichotomy between the long notes and the swift scalar runs. Craddock, with his very impressive technique, executes the fast passages well and all feels musical to me. But the reason why the Prelude works so well is that it's less metric, with lots of room for the musician to build, wind down, and so on, unlike the plus diminuee movements we're talking about. Morlaye's "La Seraphine" might make a better model if we're wondering about this style, because it also goes quite abruptly from long notes to fast diminutions, in this instance with a style which asks for a more strict tempo, more like the dances. I personally think the pulse falls apart if we slow down for the divisions, so to me this piece provides some evidence of a style in which a burst of short notes in tempo was not unusual or "freakish" to them. Stuart, which O'Dette recordings are you referring to? I have one example: "Tablatures de Leut" Astree E7776 1990. He plays a Le Roy bransle with a plus diminuee movement; his diminutions are very crisp, light and graceful. To my ears he pulls this off not only technically but musically, too, in spite of the disparity between the long and short notes. I'd love to hear about other recordings if you know of some. Sorry for such a long email. I'll end with my idea that these diminutions themselves are optional - whether we do them at all, and which notes we use is up to the performer. If we want to be completely "authentic," we should be making up our own (
[VIHUELA] Re: Playford on Ning
I've joined up since this seemed the simpler course. But can someone tell me : why 'Ning' MH --- On Fri, 27/3/09, Mjos & Larson wrote: From: Mjos & Larson Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Playford on Ning To: "Martyn Hodgson" Cc: "Monica Hall" , "Rob MacKillop" , "Vihuelalist" Date: Friday, 27 March, 2009, 2:22 PM The Early Guitars and Vihuela Ning group can be accessed by the public, unlike the Lute and Cittern Ning groups. A person does need to be a member (free!) to upload files, participate in forums, and get your own page. The Score page lists scores uploaded by members on the site (usually uploaded to an individual's member page) and provides a link to those member pages where the actual file(s) may be downloaded. Perhaps this could be explained on the Score page for new users. Once on a member's page, clicking a score link opens it (often a PDF) in a window (for me). I can also right click and save the file to my computer. To me it seemed to give the most control to the individual contributors for uploads to be made to their own member pages. The Score list is updated manually and it may take a little time for the current Score Administrator (oh, that would be me!) to get around to adding new items and updating or correcting the list. You will find the Score listing at: [1]http://earlyguitar.ning.com/page/scores-1 Happy plucking! -- R On Mar 27, 2009, at 3:49 AM, Martyn Hodgson wrote: > >Monica (and Rob), > >I clicked on the link and got to the Ning (What's Ning incidentally?) >site but couldn't see the Playford in the 'scores' section. I then >clicked on yr name (in members section) and found the Playford and >clicked on it - but nothing! Does one have to be a member of 'Ning' >to access these things? > -- References 1. http://earlyguitar.ning.com/page/scores-1 To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Playford on Ning
Monica (and Rob), I clicked on the link and got to the Ning (What's Ning incidentally?) site but couldn't see the Playford in the 'scores' section. I then clicked on yr name (in members section) and found the Playford and clicked on it - but nothing! Does one have to be a member of 'Ning' to access these things? Martyn --- On Thu, 26/3/09, Rob MacKillop wrote: From: Rob MacKillop Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Playford on Ning To: "Monica Hall" Cc: "Vihuelalist" Date: Thursday, 26 March, 2009, 6:23 PM Well done, Monica. Good work, as usual. Maybe Rocky could give you some formatting tips? Rob 2009/3/26 Monica Hall <[1][1]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk> I have just uploaded my edition of 13 pieces by Playford arranged for 5-course guitar in the Princess Anne book to my [1][2]www.earlyguitar.ning.com page. I had a bit of a problem combining the tablature with the introduction in one document without the music being reduced in size. If anyone wants it in larger print I could put the music on separate from the introduction. Hope everyone likes the picture of the young lady too. Monica -- References 1. [3][2]http://www.earlyguitar.ning.com/ To get on or off this list see list information at [4][3]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. mailto:[4]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk 2. [5]http://www.earlyguitar.ning.com/ 3. [6]http://www.earlyguitar.ning.com/ 4. [7]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk 2. http://www.earlyguitar.ning.com/ 3. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html 4. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk 5. http://www.earlyguitar.ning.com/ 6. http://www.earlyguitar.ning.com/ 7. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: four-course guitar music 'plus diminuees'
Dear Stuart, I don't see why the 'diminuee' sections need to be played at the same speed as the plain. Once the tune is established then an auditor would be able to recognise it in a slower, more decorated, exposition. Isn't there something about this in the Spanish vihuelist's repertoire (and I'm not speaking about Milan's speed variations - I think it's in Narvaez or Muddura - I'll look when I've a minute). Martyn --- On Tue, 24/3/09, Stuart Walsh wrote: From: Stuart Walsh Subject: [VIHUELA] four-course guitar music 'plus diminuees' To: "Vihuelalist" Date: Tuesday, 24 March, 2009, 10:53 PM I've got a four-course guitar for a short while. I used to try and play this four-course (mid 16th century) repertoire, years ago, on a baritone uke and a home-made concoction - without much success or pleasure. Anyway this current instrument is a good one...but I must admit I can't make it sound very well at all. But I'm interested to know what people think about the speeds of the 'plus diminuee' pieces, the versions of pieces with divisions. Leroy's Third Book has many little dances with second versions of the pieces with divisions. Perhaps it's important that the 'plus diminuees' versions are free-standing. Pieces with ornamented repeats might have been expected. But no, there is a straightforward, 'simple' version and then the 'plus diminuees' version. Some commentators (like Harvey Turnbull) have been quite dismissive of all of this 'amateur' music - which, I suppose, it must have been. But looking at the 'plus diminuees' pieces again, and trying to play them I wonder whoever could possibly have played them. As an example, the straightforward version of Almande tournee (Allemande Loreyne) f.16 feels like a two to a bar tune with running eighth notes. It's a lively little dance. But, at that speed for the straightforward version, the 'plus diminuees' version is ridiculously, absurdly - freakishly - fast. But if the 'plus diminuess' version is slowed down to a human level, the dance is now unbearably, turgidly slow. Th Spanish guitar books don't have an equivalent of these 'plus diminuees' pieces. The Spanish guitar pieces can be challenging and difficult - but not beyond practice and hard work. I don't think the Gorlier books have anything like the 'plus diminuees' pieces either. Paul Odette (fastest on earth?) has recorded some of this stuff and it sounds a bit weird...why turn a dance tune into a sort of machine gun burst? (And almost all of the divisions are within the first five frets of a four-course instrument: all squashed into to a tiny space). So I wonder what these 'plus diminuees' pieces are all about. Is anyone happily playing them? Stuart 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: Diesel duets uploaded
In these MSs Diesel seems to have been both the compiler of other people's work ( eg Schikhardt) and a composer of many of the pieces. M --- On Tue, 20/1/09, Stuart Walsh wrote: From: Stuart Walsh Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Diesel duets uploaded To: "Mjos & Larson" Cc: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Tuesday, 20 January, 2009, 7:40 PM > I have uploaded scores of two duets by Nathanael Diesel to my Ning member page: > http://earlyguitar.ning.com/profile/RockyMjos > > -- R > > Great stuff. I'll certainly have a crack at these pieces. Martyn pointed me in the direction of this page: http://buhl-mortensen.dk/fibiger.html#English And now I'm getting getting confused. Kristain Buhl-Mortensen says, of someone called, J. F. Fibiger: "Beginning after Frederik IV's death in 1730, he (Fibiger) wrote a total of five books with guitar tablature, with an accompanying bass book, that chronologically match the guitar books perfectly. In all, they contain 255 pieces for guitar with a bass part, 37 pieces with a second guitar part and 34 hymns in guitar tablature. There are many single pieces but also 42 suites (Sonata) with between three and six movements." So: is Diesel's music in addition to this? And what about the Schickhardt sonatas? And the piece on the page - with some of its ornaments written out - is reminiscent of the Hertzberg MS? Stuart > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.9/1900 - Release Date: 18/01/2009 12:11 > > --
[VIHUELA] Re: Baroque guitar duo (Merchi)
Further to this thread, you may be vaguely interested to know that
there's a quite large 5 course mandora repertoire from the 18thC which,
of course, has exactly the same interval tuning as the guitar and
always had the bourdon on the thumb side
The late Deisel guitar Mss also requires low octaves on the thumb side
M
--- On Sat, 17/1/09, Monica Hall wrote:
From: Monica Hall
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Baroque guitar duo (Merchi)
To: "Stuart Walsh"
Cc: "Vihuelalist"
Date: Saturday, 17 January, 2009, 11:52 AM
Spelling has never been my strong point!
Monica
- Original Message - From: "Stuart Walsh"
To: "Monica Hall"
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009 7:45 PM
Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Baroque guitar duo (Merchi)
> Stuart Walsh wrote:
>>
>>> Finally got to listen to this. V. nice - but is it 2 Stuarts
playing - and are they playing baroque or classical guitars?
>>>
>>> Monica
>>
>> Thank you for listening Monica. It's just me playing - finally
coming to terms with a multi-track recording device I got ages ago. And it's
just my very (very!) humble five-course guitar - but with the bourdons reversed
so the thumb hits the bourdon first. According to Tyler this publication is from
1757. I think it's a fine little Minuetto and it has a sort of swaggeriness
that sort of reminds me of Mertz from a century later.
>>
>> So now I'm fascinated by Merchi ("the Jack and Joe
mystery"). There seems to be very little on the Internet on the Merchi
brothers - little more than a couple of paragraphs about their concerts and
speculations about their dates. There is an online pdf in Italian on G or
J's song accompaniments. There is also the Groves entry which says that
Giacomo and Joseph Barnard are frequently confused. Tyler has a couple of pages
and the SPES edition of some of Giacomo's (if it was Giacomo?) works and
an introduction (in Italian). Do you know of anything else?
>
> And, of course, your discussion of stringing from Joseph Bernard (not
Barnard!)on your website too!!
>
>
>>
>>
>> Stuart
>
>
>>>
>>> - Original Message - From: "Stuart Walsh"
>>> To: "Vihuelalist"
>>> Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2009 7:29 PM
>>> Subject: [VIHUELA] Baroque guitar duo
>>>
>>>
Here's the Minuetto from the fourth Duetto 'a due
chitarre' by Giacomo Merchi...1770s-ish? James Tyler and Robert Spencer
recorded the preceding Allegro (how long ago!)and maybe recorded this one too.
Merchi also published 'Sei Duetti a Chitarra e Violino Con sordina' and
number 4 is almost the same as the fourth Duetto for two guitars but there are a
lot of small differences. The guitar/violin version has an additional movement
and, at a cursory glance, the guitar/violin duets look a bit more fancy than the
guitar duets.
http://www.pluckedturkeys.co.uk/Minuetto.mp3
Stuart
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus
Database: 270.10.8/1897 - Release Date: 16/01/2009 06:52
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database:
270.10.8/1897 - Release Date: 16/01/2009 06:52
>>
>>
>
--
[VIHUELA] Re: non-re-entrant campanella: de Gallot and Granata
Hmmm I had in mind things like Sanz's Instruccion (1674) which is quoted in an excellent summary of baroque guitar stringing by one M Hall (Lute Soc Booklet No 9, 2003): '. since some use two bourdons on the fourth course and another two on the fifth,...' Martyn --- On Wed, 17/12/08, Monica Hall wrote: From: Monica Hall Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: non-re-entrant campanella: de Gallot and Granata To: hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: "Vihuelalist" Date: Wednesday, 17 December, 2008, 4:53 PM i>>? Well yes indeed - but there isn't a great deal of evidence that the guitar was strung in unison throughout Monica - Original Message - From: [1]Martyn Hodgson To: [2]Stuart Walsh ; [3]Monica Hall Cc: [4]Vihuelalist Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 4:28 PM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: non-re-entrant campanella: de Gallot and Granata Also well - I can't really agree with yr assertion that campanellas have 'nothing to do with the stringing': if both lower courses were in unison at the lower octave I think that even my 'Old Ones' (not 'ancients'!) would have raised an eyebrow or two.. Martyn --- On Wed, 17/12/08, Monica Hall <[5]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote: From: Monica Hall <[6]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk> Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: non-re-entrant campanella: de Gallot and Granata To: "Stuart Walsh" <[7]s.wa...@ntlworld.com> Cc: "Vihuelalist" <[8]vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu> Date: Wednesday, 17 December, 2008, 1:46 PM Well - as you say - we have been over this innumerable times before. First and foremost I would say that - as far as we know - campanellas have nothing to do with the method of stringing one might chose to use. Everyone just misunderstands what Sanz says about this. He doesn't say that re-entrant stringing is preferable because it eliminates octave doubling or skips of a 7th or a 9th in the melodic line. He is concerned with purely practical matters - it is difficult to stop two strings of unequal thickness when playing ornaments and campanellas.etc. I would add to that - there are problems with tuning and fretting with octave stringing especially at the higher frets which is another reason why re-entrant tunings may have been preferred. If you actually trying playing the music with the guitar strung throughout with plain gut I think you will find that this is so. It is certainly my experience. Why else does everyone use nylgut? There seems to be this idea that all the music is specifically intended for one method of string rather than another and somehow by analysing the music we can prove what this is and make it conform to what we believe are "the rules of musical theory". Personally I don't think that is the case. Whichever method of stringing you use, the music won't conform to the "rules of musical theory". There is no reason why it should and no evidence that the "ancients" as Martin calls them were concerned about such matters! What people invariably overlook when analysing the music is that the octave stringing will result in lower parts being duplicated in the upper octave all the time - not just in campanellas. They will often overlap with notes on the upper courses so that the melodic line and voice leading are different from what you imagine just looking at the music on paper. This is very apparent when you follow the tablature. Really you have a situation rather similar to that with music for the cittern. Some of the music may reflect the fact that it has a re-entrant tuning, and some may not, but this doesn't alter the fact that it invariably has a re-entrant tuning for practical reasons. So rather than being a "mysterianist" - I personally think that re-entrant tunings were preferred for most solo music simply because they worked best in practice and that octave stringing on the 4th course but not the 5th is a suitable compromise. There is no reason to think that this was "new" in 1671 and no reason why Corbetta should not have been used it throughout the whole of his career - and Granata too. As far as the Gallot ms. is concerned I think that octave stringing on the 4th course only is probably what Gallot himself would have used - for the same reason. As I am fond of saying - you are really looking for gold at the end of the rainbow. And also I think that by trying to iron out all the "idiosyncracies" you are actually destroying the unique quality of the music. If players in the 17th century were really concerned about these things they would have intabulated the music differently. I hope that doesn't set the cat amongst the pigeons yet again! Monica - Original Message - Fro
[VIHUELA] Re: non-re-entrant campanella: de Gallot and Granata
Also well - I can't really agree with yr assertion that campanellas
have 'nothing to do with the stringing': if both lower courses were in
unison at the lower octave I think that even my 'Old Ones' (not
'ancients'!) would have raised an eyebrow or two..
Martyn
--- On Wed, 17/12/08, Monica Hall wrote:
From: Monica Hall
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: non-re-entrant campanella: de Gallot and
Granata
To: "Stuart Walsh"
Cc: "Vihuelalist"
Date: Wednesday, 17 December, 2008, 1:46 PM
Well - as you say - we have been over this innumerable times before.
First and foremost I would say that - as far as we know - campanellas have
nothing to do with the method of stringing one might chose to use.
Everyone just misunderstands what Sanz says about this. He doesn't say
that re-entrant stringing is preferable because it eliminates octave
doubling or skips of a 7th or a 9th in the melodic line. He is concerned
with purely practical matters - it is difficult to stop two strings of
unequal thickness when playing ornaments and campanellas.etc.
I would add to that - there are problems with tuning and fretting with octave
stringing especially at the higher frets which is another reason why re-entrant
tunings may have been preferred.
If you actually trying playing the music with the guitar strung throughout with
plain gut I think you will find that this is so. It is certainly my
experience. Why else does everyone use nylgut?
There seems to be this idea that all the music is specifically intended for one
method of string rather than another and somehow by analysing the music we can
prove what this is and make it conform to what we believe are "the rules of
musical theory".
Personally I don't think that is the case. Whichever method of stringing
you use, the music won't conform to the "rules of musical theory".
There is no reason why it should and no evidence that the "ancients"
as Martin calls them were concerned about such matters! What people invariably
overlook when analysing the music is that the octave stringing will result in
lower parts being duplicated in the upper octave all the time - not just in
campanellas. They will often overlap with notes on the upper courses so that
the melodic line and voice leading are different from what you imagine just
looking at the music on paper. This is very apparent when you follow the
tablature.
Really you have a situation rather similar to that with music for the cittern.
Some of the music may reflect the fact that it has a re-entrant tuning, and
some may not, but this doesn't alter the fact that it invariably has a
re-entrant tuning for practical reasons.
So rather than being a "mysterianist" - I personally think that
re-entrant tunings were preferred for most solo music simply because they worked
best in practice and that octave stringing on the 4th course but not the 5th is
a suitable compromise. There is no reason to think that this was
"new" in 1671 and no reason why Corbetta should not have been used it
throughout the whole of his career - and Granata too.
As far as the Gallot ms. is concerned I think that octave stringing on the 4th
course only is probably what Gallot himself would have used - for the same
reason.
As I am fond of saying - you are really looking for gold at the end of the
rainbow. And also I think that by trying to iron out all the
"idiosyncracies" you are actually destroying the unique quality of the
music. If players in the 17th century were really concerned about these things
they would have intabulated the music differently.
I hope that doesn't set the cat amongst the pigeons yet again!
Monica
- Original Message - From: "Stuart Walsh"
To: "Monica Hall"
Cc: "Vihuelalist"
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 11:28 PM
Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: non-re-entrant campanella: de Gallot and Granata
>> Very nice although I think that Granata and Gallot probably used a
>> re-entrant tuning anyway!
>> Monica
>>
> The reason I was interested in these pieces was because I was assuming
> that they were not in re-entrant tuning: that the campanellas were made
> possible by the alternative tuning rather than the high octaves on the
> fourth (and maybe fifth) course(s).
>
> (But it's even possible, if rare, to have the normal guitar tuning,
and
> non-re-entrant stringing, and campanellas.)
>
> There is not much in Granata's 'Nuove Suonata' (c1650) to
suggest
> re-entrant tuning. The last three bars of the Corrente on p.19 of the same
> publication ('Nuove Suonate') has a hint of campanella which might
be a
> way of suggesting re-entrant tuning but it could be a case of using the
> ordinary tuning (without octaves in the basses) to achieve campanella
> effects.
>
> Here is the Granata piece (with a tuning diagram of the alternative
> tuning)
>
> http://www.pluckedturkeys.co.uk/granata.jpg
>
> But, looking at the piece yet again, I suppose the campanella passage
> (fourth bar
[VIHUELA] Re: non-re-entrant campanella: de Gallot and Granata
Dear Stuart, Re De Gallot MS: folio 2 gives many of the particular (scordatura) tunings required and page numbers where applicable. Re intrusive high 4th: perhaps this wasn't an issue for the Old Ones since a complete re-entrant tuning on 4th and 5th was well recognised; OR perhaps for particular tricky passages, where it was felt voice leading was especially important (say a desending passage crossing the 3rd/4th courses), the use of the fingers to pluck the string would automatically stress the lower course (ie that plucked by the finger first). If using a thumb stroke, try pressing down (as if into the belly) to play through the course - I find this gives more equality between the two strings of the course if that's what is thought to be required. As with the early strumming patterns, still I believe insufficiently explored, much guitar technique may be below the waterline of the early professional guitarists' published and MS iceberg,... MH --- On Sun, 14/12/08, Stuart Walsh wrote: From: Stuart Walsh Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: non-re-entrant campanella: de Gallot and Granata To: "VihuelaList" Date: Sunday, 14 December, 2008, 9:48 PM (this time with the link) > It's probably old news to some people but it's fairly new to me: that composers for the five-course guitar used campanella techniques not only when the guitar was tuned re-entrantly. Foscarini may have been the first (composer for guitar) to use an alternative tuning and to use campanellas. Lex Eisenhardt has made a fine recording (Canta Venetia) of some of these pieces. > > http://home.planet.nl/~eisen073/discography.html > > I have a currently languishing blog on the subject (!): > > http://www.tuningsinthirds.com/Foscarini/ > > Monica Hall has sent me details of many other scordature other than the one used by Foscarini. > > I have been looking at an alternative tuning in one of Granata's second publication, the 'Nuove Suonata' (c1650). Tyler says that the music in this book is 'dismal' and it really is difficult to make much musical sense of most of the pieces, and those that make sense aren't very memorable. The final piece is in scordatura - a sort of minor key chordal tuning: A-D-G-Bb-D. Like the other pieces in the book it's quite hard to discern the shape of this Corrente Francese but it is quite musical in places. The first section seems to make sense, though it ends oddly. The second section - 17 bars - goes wandering off a bit but it sort of makes sense, I think and, at the end, it uses campanellas. > > > I've also been looking at some of the pieces in the Gallot MS. I really don't know my way around this tome. There are scordatura pieces but it's not always clear what the tuning is. There is a prelude on p.115(?) which looks like it could be the same tuning as Granata's above. I wondered whether the lowest course should be a tone lower but I don't think so. This too uses campanellas. Played well, on a decent instrument, I think this could be a striking piece. Although it's in a context of mainly French and Italian music, it sounds very English to me. > > I've had a go at playing the two pieces: the Prelude, then the Corrente Francese. Following David Tayler's idea, I have made a video with the music displayed. Unfortunately you can't really see the music - it's just a blur, especially the Granata - I should have used far higher quality scans. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=l3s0lB3RedQ > > (As usual I'm busting a gut trying to minimise the sound of the high octave on the fourth string) > > Stuart > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.18/1848 - Release Date: 14/12/2008 12:28 > > --
[VIHUELA] Re: Sor's harpolyre
Rob, Re my last - I meant 1830 --- On Sat, 22/11/08, Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Sor's harpolyre To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: "Vihuela" Date: Saturday, 22 November, 2008, 9:37 AM Does this link work? [1]http://tinyurl.com/62zsar or this: [2]http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lost-Music-of-Fernando-Sor/dp/B0018Y DPJA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1227290706&sr=8-1 (cut and paste into browser) Or serch [3]www.amazon.co.uk or com for Lost Music Fernando Sor Rob 2008/11/22 Martyn Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Rob, Interesting but I can't seem to open this link regards Martyn --- On Fri, 21/11/08, Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [VIHUELA] Sor's harpolyre To: "Vihuela" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Friday, 21 November, 2008, 7:48 PM Anyone seen one of these: [1][8]http://tinyurl.com/62zsar He has a couple of youtube videos. I've ordered the disc just to hear the repertoire. Brian Jeffrey's biography of Sor contains a description of the instrument. The central neck is just a normal guitar. The other necks have the same bass notes, but one neck has gut strings, the other wire-covered silk - a strange and subtle thing to devise. Apparently the repertoire by Sor is among his best...we shall see... Anyone have more info? Rob MacKillop -- References 1. [9]http://tinyurl.com/62zsar To get on or off this list see list information at [10]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. http://tinyurl.com/62zsar 2. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lost-Music-of-Fernando-Sor/dp/B0018Y 3. http://www.amazon.co.uk/ 4. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 5. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 6. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 7. mailto:vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu 8. http://tinyurl.com/62zsar 9. http://tinyurl.com/62zsar 10. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html --
[VIHUELA] Re: Sor's harpolyre
Thanks Rob, I've ordered it as well. Not sure if ithe music was 'lost' though. The principal modern work on Sor (Brain Jeffrey's book) gives the same source for all three works (Paris Bibliotheque Nationale) and their titles etc - all published in 1820 and by the same publisher incidentally - Salman, Rue Colbert who I don't believe was one of his usual publishers. Interestingly the prices look comparable with his ordinary guitar publications. Presumabvly Salman 'took a punt' on this new instrument M --- On Sat, 22/11/08, Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Sor's harpolyre To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: "Vihuela" Date: Saturday, 22 November, 2008, 9:37 AM Does this link work? [1]http://tinyurl.com/62zsar or this: [2]http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lost-Music-of-Fernando-Sor/dp/B0018Y DPJA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1227290706&sr=8-1 (cut and paste into browser) Or serch [3]www.amazon.co.uk or com for Lost Music Fernando Sor Rob 2008/11/22 Martyn Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Rob, Interesting but I can't seem to open this link regards Martyn --- On Fri, 21/11/08, Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [VIHUELA] Sor's harpolyre To: "Vihuela" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Friday, 21 November, 2008, 7:48 PM Anyone seen one of these: [1][8]http://tinyurl.com/62zsar He has a couple of youtube videos. I've ordered the disc just to hear the repertoire. Brian Jeffrey's biography of Sor contains a description of the instrument. The central neck is just a normal guitar. The other necks have the same bass notes, but one neck has gut strings, the other wire-covered silk - a strange and subtle thing to devise. Apparently the repertoire by Sor is among his best...we shall see... Anyone have more info? Rob MacKillop -- References 1. [9]http://tinyurl.com/62zsar To get on or off this list see list information at [10]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. http://tinyurl.com/62zsar 2. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lost-Music-of-Fernando-Sor/dp/B0018Y 3. http://www.amazon.co.uk/ 4. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 5. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 6. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 7. mailto:vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu 8. http://tinyurl.com/62zsar 9. http://tinyurl.com/62zsar 10. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Josephine Plantin
Josephine was a celebrated concert pianist (better known outside guitar circles than Mertz) - you might be better off enquiring from piano related sites. MH --- On Fri, 3/10/08, Fabio Rizza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Fabio Rizza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [EARLY-GUIT] Josephine Plantin > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Friday, 3 October, 2008, 9:13 AM > Does anyone know if there are connections between Josephine > Plantin, > Mertz's wife, and "Herr Plantin", who is > reported to have been Secretary > of Finance as well as Anna Sanssouci's nephew? > > Thanks, > FR > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: The Learned Guitarist...
Just so. As said, we need to be wary about making assumptions M --- On Sun, 28/9/08, Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: The Learned Guitarist... > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > Date: Sunday, 28 September, 2008, 8:57 AM > Well ...Foscarini clearly describes himself a a lutenist so > may not have > played the theorbo. > > Corbetta quite emphatically states in the preface to La > guitarre royale that > he has never played the lute and doesn't know a single > chord on the > instrument... > > The book De Vise published in 1716 has the title > "Piece de theorbe et de > luth" although they are all in staff notation. I > think there are separate > sections but don't have the book to hand and may be > wrong about that. > > Bartolotti's Continuo book is apparently for a > theorboed lute without > re-entrant course rather than theorbo but that doen't > really tell us what > instruments he played... > > Monica > > - Original Message - > From: "Martyn Hodgson" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Monica Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > > Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2008 7:53 AM > Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: The Learned Guitarist... > > > > I don't know for sure - anything is, of course, > possible but that by no > means implies it was the usual practice ad I think we need > to be very > careful of making such assumptions. > > For example, pieces for the lute with the name de Visee do > indeed survive, > but the suggestion has been made that these are > arrangements of his theorbo > works made by the Ms compiler (eg de Saizeny). Certainly > they exhibit few > idiomatic Dm lute features (as, say, the works of his > contemporaries Logy, > Mouton, Gallot, Bittner, Von Radolt, et al) and are closer > in texture to the > arrangements made by St Luc. > > In short, I'm not at all sure it's right to assume > that the Old Ones played > a range of plucked instruments as we try to do today. I > know of no evidence, > for example, that the most illustrious one, Corbetta, > played the lute or > even the theorbo. > > Martyn > > > --- On Sat, 27/9/08, Monica Hall > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: The Learned Guitarist... > > To: "Martyn Hodgson" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > > > Date: Saturday, 27 September, 2008, 9:00 AM > > Well - Foscarini says that he is a lutenist by > profession > > and was employed > > as one in Ancona and at the court in the Spanish > > Netherlands. Bartalotti is > > mentioned as a theorbo player in the 1660s - but does > > that exclude the possibility that he played the lute > as > > well? De Visee's > > music > > survives in versions for lute I believe. > > > > I would guess that these people played a range of > plucked > > stringed > > instruments - as they do today. > > > > Monica > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Martyn Hodgson" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Michael Gillespie" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Monica Hall" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > > > > Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2008 8:06 AM > > Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: The Learned Guitarist... > > > > > > > > Were these actually lutenists are rather theorbo > players? - > > not the same. > > > > MH > > > > > > --- On Sat, 27/9/08, Monica Hall > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: The Learned Guitarist... > > > To: "Michael Gillespie" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > > > > > Date: Saturday, 27 September, 2008, 8:04 AM > > > Another topic which needs a book to be written. > > > > > > Many 17th century guitarists were actually > lutenists > > by > > > profession > > > (Foscarini, Bartolotti, De Visee to name but > three) > > and > > > whatever training > > > they had would have been on the lute. I think > this > > may > > > have been on a one > > > to one basis rather than in established &g
[VIHUELA] Re: The Learned Guitarist...
I don't know for sure - anything is, of course, possible but that by no means implies it was the usual practice ad I think we need to be very careful of making such assumptions. For example, pieces for the lute with the name de Visee do indeed survive, but the suggestion has been made that these are arrangements of his theorbo works made by the Ms compiler (eg de Saizeny). Certainly they exhibit few idiomatic Dm lute features (as, say, the works of his contemporaries Logy, Mouton, Gallot, Bittner, Von Radolt, et al) and are closer in texture to the arrangements made by St Luc. In short, I'm not at all sure it's right to assume that the Old Ones played a range of plucked instruments as we try to do today. I know of no evidence, for example, that the most illustrious one, Corbetta, played the lute or even the theorbo. Martyn --- On Sat, 27/9/08, Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: The Learned Guitarist... > To: "Martyn Hodgson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > Date: Saturday, 27 September, 2008, 9:00 AM > Well - Foscarini says that he is a lutenist by profession > and was employed > as one in Ancona and at the court in the Spanish > Netherlands. Bartalotti is > mentioned as a theorbo player in the 1660s - but does > that exclude the possibility that he played the lute as > well? De Visee's > music > survives in versions for lute I believe. > > I would guess that these people played a range of plucked > stringed > instruments - as they do today. > > Monica > > - Original Message - > From: "Martyn Hodgson" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Michael Gillespie" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Monica Hall" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > > Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2008 8:06 AM > Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: The Learned Guitarist... > > > > Were these actually lutenists are rather theorbo players? - > not the same. > > MH > > > --- On Sat, 27/9/08, Monica Hall > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: The Learned Guitarist... > > To: "Michael Gillespie" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > > > Date: Saturday, 27 September, 2008, 8:04 AM > > Another topic which needs a book to be written. > > > > Many 17th century guitarists were actually lutenists > by > > profession > > (Foscarini, Bartolotti, De Visee to name but three) > and > > whatever training > > they had would have been on the lute. I think this > may > > have been on a one > > to one basis rather than in established conservatoires > such > > as we have > > today. > > > > Corbetta however seems to imply in the preface to La > > Guitarre royale that he > > was self taught! > > > > Monica > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Michael Gillespie" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Vihuelalist" > > > > Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 10:47 PM > > Subject: [VIHUELA] The Learned Guitarist... > > > > > > > I was wondering... when (with who) did study of > the > > early guitar become > > > more serious. Sanz used spanish folk melodies > where > > as de Visse was the > > > "royal guitarist," thats a big gap. I > > imagine that the great vihuelists > > > and lutenists of the day went through > > "conservatory" training rather > > > than just picking one up and beating it to > death, > > what about the > > > guitarists? > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information > at > > > > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: The Learned Guitarist...
Were these actually lutenists are rather theorbo players? - not the same. MH --- On Sat, 27/9/08, Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: The Learned Guitarist... > To: "Michael Gillespie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > Date: Saturday, 27 September, 2008, 8:04 AM > Another topic which needs a book to be written. > > Many 17th century guitarists were actually lutenists by > profession > (Foscarini, Bartolotti, De Visee to name but three) and > whatever training > they had would have been on the lute. I think this may > have been on a one > to one basis rather than in established conservatoires such > as we have > today. > > Corbetta however seems to imply in the preface to La > Guitarre royale that he > was self taught! > > Monica > > > - Original Message - > From: "Michael Gillespie" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Vihuelalist" > > Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 10:47 PM > Subject: [VIHUELA] The Learned Guitarist... > > > > I was wondering... when (with who) did study of the > early guitar become > > more serious. Sanz used spanish folk melodies where > as de Visse was the > > "royal guitarist," thats a big gap. I > imagine that the great vihuelists > > and lutenists of the day went through > "conservatory" training rather > > than just picking one up and beating it to death, > what about the > > guitarists? > > > > -- > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Lineage of early Guitars and the mandora
What I was hoping might appear was either printed or MS music for this tuning other than the two Scheidler sonatas. You'll no doubt be aware that Scheidler was one of the musicians at the court of the Elector of Mainz: Koch's familiarity with this one player and his local pupils may have led to the comment. MH --- On Thu, 25/9/08, Jocelyn Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Jocelyn Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Lineage of early Guitars and the mandora > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Monica Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Joshua Horn" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Fred" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > Date: Thursday, 25 September, 2008, 5:32 PM > Hi Martyn, > > I have no evidence other than the Koch reference that this > tuning (the > lowest guitar string in G rather than E) was common in > Mainz in late 18th c > and its general region. I came across this years ago when I > studied a > Scheidler sonata in a seminar. I wish I had the page > number, sorry! > > Assuming it really is in Koch (I don¹t have it at hand), > it carries some > weight as a primary source (1802), but of course that > doesn¹t guarantee > absolute truth, especially when we don¹t see it anywhere > else. > > Tonality might have more to do with this than guitar tuning > conventions, > though: the sonata I looked at was in C Major, and his > other extant works > are in C and G, so perhaps the G tuning is not coincidence > or guitar custom To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Lineage of early Guitars and the mandora
I should be most grateful for evidence of this. I've found none and an earlier enquiry on this list (and elsewhere) for examples other than Scheidler's similarly gave a nil response. MH --- On Tue, 23/9/08, Nelson, Jocelyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Nelson, Jocelyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: [VIHUELA] Lineage of early Guitars and the mandora > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Monica Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Joshua Horn" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Fred" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > Date: Tuesday, 23 September, 2008, 10:28 PM > Hi Monica and List, > > About that "unusual" Scheidler tuning: I believe > it was considered the "usual" guitar tuning in > that area of Germany at the time, according to Koch. Sorry I > can't tell you the page number: > > Koch, Heinrich Christoph. Musicalisches Lexicon. > Frankfurt: Hermann dem jüngern, 1802. Facsimile, > Heldesheim: Olms, 1964. > > Jocelyn > > Jocelyn Nelson, DMA > Teaching Assistant Professor > Early Guitar, Music History > 336 Fletcher Music Center > East Carolina University > School of Music > 252.328.1255 Office > 252.328.6258 Fax > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > From: Martyn Hodgson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tue 9/23/2008 4:15 AM > To: Monica Hall; Joshua Horn; Fred > Cc: Vihuelalist > Subject: [VIHUELA] Lineage of early Guitars and the mandora > > > > > > There is indeed speculation (first put forward in 1979) > that the mandora's 6 strings and tuning inspired the > addition of an extra course to the 5 course > 'baroque' guitar. > > Regrettably there is no unequivocal evidence that this was > the case; merely indirect, such as the unusual tuning for > the 6th string (mirroring a common mandora tuning pattern) > in Scheidler's early sonatas for 6 string guitar. > > MH > > > --- On Mon, 22/9/08, Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > From: Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Lineage of early Guitars > > To: "Monica Hall" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Joshua Horn" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > > > Date: Monday, 22 September, 2008, 3:27 PM > > When I've been asked by students a question not > unlike > > that posed by Josh, my instinct is to draw lineages > based on > > distinct tuning/stringing characteristics of > historical > > instruments. The earliest instrument that is known to > me > > that shares a similar tuning/stringing scheme to that > of the > > modern guitar is the single-strung mandora of 18th > century > > Germany. Being that there was a strong early guitar > making > > tradition in Germany that grew to include the likes of > > Stauffer, could there be a lineage to the modern > guitar that > > can be traced from this instrument? Can the history > of the > > modern guitar be traced to the theorbo/chitarrone by > way of > > the mandora? Is it possible that the theorbo > connection > > explains how the modern guitar idea came to the > builders of > > Spain? > > > > Sorry to answer a question with more questions. > > > > Fred > > > > -Original Message- > > >From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Sent: Sep 22, 2008 8:12 AM > > >To: Joshua Horn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Cc: Vihuelalist > > >Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Lineage of early Guitars > > > > > >This is really an impossible question short of > writing > > a book on the > > >subject. > > > > > >However - received wisdom I think is that the > vihuela > > could originally be > > >played with a bow, a plectrum or finger style - > to > > whit > > > > > >vihuela de arco > > >vihuela de penola > > >vihuela de mano. > > > > > >However "guitars" or instruments called > > "guitarra" seem to have existed > > >alongside the vihuela and it is not altogether > clear > > whether this was simply > > >a vihuela with fewer strings or derived from a > > different prototype. > > > > > >Be that as it may, the present day classical > guitar is > > probably not a direct > > >descendent of the vihuela - because in between you > get > > my good friend "the > > >baroque guitar" which had only five courses > and a > > re-entr
[VIHUELA] Re: Left or right knee?
If sitting, iconography shows the instrument mostly resting on the right thigh (as also often found with contemporary lute depictions) rather than cradled in the lap as with the modern 'classical' guitar. The use of straps/ribbons allows the instrument to be held higher on the body (also often depicted) and, indeed, the instrument to be played standing. MH --- On Mon, 22/9/08, Josh Horn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Josh Horn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] Left or right knee? > To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu > Date: Monday, 22 September, 2008, 4:42 AM > Hi all, > >I am curious as to wether your Vihuela or Guitar should > be resting on >your left or right knee when playing traditional music. > Is this the >proper position for holding? > >Thanks, > >Josh > >-- > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Lineage of early Guitars and the mandora
There is indeed speculation (first put forward in 1979) that the mandora's 6 strings and tuning inspired the addition of an extra course to the 5 course 'baroque' guitar. Regrettably there is no unequivocal evidence that this was the case; merely indirect, such as the unusual tuning for the 6th string (mirroring a common mandora tuning pattern) in Scheidler's early sonatas for 6 string guitar. MH --- On Mon, 22/9/08, Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Lineage of early Guitars > To: "Monica Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Joshua Horn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > Date: Monday, 22 September, 2008, 3:27 PM > When I've been asked by students a question not unlike > that posed by Josh, my instinct is to draw lineages based on > distinct tuning/stringing characteristics of historical > instruments. The earliest instrument that is known to me > that shares a similar tuning/stringing scheme to that of the > modern guitar is the single-strung mandora of 18th century > Germany. Being that there was a strong early guitar making > tradition in Germany that grew to include the likes of > Stauffer, could there be a lineage to the modern guitar that > can be traced from this instrument? Can the history of the > modern guitar be traced to the theorbo/chitarrone by way of > the mandora? Is it possible that the theorbo connection > explains how the modern guitar idea came to the builders of > Spain? > > Sorry to answer a question with more questions. > > Fred > > -Original Message- > >From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Sep 22, 2008 8:12 AM > >To: Joshua Horn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Cc: Vihuelalist > >Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Lineage of early Guitars > > > >This is really an impossible question short of writing > a book on the > >subject. > > > >However - received wisdom I think is that the vihuela > could originally be > >played with a bow, a plectrum or finger style - to > whit > > > >vihuela de arco > >vihuela de penola > >vihuela de mano. > > > >However "guitars" or instruments called > "guitarra" seem to have existed > >alongside the vihuela and it is not altogether clear > whether this was simply > >a vihuela with fewer strings or derived from a > different prototype. > > > >Be that as it may, the present day classical guitar is > probably not a direct > >descendent of the vihuela - because in between you get > my good friend "the > >baroque guitar" which had only five courses and a > re-entrant tuning and was > >all the rage in the 17th and early 18th century. > > > >About the middle of the 18th century someone had the > bright idea of putting > >a sixth course on it - or back on it ...and the rest... > as they say ...is > >history. > > > >Hope that's helpful and I don't spark off a > whole correspndence from people > >who disagree with my "History of the guitar in a > nutshell". > > > >Monica > > > >- Original Message - > >From: "Joshua Horn" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: > >Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 11:11 AM > >Subject: [VIHUELA] Lineage of early Guitars > > > > > >> Guys, > >> > >> I have read various sources on the web about the > relation of the > >> Vihuela to other stringed instruments. I am > looking for information on > >> the lineage of the modern Acoustic Guitars. > >> > >> I read on one site that the Vihuela was once a > bowed instrument, is the > >> Classical and Flamenco Guitars you see today > direct relatives of the > >> Vihuela, or are there other instruments that > influenced them first? > >> > >> Josh > >> > >> -- > >> > >> > >> To get on or off this list see list information at > >> > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > >
[VIHUELA] Re: arch-guitar
> From: Martyn Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: arch-guitar > To: "David van Ooijen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wednesday, 10 September, 2008, 5:24 PM > David, > > I think (or thought) Rob said that his instrument was > strung so that the lowest bass went down to A, (ie 3 lines > below bass F clef) rather than just A an octave higher > (bottom space of bass F clef). Hence my comments > > M. > > > --- On Wed, 10/9/08, David van Ooijen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > From: David van Ooijen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: arch-guitar > > To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu > > Date: Wednesday, 10 September, 2008, 9:15 AM > > >> > > basses would most likely have been of gut and, due to > the > > relatively > > short string length, therefore at the higher octave. > > << > > > > Still figuring out the 'features' of gmail, so > > correct me if I missed > > something... > > > > String length of ca 116cm, single strings, plain gut, > > a'=440Hz > > You should be able to go down to around E-flat > (according > > to the > > Kürschner slide rule on 'what works for what type > of > > string'). That > > would make A well within the safety zone. > > From personal experience, as opposed to slide rules, I > can > > say single > > basses on three archlutes I've seen, heard and in > one > > case play a lot > > with neck extensions of around that string length > (mine at > > 106cm, a > > friend's at 110 and the other friend's > something > > similar), single > > basses are no problem. Mine goes down to G, both my > > friend's > > instruments to F. > > So, I'd say going down to a mere A on something > around > > 116cm is well > > within possibilities. And considering you're not > likely > > to play Maria > > Vespers or other big continuo jobs on an instrument > like > > that, but > > rather modest solo music in an intimate setting, I > think > > it's no > > problem at all. > > > > David - not denying bigger is better, of course > > > > www.davidvanooijen.nl > > > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: arch-guitar
You'll recall I also promised to speak to Donald Gill. This I did and he's sending me something in the post which he's happy for me to transcribe into an email. So in due course M --- On Wed, 10/9/08, Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: arch-guitar > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > Date: Wednesday, 10 September, 2008, 2:14 PM > Well - if you find it - do let us know! > > Monica > > - Original Message - > From: "Martyn Hodgson" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Monica Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > > Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 8:45 AM > Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: arch-guitar > > > > Thanks > > As said, I have a copy of the pattern somewhere - just have > to find it! > > I have however now found the FoMRHI article which mentions > Strad's > 'chitara tiorbata' (by yrs truly): FoMRHI Comm 663 > October 1985 'The > stringing of a baroque guitar'. Unfortunately, my aim > in the paper was to > look at evidence for stringing of the top 5 courses and, > whilst I refer to > Strad's records of the theorboed instrument, I only > quote his remarks on the > first 10 strings (ie 5 courses) and none on the basses. > > MH > > > > --- On Tue, 9/9/08, Monica Hall > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: arch-guitar > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > > > Date: Tuesday, 9 September, 2008, 8:47 PM > > The information comes from > > > > Sacconi, Simone F., The secrets of Stradivari (Cremona > : > > Libreria del > > Convegno, 1979), Item 375, p.228. > > > > > > It's a paper pattern of a neck and fingerboard > 320mm > > long by 72 mm and 60 > > min width... with a description of the strings and > their > > arrangement at the > > nut. There is a handwritten note on the back by the > sons > > of Strad "Misura > > della Longezza et largezza del manico della chitara > > tiorbata" followed by > > the description of the strings. > > > > I wonder if anyone has seen the paper pattern? Or has > a > > copy of it? > > > > Monica > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Martyn Hodgson" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Monica Hall" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 6:54 PM > > Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: arch-guitar > > > > > > > > I'm really not so sure Monica. Whilst it's > > certainly true that whenever > > Strad is mentioned it's generally only the five > courses > > which are of > > interest and so are the only ones referred to, But I > have > > this nagging > > memory that in fact he describes theorboed guitar > > stringing. Indeed I also > > recall FoMRHI had relevant articles in mid/late 70s - > I > > must look. > > > > I've been to my stack (ie loft) to find the > > articles/facsimile but no luck > > so far in the piles of misc paper - I will > persevere... > > > > Another who thinks the basses are at the upper octave > is > > Tyler ( 'the > > guitar... OUP 2002) page 74 Footnote 51 where he > describes > > Granata's > > theorboed guitar as having seven 'unfingered > basses > > tuned daitonically down > > to a A at the bottom of the bass clef' ie down to > A as > > I suggest and not to > > A,. Of course Tyler is not always reliable , but. > > Sources requiring > > the same instruments are listed as Granata 1659, the > De > > Gallot Ms, I-NC Ms > > (have you got this?) and Bob Spencer's sonata for > > 'chitarrone francese'. > > > > Of course, by the mid 18th century the various types > of > > arch citterns and > > arch guitars introduced as novelties could use heavy > > overwound strings and > > be strung down to A,. But, as said earlier, I really > > can't see getting a > > satisfactory sound from a gut string c. 116cm at A,. > > > > MH > > > > > > > > --- On Tue, 9/9/08, Monica Hall > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: arch-guitar &g
[VIHUELA] Re: arch-guitar
Thanks As said, I have a copy of the pattern somewhere - just have to find it! I have however now found the FoMRHI article which mentions Strad's 'chitara tiorbata' (by yrs truly): FoMRHI Comm 663 October 1985 'The stringing of a baroque guitar'. Unfortunately, my aim in the paper was to look at evidence for stringing of the top 5 courses and, whilst I refer to Strad's records of the theorboed instrument, I only quote his remarks on the first 10 strings (ie 5 courses) and none on the basses. MH --- On Tue, 9/9/08, Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: arch-guitar > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > Date: Tuesday, 9 September, 2008, 8:47 PM > The information comes from > > Sacconi, Simone F., The secrets of Stradivari (Cremona : > Libreria del > Convegno, 1979), Item 375, p.228. > > > It's a paper pattern of a neck and fingerboard 320mm > long by 72 mm and 60 > min width... with a description of the strings and their > arrangement at the > nut. There is a handwritten note on the back by the sons > of Strad "Misura > della Longezza et largezza del manico della chitara > tiorbata" followed by > the description of the strings. > > I wonder if anyone has seen the paper pattern? Or has a > copy of it? > > Monica > > > - Original Message - > From: "Martyn Hodgson" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Monica Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > > Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 6:54 PM > Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: arch-guitar > > > > I'm really not so sure Monica. Whilst it's > certainly true that whenever > Strad is mentioned it's generally only the five courses > which are of > interest and so are the only ones referred to, But I have > this nagging > memory that in fact he describes theorboed guitar > stringing. Indeed I also > recall FoMRHI had relevant articles in mid/late 70s - I > must look. > > I've been to my stack (ie loft) to find the > articles/facsimile but no luck > so far in the piles of misc paper - I will persevere... > > Another who thinks the basses are at the upper octave is > Tyler ( 'the > guitar... OUP 2002) page 74 Footnote 51 where he describes > Granata's > theorboed guitar as having seven 'unfingered basses > tuned daitonically down > to a A at the bottom of the bass clef' ie down to A as > I suggest and not to > A,. Of course Tyler is not always reliable , but. > Sources requiring > the same instruments are listed as Granata 1659, the De > Gallot Ms, I-NC Ms > (have you got this?) and Bob Spencer's sonata for > 'chitarrone francese'. > > Of course, by the mid 18th century the various types of > arch citterns and > arch guitars introduced as novelties could use heavy > overwound strings and > be strung down to A,. But, as said earlier, I really > can't see getting a > satisfactory sound from a gut string c. 116cm at A,. > > MH > > > > --- On Tue, 9/9/08, Monica Hall > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: arch-guitar > > To: "Martyn Hodgson" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > > > Date: Tuesday, 9 September, 2008, 4:35 PM > > Stradivarius describes the strings on the fingerboard > and > > the 4th and 5th > > courses are octave strung. > > > > > > > > I don't think he describes the open courses. > > > > > > > > Monica > > > > > > > > > > > > First & second strings: These must be like two > guitar > > first strings > > (cantini) > > > > Third & fourth strings:These must be > like > > two guitar second > > strings (sotanelle) > > > > Fifth & sixth strings: These must be like two > > thick violin first > > strings (cantini) > > > > Seventh string: This must be a violin > second > > string (canto) > > > > Eighth string: This must be a guitar > second > > string > > (sotanella) > > > > Ninth string: This must be the thickest possible > > violin second string > > (canto) > > > > Tenth string: This must be a violin > first > > string (cantino) > > > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > >
[VIHUELA] Re: arch-guitar
I'm really not so sure Monica. Whilst it's certainly true that whenever Strad is mentioned it's generally only the five courses which are of interest and so are the only ones referred to, But I have this nagging memory that in fact he describes theorboed guitar stringing. Indeed I also recall FoMRHI had relevant articles in mid/late 70s - I must look. I've been to my stack (ie loft) to find the articles/facsimile but no luck so far in the piles of misc paper - I will persevere... Another who thinks the basses are at the upper octave is Tyler ( 'the guitar... OUP 2002) page 74 Footnote 51 where he describes Granata's theorboed guitar as having seven 'unfingered basses tuned daitonically down to a A at the bottom of the bass clef' ie down to A as I suggest and not to A,. Of course Tyler is not always reliable , but. Sources requiring the same instruments are listed as Granata 1659, the De Gallot Ms, I-NC Ms (have you got this?) and Bob Spencer's sonata for 'chitarrone francese'. Of course, by the mid 18th century the various types of arch citterns and arch guitars introduced as novelties could use heavy overwound strings and be strung down to A,. But, as said earlier, I really can't see getting a satisfactory sound from a gut string c. 116cm at A,. MH --- On Tue, 9/9/08, Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: arch-guitar > To: "Martyn Hodgson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > Date: Tuesday, 9 September, 2008, 4:35 PM > Stradivarius describes the strings on the fingerboard and > the 4th and 5th > courses are octave strung. > > > > I don't think he describes the open courses. > > > > Monica > > > > > > First & second strings: These must be like two guitar > first strings > (cantini) > > Third & fourth strings:These must be like > two guitar second > strings (sotanelle) > > Fifth & sixth strings: These must be like two > thick violin first > strings (cantini) > > Seventh string: This must be a violin second > string (canto) > > Eighth string: This must be a guitar second > string > (sotanella) > > Ninth string: This must be the thickest possible > violin second string > (canto) > > Tenth string: This must be a violin first > string (cantino) > > > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Martyn Hodgson" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Rob MacKillop" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuela" > Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 3:21 PM > Subject: [LUTE] Re: arch-guitar > > > > Yes, indeed, they would double some of the fingered strings > but that, I > think, is the point: you can play an open bass whilst > fingering a string > (even though the same open pitch) - the same advantage > indeed as the late Dm > lute of course ie not so much/or only to get lower notes > but to free the > left hand. > > I mention all this because I recall an early source (may be > Strad's arch > guitar) gives higher octave stringing (I can't lay my > hands on the paperwork > at the present but will dig out in due course. > > Monica may know what I'm on about... > > Martyn > > > --- On Tue, 9/9/08, Rob MacKillop > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > From: Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: arch-guitar > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cc: "Vihuela" > > > Date: Tuesday, 9 September, 2008, 3:07 PM > > The string length of the basses is c.116cms. I say > > 'circa' because I > >couldn't find a tape measure, so ended up using > a > > six-inch ruler... > > > >The Granata Sarbande and Corrente do not have > passages > > that would > >suggest anything other than GFEDCBA. In the tuning > you > > mention, Martyn, > >(gfedcBA) does not the g double the open third > course, > > and likewise the > >d with the fourth course? I can't see any > allowances > > for that in the > >scores. > > > >The Sarabande is difficult to play without laughing > - > > the first seven > >bass notes (tasto) chime out Prokofiev's Hall > of the > > Mountain King (if > >that's the correct title) from Pictures at an > > Exhibition... This music > >is difficult to play! I wish I hadn't promised > a > > video!! > > > >Rob &
[VIHUELA] Re: arch-guitar
Rob, Are the basses at the upper octave and does this work for you? Martyn --- On Sun, 7/9/08, Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] arch-guitar > To: "Vihuela" > Date: Sunday, 7 September, 2008, 11:23 PM > Just received the arch-guitar from Wolfgand Emmerich. I have > one week >to master it (!) before he takes it back to Germany. It > is a well-made >instrument, but everytime I try to play something, I > can't help >thinking I am in archlute tuning. I have some Gallot - > but that is in a >weird tuning requiring a change of strings, so will give > it a miss. I >also have some Granata, so I hope to record that before > Saturday, maybe >a video, we'll see. > >Rob > >-- > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: More on the Dias vihuela
Dear Alexander, A very comprehensive paper and some super pics - thank you. Perhaps you might consider having it published in the newly resurrected FomRHI Quartetly? Contact the FoMRHI Sec Chris Goodwin. regards, Martyn --- On Tue, 26/8/08, Alexander Batov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Alexander Batov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] More on the Dias vihuela > To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu > Date: Tuesday, 26 August, 2008, 1:23 PM > My long promised update for one of the pages dedicated to > the Dias >vihuela: > > > >[1]http://www.vihuelademano.com/vgcrossroads.htm > > > >It's not a sort of 'must read' for everyone > (i.e. rather technical) but >might be interesting for makers and those who are > curious what linen >strips are doing inside musical instrument's body ;) > Roger Blumberg >certainly did but I'm not sure if he's still on > the list. > > > >Alexander > >-- > > References > >1. http://www.vihuelademano.com/vgcrossroads.htm > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[VIHUELA] Re: Chitarrone Francese
I'm hoping to pop 'oop North' to see Donald shortly and will ask if he's got any further information on this. Martyn --- On Tue, 26/8/08, Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Chitarrone Francese > To: "Stuart Walsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > Date: Tuesday, 26 August, 2008, 8:57 AM > It's not actually specified in the ms. but in his > article on Gallot (Early > Music Jan. 1978) Donald Gill gives nominal tunings of > > cegc'e'or > > c eflgcefl' > > i.e. major and minor common chords with open basses down to > G. > > Donald also points out that the first four basses overlap > with the 4th and > 5th courses on the fingerboard. > > That is assuming that these are octave strung. However > this wouldn't be > the case with a re-entrant tuning - although Donald > doesn't mention this. > > In practice the 4th and 5th courses are rarely used and > then usually as only > as open courses. > > In the ms. the instrument is called "la guittare > theorbee" > > Monica > - Original Message - > From: "Stuart Walsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Monica Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Rob MacKillop" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Vihuelalist" > > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 8:47 PM > Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Chitarrone Francese > > > > > >> Well - I have the Granata book and Gallot and so > could send you some of > >> the pieces if you haven't got these. The > Gallot has the strings on the > >> fingerboard tuned to a major major common chord > rather than the usual > >> guitar intervals. > > > > I'd be interested to know the chordal tuning here. > I don't think you > > mentioned it in your previous lists of alternative > tunings. > > > > > > Stuart > >> > >> I am bit curious about this though because > according to Gary Boye there > >> is a copy of Granata's 1651 book which has an > additional engraved > >> portrait of Granata with in the background what > appears to be a guitar > >> with extended bass strings. I did query with him > whether the instrument > >> was guitar shaped rather than lute shaped. He > said it was guitar shaped > >> but couldn't find his copy of the > illustration. In his dissertation he > >> gives the RISM sigla of the book as F:C. I'm > not sure whether by this he > >> means the Conservatorio Library in Florence or an > obscure library in > >> France. > >> > >> Has anyone else seen this copy? It also seems > that Granata applied to > >> be a super numerary lutenist to the Concerto > Palatino of San Petronio in > >> Bologna. > >> > >> Monica > >> - Original Message - From: "Rob > MacKillop" > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: "Vihuela" > > >> Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2008 5:57 PM > >> Subject: [VIHUELA] Chitarrone Francese > >> > >> > >>> The German luthier, Wolfgang Emmerich has > made a copy of the > >>> instrument > >>> from the Grammatica painting, which some > believe to be a Chitarrone > >>> Francese - a sort of archlute for guitar > players. The painting has > >>> only > >>> five courses on the fretboard. Robert > Spencer thought the music by > >>> Fontanelli, the Sonate per il Chitarrone > Francese, was for this > >>> instrument. Richard Pinnell has identified > the music of Granata and > >>> Gallot also for this instrument. > >>> > >>> Now, Wolfgang is visiting Edinburgh in > September and is leaving the > >>> instrument with me for a week before he > takes it home. I hope to make > >>> an mp3 or two and maybe a video of it before > I hand it back. So, could > >>> someone please send me a jpg or two of some > pieces I might be able to > >>> play on it? > >>> > >>> I'm not in the market for such an > instrument, but having it for a week > >>> is very interesting. You can see pictures of > the original painting on > >>> Wolfgang's website: > >>> > >>> > [1]http://www.zupfinstrumente-emmerich.de/English/index.htm > - click on > >>> archlute and scroll down. > >>> > >>> Rob MacKillop > >>> > >>> -- > >>> > >>> References > >>> > >>> 1. > http://www.zupfinstrumente-emmerich.de/English/index.htm > >>> > >>> > >>> To get on or off this list see list > information at > >>> > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > >> > >> > >> > >> Internal Virus Database is out of date. > >> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: > 8.0.138 / Virus Database: > >> 270.6.5/1620 - Release Date: 19/08/2008 06:04 > >> > >> > >> > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Chitarrone Francese
The instrument that Rob's been lent --- On Mon, 25/8/08, Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Chitarrone Francese > To: "Martyn Hodgson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > Date: Monday, 25 August, 2008, 4:30 PM > I'm not sure which instrument you are referring to - the > modern one or > Gallot? > > Monica > > - Original Message - > From: "Martyn Hodgson" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Monica Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > "Rob MacKillop" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > > Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 8:03 AM > Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Chitarrone Francese > > > > Are the 'basses' of this instrument set at the > upper or lower octave? > > Martyn > > > --- On Sun, 24/8/08, Rob MacKillop > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > From: Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Chitarrone Francese > > To: "Monica Hall" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > > > Date: Sunday, 24 August, 2008, 7:43 AM > > Thanks, Monica. I only have time for maybe one piece > by each > > composer, > >so if you could post me copies or jpgs that would > be > > great. > > > >Regarding the question of body shape - guitar or > lute - > > I have no fixed > >or learned opinion, but I imagine different > luthiers > > tried different > >things. The guitar shape is an obvious one to start > > with, as what we > >are considering is a guitar with diapasons added. > > However, the baroque > >guitar shape is not conducive to a longer bridge on > the > > bass side. The > >lute shape is better in this regard. So it might be > > possible that some > >luthiers preferred a lute shape for their > arch-guitars. > > We might never > >know. The Grammatica painting shows only five > courses on > > the fretboard, > >and this would be an odd thing to do for an > archlute - > > and the painting > >is otherwise very detailed, so I think the artist > was > > being accurate. I > >can see the desire of some baroque guitar players > to > > want to play the > >role that their lute-playing colleagues were doing > in > > the continuo > >section, playing bass lines and chords. Having an > > archlute in guitar > >tuning would be an obvious step for some, I guess. > > > >Anyway, I'm looking forward to experimenting > with it > > for a week. > > > >Rob > >2008/8/23 Monica Hall > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Well - I have the Granata book and Gallot and so > could > > send you some > > of the pieces if you haven't got these. The > > Gallot has the strings > > on the fingerboard tuned to a major major common > chord > > rather than > > the usual guitar intervals. > > I am bit curious about this though because > according > > to Gary Boye > > there is a copy of Granata's 1651 book which > has > > an additional > > engraved portrait of Granata with in the > background > > what appears to > > be a guitar with extended bass strings. I did > query > > with him > > whether the instrument was guitar shaped rather > than > > lute shaped. > > He said it was guitar shaped but couldn't > find his > > copy of the > > illustration. In his dissertation he gives the > RISM > > sigla of the > > book as F:C. I'm not sure whether by this he > > means the > > Conservatorio Library in Florence or an obscure > > library in France. > > Has anyone else seen this copy? It also seems > that > > Granata applied > > to be a super numerary lutenist to the Concerto > > Palatino of San > > Petronio in Bologna. > > Monica > > - Original Message - From: "Rob > > MacKillop" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Vihuela" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2008 5:57 PM > > Subject: [VIHUELA] Chitarrone Francese > > > > The German luthier, Wolfgang Emmerich has made a > copy > > of the > >instrument > > from the Grammatica painting, which some believe >
[VIHUELA] Re: Search for Scottish pieces
I'm quite aware of the dedications! But my point was that the Stuart monarchy had scottish roots and it was almost within living memory in 1671 that James of Scotland had become king of a united Great Britain. Hence a true scottish connection (no scotch snaps tho' if that is what's wanted...). M --- On Mon, 18/8/08, Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Search for Scottish pieces > To: "Martyn Hodgson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > Date: Monday, 18 August, 2008, 4:40 PM > They are not really Scottish unless you regard Charles II as > being Scottish. > The pieces are dedicated to individuals at the Restoration > court. > > La Stuarde probably refers to Francis Teresa Stuart, known > as “La Belle > Stuart”, one of the few women that Charles II failed to > seduce. I don't > know if she was Scottish but she eloped with Duke of > Richmond. > > Monica > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Martyn Hodgson" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Vihuela" ; > "Rob MacKillop" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 4:20 PM > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Search for Scottish pieces > > > Rob, > > Other than these two, the only others which come to mind > are in a sense all > pieces in Corebetta's 1671 book dedicated to the Stuart > monarch. In > particular there's a nice sarabande: La Stuart (f. 71) > and the preceding > Allemande: La Royalle > > Martyn > > > --- On Mon, 18/8/08, Rob MacKillop > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > From: Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: [VIHUELA] Search for Scottish pieces > > To: "Vihuela" > > > Date: Monday, 18 August, 2008, 2:22 PM > > I'm looking for baroque guitar pieces with a > Scottish > > connection. I > >have the two pieces in the Princess Anne Lute Book > and > > the Schiller > >manuscript. Speaking of which, can someone give me > the > > full name for > >the Schiller ms? > > > >Rob MacKillop > > > >-- > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > Send instant messages to your online friends > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[VIHUELA] Re: Search for Scottish pieces
Rob, Other than these two, the only others which come to mind are in a sense all pieces in Corebetta's 1671 book dedicated to the Stuart monarch. In particular there's a nice sarabande: La Stuart (f. 71) and the preceding Allemande: La Royalle Martyn --- On Mon, 18/8/08, Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] Search for Scottish pieces > To: "Vihuela" > Date: Monday, 18 August, 2008, 2:22 PM > I'm looking for baroque guitar pieces with a Scottish > connection. I >have the two pieces in the Princess Anne Lute Book and > the Schiller >manuscript. Speaking of which, can someone give me the > full name for >the Schiller ms? > >Rob MacKillop > >-- > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[VIHUELA] Re: alternative tunings for Baroque guitar - and campanella!
The thing that slightly puzzles me about these guitar variant tunings is why some (not all of course) were bothered with. Some chords (usually the tonic) are, of course, made easier but others in the same piece not. As you say Murcia transcribed back. Rather like him, by and large, I often wish the others hadn't bothered. Was it: lute envy, showing off or simply 'doodling' do you think? Martyn --- On Sun, 17/8/08, Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: alternative tunings for Baroque guitar - and > campanella! > To: "Stuart Walsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > Date: Sunday, 17 August, 2008, 3:26 PM > Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: alternative tunings for Baroque > guitar - and > campanella! > > > Thanks for saying it's an interesting topic! There > is a lot more (oh no!) > > ...with pictures wherever too. > > Well - I couldn't find any more. > > The nice thing about the Internet is that > > it would be quite a coup in itself if absolutely no > one was interested. > > Anything to do with the baroque guitar is so fascinating > that I have just > spent an hour working out the scordaturae in Corbetta and > Granata which are > as follows...if they don't get mangled in transmission > > > > Corbetta 1643 443 3 > > a dg bflat d > > > > Corbetta 1648 3 4 44 > > a c#f# b e > > > > Granata 1659 > > p.82 43- 34 > D minor > >a d fa > d > > > > p.863 3- 4 3 > A major > >a c# ea > c# > > > > p.88343 3- >F major > > ac f a > c > > > > p.933 4 4 4 > > ac# f# b > e > > > > p.954 3 3- 4 > > ad f#a > d D major > > > > They seem to re-arrange the intervals within the basic > compass on the > whole. > > > I was hoping there might be similar alternative > tunings to Foscarini's. On > > the other hand there is yet another fascinating issue: > why guitarists > > wanted to play in strange keys? It's not what > plucked instruments > > typically do. > > I haven't had time to do Campion in detail but his > scordaturae are similar > to Granata. The Gallot ones have always defeated me > because they are so > difficult to read. One possible explanation is that it > enables one to use > more open course but also simplifies the left-hand > fingering. In Foscarini > a lot of the chords consist just of a barre across all five > courses. > > > > I'm not sure that I do. But I uploaded a photocopy > of a painting of some > > children with an English guitar a while ago. I > can't find it anywhere > > though. > > I've put it on my guitar.ning site if anyone is > inteested. > > > > Going back to Foscarini and his alternative tuning: he > writes campanella > > passages. Now it's probably possible to do > campanellas in just about any > > tuning but it's a lot easier in some than others. > One easier way is > > (Foscarini's) tuning in thirds (taken up in a > sophisticated way by the > > much later Russian guitar). Another way is re-entrant > tuning. Foscarini is > > writing campanellas around 1632. Is anyone else > writing campanellas at > > his time or before? Old Fosco couldn't have been > setting a trend could he? > > Well - his book is the first to have appeared in print (as > far as we know) > but things have usually been round a while before anyone > gets to printing > them. There are dozens of Italian mss. most of which I > haven't seen and at > least one of them has mixed chords with lute style > counterpoint. There are > no campanella's in Corbetta's 1639 book but by 1643 > they begin to be a > feature. > > They are also associated with the theorbo so may have been > used by lutenists > earlier. > > Monica > > > >> - Original Message - From: "Stuart > Walsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: "Vihuelalist" > > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 9:04 PM > >> Subject: [VIHUELA] alternative tunings for Baroque > guitar > >> > >> > >>> I have been looking at some Foscarini pieces > in an alternative tuning > >>> and, > >>> just for the hell of it, I'm trying to do > a little website about them. > >>> My > >>> idea is to do the website as a sort of blog - > a bit at at a time. > >>> But blog software (I'm using WordPress) > only lets you put postings in > >>> reverse chronology - the latest post is first > - whereas I'm wanting to
[VIHUELA] Re: Alfabeto songs and editions
Yes, I agree with most of this (especially forgot about M's special notation which further shows that 4,3 cadences would have been played). However I'm not so sure that professional/more accomplished amateur players wouldn't have used a more comprehensive harmonic language than you seem to suggest - hard to prove of course since in the nature of things their extempore playing is not recorded. However the very existence of F, C and R's extended Alfabeto shows that at least some were aware of the shortcomings of the basic chords. But odd that none of them shows the common Am7 chord which I gave earlier.. MH --- On Mon, 21/7/08, Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Alfabeto songs and editions > To: "Martyn Hodgson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > Date: Monday, 21 July, 2008, 12:33 PM > Yes, I do think something as common as the ubiqitous 4,3 > cadence would have > been expected: wether they thought merely indicating the > root chord was > sufficient and that players would themselves automatically > play a 4,3 is > moot; presumably for professional players not required, but > for beginners > (the buyers of such books)? > > In Marini's Scherzi e canzonette of 1622 he has in > fact explained 4-3 > cadences and in the music puts a dot beside the letter to > indicate where one > should be played. > > Regarding the use of 'modern' chord names, they are > not, of course, just > used by modern guitar players but more generally employed. > The problem with > Alfabeto is also indicating commonly appearing harmonies > such as Am7 ie > > which are not (I think offhand) covered by such additional > systems as > Foscarini's 'alfabeto dissonante', Calvi's > 'alfabeto falso' > > Foscarini includes some chords of the 7th and chords for > introducing 4-3 > suspensions.Calvi is actually a plagiarized edition of > Corbetta's 1639 > book although most people don't seem to realize that. > Corbetta's alfabeto > falso also includes some 7th chords and 4-3 which he uses > in his alfabeto > pieces. > > or Ricci's > 'lettere tagliate'. > > Ricci's lettere tagliate are something completely > different. They are a > form of dissonance created by leaving one course of a chord > unfretted > creating a sort of appoggiatura. > > However I think the point is that the guitar was not > expected to realize the > bass line at all - only strum the relevant chords... At > least Marini says: > > Note that in some places in this book you will find that > the alfabeto does > not match the bass line. It was the Author’s desire to > accompany the voice > in as many ways as possible so do not concern yourself with > this which is > due to the fact that the guitar lacks many of the correct > chords. > > There was no need to indicate such refinements as chords > of the 7th > because guitarists wouldn't have played them. > > Monica > > > -- On Mon, 21/7/08, Mjos & Larson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 3 > > From: Mjos & Larson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Alfabeto songs and editions > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cc: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu, "David van > Ooijen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Monday, 21 July, 2008, 7:18 AM > > Martyn, > > > > Do you think a 4-3 cadence is always > "required" > > in this repertoire? > > Or do you think a plain major chord might, possibly, > be an > > element of > > the style? O would a plain chord only have been played > by > > low-level > > amateurs? > > > > I actually am happy enough to play from Italian or > Spanish > > sources > > translated in to French tab (my Piccinini arrangements > are > > in French > > tab), but I would wish for enough information in that > > "translation" > > to have a good understanding of the original. > > > > I think the issue also relates to the purpose of the > > edition. Is the > > goal to "recreate" a corrected/clearer > version of > > the original source > > -- it might be. I am trying to find a form that will > be > > useful and > > practical for me (and maybe for others) for future > > programs. So I'm > > experimenting a bit. > > > > -- R > > > > On Jul 20, 2008, at 3:04 AM, Martyn Hodgson wrote: > > > > > > > > Like many others
[VIHUELA] Re: Alfabeto songs and editions
Yes, I do think something as common as the ubiqitous 4,3 cadence would have been expected: wether they thought merely indicating the root chord was sufficient and that players would themselves automatically play a 4,3 is moot; presumably for professional players not required, but for beginners (the buyers of such books)? Regarding the use of 'modern' chord names, they are not, of course, just used by modern guitar players but more generally employed. The problem with Alfabeto is also indicating commonly appearing harmonies such as Am7 ie 0 2 2 1 3 which are not (I think offhand) covered by such additional systems as Foscarini's 'alfabeto dissonante', Calvi's 'alfabeto falso' or Ricci's 'lettere tagliate'. MH -- On Mon, 21/7/08, Mjos & Larson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 3 > From: Mjos & Larson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Alfabeto songs and editions > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu, "David van Ooijen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Monday, 21 July, 2008, 7:18 AM > Martyn, > > Do you think a 4-3 cadence is always "required" > in this repertoire? > Or do you think a plain major chord might, possibly, be an > element of > the style? O would a plain chord only have been played by > low-level > amateurs? > > I actually am happy enough to play from Italian or Spanish > sources > translated in to French tab (my Piccinini arrangements are > in French > tab), but I would wish for enough information in that > "translation" > to have a good understanding of the original. > > I think the issue also relates to the purpose of the > edition. Is the > goal to "recreate" a corrected/clearer version of > the original source > -- it might be. I am trying to find a form that will be > useful and > practical for me (and maybe for others) for future > programs. So I'm > experimenting a bit. > > -- R > > On Jul 20, 2008, at 3:04 AM, Martyn Hodgson wrote: > > > > > Like many others I use modern chord names when playing > guitar > > continuo: this enables the underlying harmony (shades > of Rameau) to > > be played without obvious errors. However I play solo > music from > > original tablatures and the many 'mixed' > Italian tablatures enables > > Alfabeto to be learnt. In practice I never confuse the > two systems. > > > > However, I do so agree that generally players ought to > be > > encouraged to play from the original notations and, > like you, > > deprecate the modern practice of transcribing into a > uniform French > > tablature. > > > > Finally, the problem with some of the early Alfabeto > songs is that > > the symbols are not always quite accurate: a good > example is the A > > 4,3 (modern chord notation)cadence which is only shown > as I > > (Alfabeto) in the original. > > > > MH > > > > __ Not happy with your email address?. Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available now at Yahoo! http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/ymail/new.html To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Alfabeto songs and editions
Like many others I use modern chord names when playing guitar continuo: this enables the underlying harmony (shades of Rameau) to be played without obvious errors. However I play solo music from original tablatures and the many 'mixed' Italian tablatures enables Alfabeto to be learnt. In practice I never confuse the two systems. However, I do so agree that generally players ought to be encouraged to play from the original notations and, like you, deprecate the modern practice of transcribing into a uniform French tablature. Finally, the problem with some of the early Alfabeto songs is that the symbols are not always quite accurate: a good example is the A 4,3 (modern chord notation)cadence which is only shown as I (Alfabeto) in the original. MH --- On Sun, 20/7/08, David van Ooijen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: David van Ooijen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Alfabeto songs and editions > To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu, "Mjos & Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Sunday, 20 July, 2008, 8:49 AM > Hi Rocky > > >> > often uses a system of "modern" chord > names in his scores -- C = C major chord, c = c minor, etc. > << > > I couldn't find your scores on your page, just a > reference to this email. > Can you tell us where they are? > > Concerning modern chord names for alfabetto, there are pro > and cons, > obviously. I am a bad alfabetto reader, play from the bass > line when playing > baroque guitar, but modern chord symbols I understand > immediately. I write > these in myself if the figures are too complicated to > 'figure' out instantly > what a strummably solution would be. I find that a reason > _not_ to use > modern chord symbols in a modern edition of alfabetto > songs. How am I ever > going to learn alfabetto if the modern editions don't > use it anymore? Not > your problem, clearly mine, but still, on a broader scale, > how are we going > to ensure that our cultural heritage remains understandable > if we have a > spelling reform every 10 years (Dutch practice that > succeeded in alienating > readers from literature of just half a century ago), > transcribe all lute > music in French tablature (anybody out there that reads > German tab? or even > just Italian tab or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Napolitan than the ever-present > but not > ever-appropriate French tablature) or refuse to read > anything else than g- > and f-clefs in their 'proper' places. What was that > about David T's > lute-dsp? I think it can be summarised as: be flexible, and > that means be > able to handle all sorts of notation. And on another note, > I know music is > only alive when sounding, but to me alfabetto feels like > baroque guitar > song, playing from modern chords feels like House of the > Rising Song. > Vihuela music in French tab, Caccini with written out > accompaniments, I know > it was done by Phalese and Robert Dowland respectively, but > it feels like > eating sushi with knife and fork or drinking wine from a > plastic cup. __ Not happy with your email address?. Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available now at Yahoo! http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/ymail/new.html To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Bartolotti's biography
Tyler And Sparks also say B played in this performance (116 n.41) but bearing in mind some of their sources this may just be from Chauvel (altho' he's not cited here but is elsewhere on Bartolotti). A general source given for this note: 'L'Opera italien en France avant Lulli' (Prunieres' dissertation Paris 1913) but not always reliable either. Martyn --- On Mon, 7/7/08, Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] Bartolotti's biography > To: "Vihuelalist" > Date: Monday, 7 July, 2008, 4:57 PM > Hola Amigos > > In his introduction to the facsimile edition of > Bartolotti's two books Claude Chauvel claims that > Bartolotti took part in the performance of Cavalli's > Ercole Amante to celebrate the marriage of Louis XIV in > Feb. 1662 ec. and that he is listed with other Italian > musicians in "His Majesty's Cabinet", and > that in 1666 he enterd the service of the Prince de Conde. > > He gives no source of reference. Does anyone know where > the information comes from? > > Monica > -- > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html __ Not happy with your email address?. Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available now at Yahoo! http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/ymail/new.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Novelties
A CD Rom of facsimiles of ALL 7 vihuela books (plus some Ms tablatures) whichpublished by a Spanish company Musica Prima (ISBN 84-95609-41-X). I got my copy about a year or so ago (through the Lute Society) and I think it only cost around £15 - a real bargain. I think the publication was subsidised by the municipality of Gijon. MH --- On Thu, 5/6/08, Jerry Willard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Jerry Willard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Novelties > To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu > Date: Thursday, 5 June, 2008, 1:18 PM > Hi > > The Milan facsimile looks terrific. My Spanish is very > limited and I can't > find any way to buy this. I'm in the USA is there an > address I can send > money too that anyone has seen on this sight? I emailed > them but alas there > has been no response. Any ideas would be helpful > > Thanks > > Jerry > > http://www.jerrywillard.com > > -Original Message- > From: John Griffiths [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 8:49 AM > To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu > Subject: [VIHUELA] Novelties > > Just for everyone's information, there will be a whole > day dedicated > to the vihuela at the Utrecht Early Music Festival on 31 > August this > year. Five concerts and three lectures. Performances by > Jose Miguel > Moreno, Hopkinson Smith, Juan Carlos Rivera, Alfred > Fernandez, and > Xavier D=EDaz. Lectures by Gerardo Arriaga, Sebastian > Nu=F1ez and myself. > Details at www.oudemuziek.nl > > I don't know if any of you have seen yet the new > facsimile of Milan's > El Maestro published by the Sociedad de Vihuela in Spain. > It is the > best facsimile of lute /vihuela music I have ever seen. All > in full > colour on paper that resembles the original. Reproduces all > the stains > and wear marks. 55 Euros for members; 70 euros for everyone > else. This > is really worth having. The print run is quite small, so > don't miss > oout if you are interested. Go to > http://www.sociedaddelavihuela.com/publicaciones.htm > and then click on the thumbnail image of the cover. > > Good wishes, > John > > > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > > Professor John Griffiths Faculty of Music =95 The > University of > Melbourne 3010 =95 Victoria =95 Australia > tel (61+3) 8344 8810 =95 fax (61+3) 8344 5346 =95 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > ~ > > This e-mail and any attachments may contain personal > information or > information that is otherwise confidential or the subject > of > copyright. Any use, disclosure or copying of any part of it > is > prohibited. The University does not warrant that this email > or any > attachments are free from viruses or defects. Please check > any > attachments for viruses and defects before opening them. If > this e- > mail is received in error please delete it and notify us by > return e- > mail. > > > > > > -- > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html __ Sent from Yahoo! Mail. A Smarter Email http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
[VIHUELA] Re: strumming near the bridge (or not)
Rob, I'm pasting in extracts from an earlier communications I had with Monica Hall which you may find of interest. Martyn - >From Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Thanks for the very useful list of references. I knew that someone would pick up on the fact that all the examples I mentioned were women! I think your explanation is probably right. They look nice like that. However the (male) players I have observed who do tend to play with the little finger on the soundboard don't keep it glued there all the time - it seems to be more of a point of reference to which they return in moments of repose (hope that sounds suitably poetic). It is not something confined to the thumb in rather than thumb out position either. But you certainly can't do elaborate strumming like that. The other thing about illustrations is that they capture a single moment in time - and what is picturesque. What they can tell us is rather limited. As with everything else I suspect different players did different things for different reasons - yesterday, today and for ever. Monica >From Martyn Hodgson: I guess part of any possible differences between lute and guitar rioght hand positions must be related to strumming: it is extremely inhibiting if the little finger is placed on the belly (especially close to the bridge as the lute) - tho not impossible as some of the pictures listed below suggest. Further, and speculatively, the pictures you mention are of, presumably, amatuer (and women! - sorry) players who might, indeed, frequently have been taught a less florid, more 'ladylike', style requiring limited strumming (tho' a couple of nice exceptions in the short list below). We note many other pictures showing a much higher hand position with few representations of little finger on belly, esp close to the bridge. Some examples of various types up to early 18th C from Grunfeld (The Art and Times of the Guitar, 1969) in page order (I make no comment on the text - or sex): LITTLE FINGER ON BELLY CLOSE TO BRIDGE Engraving -Dame de qualite jouant de la Guitarre(Trouvain, Paris 1694) Ditto (Berey, Paris c 1690) Netscher - Lady playing guitar (1680) Vermeer - guitar player (c 1670) Teniers - guitarist (c 1670) Quesnel - Young woman playing guitar (1681) LITTLE FINGER ON BELLY BUT PLAYED HIGH Fresco - Young woman playing a Guitar (Venice c 1650?) Du Boullogne - The five senses (c 1630) Raoux - The dangerous lesson!?/liaison (c1700) NO FINGER ON BELLY PLAYED HIGH Engrafing - Dame en habit de chambre (1675) Amants Donnant une Seranade (Paris 1693) Le Caffe de Rome (Paris c 1700) Title plate of Foscarini's 4th book Velasquez - Three musicians (c 1630) Rombouts - Ditto (c 1630) Rombouts - Musicians (c1630) Ryckaert - A Musical Gathering (c 1660) NB - WOMAN! Ryckaert - Hausmusik (c 1650) De Boullogne- guitarist (c 1630) Daret - guitarist (c 1660) Coques - the duo (c 1670) NB Man and woman both playing v high no finger on belly Lely - Ladies of the Lake family (c1660) Teniers - guitarist (c1670). Schubler - Amours (c 1730?) Watteau ' scene d'amour (c1710) Watteau - Five different drawing studies (c1710) Clearly, this list is selective (I don't know Grunfeld's criteria for inclusion) but all this variation suggests (like with lute right hand position) much need for proper comprehensive research. Nevertheless from memories of other representations, I'd say it is a reasonably fair cross section of pictures and suggests that MOSTLY the little finger wasn't rested on the belly and that a highish hand position (say towards the rose) was common. (NB I mean to say that the little finger wasn't mostly rested on the belly close to the bridge (not that it wasn't rested at all): Iike you I suspect that in more plucked passages a reversion to the resting position might have been usual). Finally, and I think of interest in this context, when the modern plucking style came in (c 1800) many representations show little finger again on the belly plucking between the bridge and rose (indeed, some of the great 19thC virtuosi used this - Regondi, Mertz...). I presume this reversion is because there was no longer much call for florid strumming. Martyn --- On Fri, 30/5/08, Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] strumming near the bridge > To: "Vihuela" > Date: Friday, 30 May, 2008, 9:56 PM > A couple of people have emailed me questioning my strumming > near the bridge. > My f
[VIHUELA] Re: Grenerin
Something like that - but it's only one of numerous possible (and idiomatic)of course. MH --- On Tue, 27/5/08, Mjos & Larson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Mjos & Larson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Grenerin > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: "Vihuelalist" > Date: Tuesday, 27 May, 2008, 5:03 PM > Why "more easily mistaken"? > > Are you thinking the engraver may have entered the > "a" on 1st course, > then looked back to the manuscript for "a", saw > the "a" as the top > letter of the C major chord and continued from there? > > -- Rocky > > > > On May 27, 2008, at 7:30 AM, Martyn Hodgson wrote: > > > After trying various options I've plumped for one > which a scribe/ > > engraver might more easily have mistaken/overlooked: > > > -- > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html __ Sent from Yahoo! Mail. A Smarter Email http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G
Point taken about argument starting points. However, I'm not trying to establish a high 3rd on the guitar as a tuning definitely used by the Old Ones (or not): like the chimera of octave stringing on a theorbo's second course (a subject of an earlier thread and about which we disagree - I think), it may be possible but improbable (see Monica Hall's paper on guitar stringing which, I believe, summarises available evidence). In fact, a bit like Russell's celebrated conception of a flying saucer in orbit between the Earth and moon. MH PS Dear Howard, I'm having problems with emails through the list (= appearance of rogue =3D signs) - could you kindly let me know if your own c= opy suffers from similar problems. Ta. --- On Fri, 25/4/08, howard posner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&= gt; wrote: From: howard posner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G To: "Vihuela" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .dartmouth.edu> Date: Friday, 25 April, 2008, 7:49 PM On = Apr 25, 2008, at 7:16 AM, Martyn Hodgson wrote: > cannot we assume that, like with lutes, the first course of guitars = =20 > were pitched as high (or at least not too far off) as they co=3D =20 > uld reasonably bear. You can only assume this if you also assume the lack of a high octave =20 on the third course. Since the presence or lack of the high G is =20 what you're trying to establish, you have to assume your conclusion =20 in order to assume your premise. Someone in this thread (I saw it second-hand in Monica's post) =20 mentioned Roman pitch: > Some argue that Roman pitch was around > 392, others say it was nearer 460. I don't know anyone who argues that Roman pitch was ever higher than =20 A 415. Surviving 17th-century Roman organs are slightly lower than =20 392. Doni wrote in 1640 that the pitch of Roman organs had been =20 lowered a semitone in about (or since) 1600. Robert Smith wrote in =20 1749 that Roman organs in "about 1720" were pitched around 392. In =20 the early 18th century, Handel, Alessandro Scarlatti and Caldara =20 wrote the oboe parts for Roman performances that are written a whole-=20 tone below the other parts, which Bruce Haynes takes to mean the =20 oboes were at A 435 and everyone else was at A 384. See Haynes' A =20 History of Performing Pitch: the Story of "A" at pages 69-72, 167-168. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html =0A __ =0ASent from Yahoo! M= ail.=0A =0AA Smarter Email.
[VIHUELA] PS to Re: Sanz and the High G
PS I've just opened my recent mailing in my inbox and noticed the =3D signs= which have crept into the text. The Sent message is OK though - does = anyone have any ideas what this is? Martyn --- On Fri, 25/4/08, Martyn Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .uk> wrote: From: Martyn Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>= ; Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G To: "Vihuela" , "Rob MacKillop" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]><= BR>Date: Friday, 25 April, 2008, 8:51 AM Dear Rob, How exactly is your guitar strung?. Presumably you are obliged to lower =3D the general pitch of the instrument (say a minor third or so) to avoi=3D d frequent string breakages of a high third course. A gene=3D = ral lowering of pitch will have a deliterious effect in the 'bass' register=3D which might not be to everyone's taste. This, of course, assumes you=3D 're using just gut throughout: with wound strings in the basses or mo=3D dern high tensile strings on the high third course, all sorts of things bec=3D ome possible. In practice, I've found that whatever tuning is used there's always some=3D thoeretical anomaly in the continuity of the 'bass' line - this is surely =3D a particular characteristic and, indeed, charm of the instrument. Martyn --- On Thu, 24/4/08, Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ooglemail.com>= ; wrote: From: Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>=3D ; Subject: [VIHUELA] Sanz and the High G To: "Vihuela" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .dartmouth.edu> Date: Thursday, 24 April, 2008, 8:19 PM H=3D ere are two versions of Gaspar Sanz's Fuga 1: a) no bourdons and unison third course: http://www.songoftherose.co.uk/mp3/bg/sanz/RobMacKillopSanzFuga1.mp3 b) no bourdons and high octave third course - the highest octave on the thumb side: http://www.rmguitar.info/mp3s/Rfuga.mp3 (on an original instrument, mid-17thC) Now, Sanz stipulates (Cf http://www.monicahall.co.uk/) bourdons for strumme= =3D d music and no bourdons for plucked music. Nowhere does he say 'use a high octave pairing on the third course'. We've had a few debates on this list about bourdons and high ocatves, and I've always accepted that Sanz should be played with unison third course and no bourdons, but this fuga makes me wonder. In the vast majority of Sanz's music we meet moments where lines leap about in octaves, and it never bothers me - I quite like it, in fact; it seems to be part of the charm of the instrument. However, when it comes to this fuga...almost every line makes musical sense, EVERY line, with the high octave on the third, but not so with unison third: this really stretches the bounds of musicality, not just to our own aestehtics, but to what was around Sanz at the time. Someone like Sanz would have had many different guitars - different stringing arrangements, different construction, even different pitches. Is it not reasonable to suggest that one of these guitars might have had a hig= =3D h g, but the guitar he used most for punteado style had a unison g? This fuga sits perfectly on a guitar with a high octave third course. Cue Monica... Rob PS Monica - I agree with everything you say on the subject of stringing, bu= =3D t this particular piece... -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html =3D0A __ =3D0ASent from Yaho=3D o! Mail.=3D0A =3D0AA Smarter Email. =0A <= hr size=3D1>=0ASent from Yahoo! Mail.=0A =0AA Smarter Emai= l.
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G
Dear Rob, How exactly is your guitar strung?. Presumably you are obliged to lower = the general pitch of the instrument (say a minor third or so) to avoi= d frequent string breakages of a high third course. A gene= ral lowering of pitch will have a deliterious effect in the 'bass' register= which might not be to everyone's taste. This, of course, assumes you= 're using just gut throughout: with wound strings in the basses or mo= dern high tensile strings on the high third course, all sorts of things bec= ome possible. In practice, I've found that whatever tuning is used there's always some= thoeretical anomaly in the continuity of the 'bass' line - this is surely = a particular characteristic and, indeed, charm of the instrument. Martyn --- On Thu, 24/4/08, Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ooglemail.com> wrote: From: Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>= ; Subject: [VIHUELA] Sanz and the High G To: "Vihuela" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .dartmouth.edu> Date: Thursday, 24 April, 2008, 8:19 PM H= ere are two versions of Gaspar Sanz's Fuga 1: a) no bourdons and unison third course: http://www.songoftherose.co.uk/mp3/bg/sanz/RobMacKillopSanzFuga1.mp3 b) no bourdons and high octave third course - the highest octave on the thumb side: http://www.rmguitar.info/mp3s/Rfuga.mp3 (on an original instrument, mid-17thC) Now, Sanz stipulates (Cf http://www.monicahall.co.uk/) bourdons for strumme= d music and no bourdons for plucked music. Nowhere does he say 'use a high octave pairing on the third course'. We've had a few debates on this list about bourdons and high ocatves, and I've always accepted that Sanz should be played with unison third course and no bourdons, but this fuga makes me wonder. In the vast majority of Sanz's music we meet moments where lines leap about in octaves, and it never bothers me - I quite like it, in fact; it seems to be part of the charm of the instrument. However, when it comes to this fuga...almost every line makes musical sense, EVERY line, with the high octave on the third, but not so with unison third: this really stretches the bounds of musicality, not just to our own aestehtics, but to what was around Sanz at the time. Someone like Sanz would have had many different guitars - different stringing arrangements, different construction, even different pitches. Is it not reasonable to suggest that one of these guitars might have had a hig= h g, but the guitar he used most for punteado style had a unison g? This fuga sits perfectly on a guitar with a high octave third course. Cue Monica... Rob PS Monica - I agree with everything you say on the subject of stringing, bu= t this particular piece... -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html =0A __ =0ASent from Yaho= o! Mail.=0A =0AA Smarter Email.
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar right hand positions
Just one correction to my earlier: I meant to say that the little finger wasn't mostly rested on the belly close to the bridge (not that it wasn't rested at all): Iike you I suspect that in more plucked passages a reversion to the resting position might have been usual. I also agree that, with the men, the painter might have captured the more adventureous poses which could skew any results. But heavens - I don't want to be accused of modern conjecture. Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Thanks for the very useful list of references. I knew that someone would pick up on the fact that all the examples I mentioned were women! I think your explanation is probably right. They look nice like that. However the (male) players I have observed who do tend to play with the little finger on the soundboard don't keep it glued there all the time - it seems to be more of a point of reference to which they return in moments of repose (hope that sounds suitably poetic). It is not something confined to the thumb in rather than thumb out position either. But you certainly can't do elaborate strumming like that. The other thing about illustrations is that they capture a single moment in time - and what is picturesque. What they can tell us is rather limited. As with everything else I suspect different players did different things for different reasons - yesterday, today and for ever. Monica I guess part of any possible differences between lute and guitar rioght hand positions must be related to strumming: it is extremely inhibiting if the little finger is placed on the belly (especially close to the bridge as the lute) - tho not impossible as some of the pictures listed below suggest. Further, and speculatively, the pictures you mention are of, presumably, amatuer (and women! - sorry) players who might, indeed, frequently have been taught a less florid, more 'ladylike', style requiring limited strumming (tho' a couple of nice exceptions in the short list below). We note many other pictures showing a much higher hand position with few representations of little finger on belly, esp close to the bridge. Some examples of various types up to early 18th C from Grunfeld (The Art and Times of the Guitar, 1969) in page order (I make no comment on the text - or sex): LITTLE FINGER ON BELLY CLOSE TO BRIDGE Engraving -Dame de qualite jouant de la Guitarre(Trouvain, Paris 1694) Ditto (Berey, Paris c 1690) Netscher - Lady playing guitar (1680) Vermeer - guitar player (c 1670) Teniers - guitarist (c 1670) Quesnel - Young woman playing guitar (1681) LITTLE FINGER ON BELLY BUT PLAYED HIGH Fresco - Young woman playing a Guitar (Venice c 1650?) Du Boullogne - The five senses (c 1630) Raoux - The dangerous lesson!?/liaison (c1700) NO FINGER ON BELLY PLAYED HIGH Engrafing - Dame en habit de chambre (1675) Amants Donnant une Seranade (Paris 1693) Le Caffe de Rome (Paris c 1700) Title plate of Foscarini's 4th book Velasquez - Three musicians (c 1630) Rombouts - Ditto (c 1630) Rombouts - Musicians (c1630) Ryckaert - A Musical Gathering (c 1660) NB - WOMAN! Ryckaert - Hausmusik (c 1650) De Boullogne- guitarist (c 1630) Daret - guitarist (c 1660) Coques - the duo (c 1670) NB Man and woman both playing v high no finger on belly Lely - Ladies of the Lake family (c1660) Teniers - guitarist (c1670). Schubler - Amours (c 1730?) Watteau ' scene d'amour (c1710) Watteau - Five different drawing studies (c1710) Clearly, this list is selective (I don't know Grunfeld's criteria for inclusion) but all this variation suggests (like with lute right hand position) much need for proper comprehensive research. Nevertheless from memories of other representations, I'd say it is a reasonably fair cross section of pictures and suggests that MOSTLY the little finger wasn't rested on the belly and that a highish hand position (say towards the rose) was common. Finally, and I think of interest in this context, when the modern plucking style came in (c 1800) many representations show little finger again on the belly plucking between the bridge and rose (indeed, some of the great 19thC virtuosi used this - Regondi, Mertz...). I presume this reversion is because there was no longer much call for florid strumming. Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > my own experience. As to the issue of placing the little finger on the top > (which is what many thumb-in lutenists do, also on the guitar...): this is > not exactly supported by guitar related sources (do you know of any source > saying that?), nor by iconography. On the contrary. It most likely was not > a > standard feature of guitar technique in the 17
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar right hand positions
I guess part of any possible differences between lute and guitar rioght hand positions must be related to strumming: it is extremely inhibiting if the little finger is placed on the belly (especially close to the bridge as the lute) - tho not impossible as some of the pictures listed below suggest. Further, and speculatively, the pictures you mention are of, presumably, amatuer (and women! - sorry) players who might, indeed, frequently have been taught a less florid, more 'ladylike', style requiring limited strumming (tho' a couple of nice exceptions in the short list below). We note many other pictures showing a much higher hand position with few representations of little finger on belly, esp close to the bridge. Some examples of various types up to early 18th C from Grunfeld (The Art and Times of the Guitar, 1969) in page order (I make no comment on the text - or sex): LITTLE FINGER ON BELLY CLOSE TO BRIDGE Engraving -Dame de qualite jouant de la Guitarre(Trouvain, Paris 1694) Ditto (Berey, Paris c 1690) Netscher - Lady playing guitar (1680) Vermeer - guitar player (c 1670) Teniers - guitarist (c 1670) Quesnel - Young woman playing guitar (1681) LITTLE FINGER ON BELLY BUT PLAYED HIGH Fresco - Young woman playing a Guitar (Venice c 1650?) Du Boullogne - The five senses (c 1630) Raoux - The dangerous lesson!?/liaison (c1700) NO FINGER ON BELLY PLAYED HIGH Engrafing - Dame en habit de chambre (1675) Amants Donnant une Seranade (Paris 1693) Le Caffe de Rome (Paris c 1700) Title plate of Foscarini's 4th book Velasquez - Three musicians (c 1630) Rombouts - Ditto (c 1630) Rombouts - Musicians (c1630) Ryckaert - A Musical Gathering (c 1660) NB - WOMAN! Ryckaert - Hausmusik (c 1650) De Boullogne- guitarist (c 1630) Daret - guitarist (c 1660) Coques - the duo (c 1670) NB Man and woman both playing v high no finger on belly Lely - Ladies of the Lake family (c1660) Teniers - guitarist (c1670). Schubler - Amours (c 1730?) Watteau ' scene d'amour (c1710) Watteau - Five different drawing studies (c1710) Clearly, this list is selective (I don't know Grunfeld's criteria for inclusion) but all this variation suggests (like with lute right hand position) much need for proper comprehensive research. Nevertheless from memories of other representations, I'd say it is a reasonably fair cross section of pictures and suggests that MOSTLY the little finger wasn't rested on the belly and that a highish hand position (say towards the rose) was common. Finally, and I think of interest in this context, when the modern plucking style came in (c 1800) many representations show little finger again on the belly plucking between the bridge and rose (indeed, some of the great 19thC virtuosi used this - Regondi, Mertz...). I presume this reversion is because there was no longer much call for florid strumming. Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > my own experience. As to the issue of placing the little finger on the top > (which is what many thumb-in lutenists do, also on the guitar...): this is > not exactly supported by guitar related sources (do you know of any source > saying that?), nor by iconography. On the contrary. It most likely was not > a > standard feature of guitar technique in the 17th century, although some > will > have played like that. It makes me wonder what you wish to prove by saying > this On reflection I feel I can't let this go unchallenged. There is an attractive painting of a girl playing the guitar by the Dutch(!) painter Casper Netscher in which she is clearly shown playing with her little finger resting inside the moustache of the bridge. You can see this on the web site of the Wallace Collection in London where the picture is on view. There is also another painting of the actress Mary Davis by Peter Lely in which it looks as if she could be resting her little finger on the soundboard although it's not entirely clear. On p. 99 of Frederick Grunfeld's book there is a painting from a 17th century fresco in Venice in which she also looks as if she might be resting her little finger on the soundboard. Another on p.126 by the French painter Quesnel. And of course there is the Vermeer painting. Not so long ago Stuart put some illustrations on his site from one of Pesori's books which shows a rather odd position which could be thumb inside. I can't go through my entire picture collection but I would say on the basis of the pictorial evidence that there was considerable variety in hand positions. Of course whether the pictures are accurate or not is another matter. Do you know of any guitar sources which describe right-hand position at all? Perhaps you could lists these for us. On what basis can you claim
[VIHUELA] Re: Ghostview/Ghostscript
I got so far with these and, infact, still have the icons on my desk top, but couldn't do the final hurdle so I'd like to know too. MH Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I wonder whether anyone on these lists can explain to me how to obtain and install the Ghostview & Ghostscript programmes which I understand I need in order to convert Django tablature files into PDFs. In particular it is not clear on the various sites which version or components of Ghostscript should be downloaded and I can't make head nor tail of the instructions for installing it... Any advice would be most gratefully received. Monica -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Sent from Yahoo! - a smarter inbox. --
[VIHUELA] Re: tablature, alfabeto and BC
Apart from the guitar being implied for these two dances I don't know. It's very enjoyable tho' (if possibly questionable) and not just a flash in the pan since I've done it three times with him directing three different period bands including one at RNCM. Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Peter Holman was criticised for doing this in some of reviews - who referred to "silly strummers". Although the guitar was popular - this was probably amongst amateurs as a solo instrument or as an accompaniment to the voice. It would be interesting to know what evidence Peter has for using the guitar in this way. Monica ----- Original Message - From: Martyn Hodgson To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; 'Monica Hall' ; 'Vihuelalist' Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 8:40 AM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: tablature, alfabeto and BC Two dances in fact. I know of no specific named players but considering the popularity of the instrument in London at the time there'd probably quite a choice. Peter Holman thinks the guitar was used throughout the opera in almost all the pieces including the Lament where he asked me to strum (gently of course) the opening harmonies throughout whilst the strings played the more dissonant version: it certainly works and, I think, heightens the effect. Not sure if Purcell wld have expected it tho. Having said this Peter is certainly one of the leading scholars and researchers of English music of the late 17th/early 18thC. Martyn PS I mostly strummed.. Who played the guitar dance in Purcell's Dido and Aeneas? Rob www.rmguitar.info -Original Message- From: Monica Hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 17 January 2008 17:04 To: Vihuelalist Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: tablature, alfabeto and BC - Original Message - From: Monica Hall To: Martyn Hodgson Cc: vihuelalist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:58 PM Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: tablature, alfabeto and BC Well - the short answer is no! The guitar does feature in the Florentine Intermedii. It is just possible that it was used in Landi's opera Sant Alessio as this includes a duet for the two humourous characters which is also included in one of Landi's song books with alfabeto. It does make an appearance in Lully's La Galanterie du temps - played by Corbetta - but that is French. And of course in the music for Calisto again with Corbetta. If it was used in Italian opera it would probably have been in very specific contexts - humorous, gipsies and the like I guess. Not very helpful that... Monica - Original Message - From: Martyn Hodgson To: Monica Hall ; Lex Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:44 PM Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: tablature, alfabeto and BC Monica, Related to this: are you aware if any lists of players at the 17thC/early 18thC Italian Opera Houses listing theorbos, harpsichords players also showing guitarists.? Martyn Monica Hall wrote: Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: tablature, alfabeto and BC these are my thoughts ... >> Lex Eisenhardt wrote: >> >> There is an interesting parallel to the rapid decline of alfabeto song >> after >> 1630. At about the same time the first instructions appeared for the use >> of the guitar in BC (Foscarini, Corbetta). >> Should we suppose that the practice of an all-battuto (alfabeto) >> accompaniment style has survived? >> There are (almost) no books with alfabeto from any other country >> than Italy, and the Italian alfabeto manuals from the second half of the >> 17th century are poor, rehashed versions of earlier editions, almost >> without >> exception. They were only printed in Rome and Venice, probably in small >> numbers, serving a local demand. Alfabeto (in print) clearly was past its >> prime. > The short answer to that is that what has survived in print is only a tip of the iceberg. And what is printed commercially reflects the economic situation at the time and place. Italy was apparently in economic decline in the second half of the 17th century. Also it may have been that the kind of songs which are included in these books had gone out of fashion rather than the manner of accompanying them. Surely this same is true of the songs which don't have alfabeto? And if you have been reading Cory Gavito's dissertation I wouldn't read too much into what he says as it is based on a very small statistical sample. The exercises in the books by Corbetta et al include examples showing which alfabeto chords match the the notes of the bass part e.g. The Regola per sonar sopra la parte on p.70 on Corbetta's are surely intended to help the player devise a strummed accompaniment. It is also self-evident that the acc
[VIHUELA] Re: tablature, alfabeto and BC
Two dances in fact. I know of no specific named players but considering the popularity of the instrument in London at the time there'd probably quite a choice. Peter Holman thinks the guitar was used throughout the opera in almost all the pieces including the Lament where he asked me to strum (gently of course) the opening harmonies throughout whilst the strings played the more dissonant version: it certainly works and, I think, heightens the effect. Not sure if Purcell wld have expected it tho. Having said this Peter is certainly one of the leading scholars and researchers of English music of the late 17th/early 18thC. Martyn PS I mostly strummed.. Who played the guitar dance in Purcell's Dido and Aeneas? Rob www.rmguitar.info -Original Message- From: Monica Hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 17 January 2008 17:04 To: Vihuelalist Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: tablature, alfabeto and BC - Original Message - From: Monica Hall To: Martyn Hodgson Cc: vihuelalist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:58 PM Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: tablature, alfabeto and BC Well - the short answer is no! The guitar does feature in the Florentine Intermedii. It is just possible that it was used in Landi's opera Sant Alessio as this includes a duet for the two humourous characters which is also included in one of Landi's song books with alfabeto. It does make an appearance in Lully's La Galanterie du temps - played by Corbetta - but that is French. And of course in the music for Calisto again with Corbetta. If it was used in Italian opera it would probably have been in very specific contexts - humorous, gipsies and the like I guess. Not very helpful that... Monica - Original Message ----- From: Martyn Hodgson To: Monica Hall ; Lex Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:44 PM Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: tablature, alfabeto and BC Monica, Related to this: are you aware if any lists of players at the 17thC/early 18thC Italian Opera Houses listing theorbos, harpsichords players also showing guitarists.? Martyn Monica Hall wrote: Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: tablature, alfabeto and BC these are my thoughts ... >> Lex Eisenhardt wrote: >> >> There is an interesting parallel to the rapid decline of alfabeto song >> after >> 1630. At about the same time the first instructions appeared for the use >> of the guitar in BC (Foscarini, Corbetta). >> Should we suppose that the practice of an all-battuto (alfabeto) >> accompaniment style has survived? >> There are (almost) no books with alfabeto from any other country >> than Italy, and the Italian alfabeto manuals from the second half of the >> 17th century are poor, rehashed versions of earlier editions, almost >> without >> exception. They were only printed in Rome and Venice, probably in small >> numbers, serving a local demand. Alfabeto (in print) clearly was past its >> prime. > The short answer to that is that what has survived in print is only a tip of the iceberg. And what is printed commercially reflects the economic situation at the time and place. Italy was apparently in economic decline in the second half of the 17th century. Also it may have been that the kind of songs which are included in these books had gone out of fashion rather than the manner of accompanying them. Surely this same is true of the songs which don't have alfabeto? And if you have been reading Cory Gavito's dissertation I wouldn't read too much into what he says as it is based on a very small statistical sample. The exercises in the books by Corbetta et al include examples showing which alfabeto chords match the the notes of the bass part e.g. The Regola per sonar sopra la parte on p.70 on Corbetta's are surely intended to help the player devise a strummed accompaniment. It is also self-evident that the accompaniments to the vocal pieces in Corbetta's Guitarre royale of 1671 are intended to be mostly strummed. Why else should he put the note values on the stave rather than above it? The same is true of Matteis - the first lesson which Schollars ought to learn by heart - simply the standard chords and some of his accompaniments and exercises are mostly strummed. that on p.23 for example. >> However, some players may have been able to realize an accompaniment, >> departing from the bass (and losing considerably in volume, while >> plucking >> part of the harmonies). Of course but that doesn't mean that they didn't vary the kind of accompaniment which they provided. >> >> Matteis (1680): 'The guitar was never so much in use & credit as it is at >> this day, & finding it improved to so great a perfection, it is my >> present >> design to
[VIHUELA] Re: tablature, alfabeto and BC
The modern use of the 'baroque' guitar in period ensembles is as much due to the frequently misguided tastes of directors/conductors, who often crave the exotic thinking that without it audiences attention will wander, as to guitarists (and harpists etc) putting themselves forward. MH Lex Eisenhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There is an interesting parallel to the rapid decline of alfabeto song after 1630. At about the same time the first instructions appeared for the use of the guitar in BC (Foscarini, Corbetta). Should we suppose that the practice of an all-battuto (alfabeto) accompaniment style has survived? There are (almost) no books with alfabeto from any other country than Italy, and the Italian alfabeto manuals from the second half of the 17th century are poor, rehashed versions of earlier editions, almost without exception. They were only printed in Rome and Venice, probably in small numbers, serving a local demand. Alfabeto (in print) clearly was past its prime. However, some players may have been able to realize an accompaniment, departing from the bass (and losing considerably in volume, while plucking part of the harmonies). Matteis (1680): 'The guitar was never so much in use & credit as it is at this day, & finding it improved to so great a perfection, it is my present design to make it company for other Instruments. Every body knows it to be an imperfect Instrument & yet finding upon experience how agreeable a part it bears in a consort I have composed severall Pieces both for ye practice & information of those that would make use of it with ye Harpsichord, Lute, Theorbo or Bass-Viol.' Campion (1716): '.one is not prejudiced against the guitar without reason. I acknowledge, along with everyone, that it is not as strong of harmony as the harpsichord or the theorbo. However, I believe that it is sufficient to accompany one voice.' They both did not include all-battuto accompaniments in their instructions, and the BC manuals from this time (Sanz, Grenerin, de Murcia) take the bass as the main reference. It seems that using the guitar for plain battuto had become quite much a matter of genre, kept for old exotic dances (ruggieros, ciacconas etc.) and a very specific (mainly archaic) song repertoire. I wonder if it did come to mind at all to add the strumming of a guitar to ensemble performance. Just like this was not usual in Church music (well, in Spain and South America of course they did...). There is a tantalizing lack of notated examples, eye-witness reports and iconography from the second half of the century, with regard to the role of the guitar in ensemble. Today it is often supposed that the guitar was added to ensembles, for rhythm and colour, with reference to unwritten traditions. What solid historical information is there to support this? Lex To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Sent from Yahoo! - a smarter inbox. --
[VIHUELA] Re: 'Strumming' Foscarini (and others) - even more agreement
epeat the chord with the auxiliary note. But I have been re-reading the instructions in the earliest books and suddenly had this feeling that perhaps I got it wrong about Bartolotti as what he say is a bit ambiguous! Monica From: Martyn Hodgson To: Monica Hall Cc: Vihuelalist Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 1:32 PM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again - Yes - I think we're reaching some sort of middle way. However, in the case we were particularly discussing I still return to the strum sign which I think makes all the difference - Rob shows well how it can be translated in practice (even makes me want to return to F). Incidentally, I gave the B example simply to show how general the practice was (as I know you know) not because I'm still confusing the two.. Martyn Monica Hall wrote: Well - we are talking about Foscarini not Bartolotti. In his instructions at the beginning of Book 1 Bartolotti does say that you should hold the chord in place whilst you play the intervening notes but it is not entirely clear whether you should always repeat the chord with the passing note. In some circumstances I think that you should, and in others perhaps not. He quite clearly indicates notes which should be played as single notes - by putting 1 or 2 dots beside them. Foscarini is another matter. His Fourth rule reads as follows Fourthly particular regard must be had when playing those numbers which are placed beside the letter. These must be played singly; that is to say touching neither less nor more strings than those which are shown. In this way the effect of the ornaments will be felt and the parts will follow distinctly one after the other; such is my intention. Which observation will be both in general and especially in the Arie di Firenze Passegiate, Correnti Francese, Toccate, Gagliarde, e Balletti. Otherwise if more or less numbers [than are shown] are played it will succeed in awakening little pleasure in the listener. This is to be observed even if the number is alone; that is to say only touch that string and fret which the said number shows. As I said, in the particular passage under discussion the single figures don't follow an alfabeto chord but it seems to me that the same principle applies. Otherwise the part writing is obscured. However - as far as my specific query was concerned this isn't really relevant, as whether or not you play them as single notes or in combination with the preceding notes there are still only two notes in the strum... As far as the single notes which Stuart was referring to it is fairly obvious that these can't conveniently be played whilst the alfabeto chord is held and Foscarini has in fact said fairly clearly that they shouldn't be. But the general question as to whether you should should incorporate the passing notes into the chords or play them as single notes seems to be a bit of grey area. Perhaps it was left to the discretion of the player. Monica - Original Message - From: Martyn Hodgson To: Monica Hall ; Stuart Walsh Cc: Vihuelalist Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:58 AM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again - Monica, why do you think that the single notes are not played as a chord with any of the preceding note(s)? I realise this is your position but I still don't understand why you hold it: as someone else has said, if F had wanted this there's a perfectly clear way to intabulate it. As you know I disagree with your view and find support in other tabs where just one note changes in a strummed chord progression. Numerous examples in other sources just one (from the real Bartolotti 1640 top of page 19): B,(B)1'/A3,(A)2,13/ etc, etc, etc... Martyn PS I do wish B's book 5 existed Monica Hall wrote: > I wonder if you've added at least one bar towards the end. I'm sure there > is definitely something dodgy about line 8, penultimate bar to final bar > on that line (bars 10-11 in Monica's transcription). I think there is a > bar - or more - missing and you have unconsciously compensated for it. You may be right - I haven't looked at that bit closely! > > Rob, while you have your guitar in one hand and the Edirol in the other, > try playing line one, second half of bar 4. The single note (a) on the > first course is marked with a strum sign. Can you physically play the > preceding chord and add the a? And even if you could, does it sound > remotely plausible as chord? And again the last two bars of line two, > especially the penultimate bar. Can you strum them? Could you make a > recording of a bit more of this piece? All these notes are meant to be played as single notes. They are not intended to be included in the chord. > > Finally , line 9, bar 4. how do you add a top g to a full barre Bb chord? You don't - it's meant to be a G ma
[VIHUELA] Re: 'Strumming' Foscarini (and others) - even more agreement
Martyn Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 09:05:50 + (GMT) From: Martyn Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: 'Strumming' Foscarini (and others) - even more agreement To: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'd be interested to hear if Rob used index alone or this sort of alternating thumb/finger strum (I'm not quite sure from the recording). Interestingly it reminds me rather of what lutenists call the 'thumb under' technique for running passages (used mostly used up to the end of the 16thC) whereby the thumb plucks (down) followed by the index (up) and perhaps this is how the technique came about. That's an interesting point. In a different context - in the Corrente on p.60 in the first line there are passing notes following Chord M3 and G. These are clearly !!! WHY meant to be played as single notes. It is not possible to play those following Chord G and hold the chord. * RESPONSE Re the very beginning: indeed all strummed: little finger which takes the 6 of the M3 chord squeezes back to the 5 and then again to to 6 , up stroke on the following 3 automatically emphasises this note. In all this, as said previously, I think it v important to distinguish between more full blooded strumming (say when just alfabeto or mixed but with just full chords) and this sort of situation where I'm using a much more gentle stroke. In fact on further analysing what I'm doing is: using index on the opening upbeat (upstroke) then thumb followed by index on the down stroke (down beat), index up from the second course on the squeezed 5 (but still play the rest of the chord) , thumb down on the returned 6 (but play full chord - possibly come off before first course - but not vital - the effect remains), index up stroke on the 3 (but keep rest of M3 chord - lovely passing dissonance) and finally on to the full M3 chord on a downbeat. But he has marked them as up and down strokes. Would you use finger, thumb, finger for the notes following M3 ... and thumb, finger, thumb for those following G. Regarding the G chord passage later on the first line, I think there's no real problem- for the open 4th, simply lift fingers 3 and 4 (previously stopping course 4 and 5 at fret 3) , for the next 2 on the 4th, move finger 2 to course 4 and use finger 3 on course 3, then revert to the normal G fingering. Elsewhere he tends to indicate that a group of notes like this should be slurred but in the Passacaglio on p.78 there is a similar figure - at the beginning of stave 5 following chord P where he hasn't put in any stroke marks which suggests that you play them all with your thumb. * RESPONSE The page 78 passac has some informative passages (also similar in other pieces)which clearly show that if he wants plucking alone he's perfectly able to show it in the tablature, For example 3rd line down after the +M3 chord which is played with two full chord downbeats followed by single notes on their own (no strum marks) with the first slurred. *** Has he really done this intentionally? I am a bit sceptical about that. * RESPONSE In short, I do indeed still think that he knew what he wanted and was trying, within the confines of the notation, to indicate what he actually did Monica I Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yes - I think we are more or less in agreement. I used to think with Bartolotti that you should always repeat the chord with the auxiliary note. But I have been re-reading the instructions in the earliest books and suddenly had this feeling that perhaps I got it wrong about Bartolotti as what he say is a bit ambiguous! Monica From: Martyn Hodgson To: Monica Hall Cc: Vihuelalist Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 1:32 PM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again - Yes - I think we're reaching some sort of middle way. However, in the case we were particularly discussing I still return to the strum sign which I think makes all the difference - Rob shows well how it can be translated in practice (even makes me want to return to F). Incidentally, I gave the B example simply to show how general the practice was (as I know you know) not because I'm still confusing the two.. Martyn Monica Hall wrote: Well - we are talking about Foscarini not Bartolotti. In his instructions at the beginning of Book 1 Bartolotti does say that you should hold the chord in place whilst you play the interve
[VIHUELA] 'Strumming' Foscarini (and others) - even more agreement
I've spent quite a few hours exploring possible strumming methods for these sort of passages (ie where one is strumming low courses and/or mid courses without sounding others) and now think that a sort of combination pluck and strum is the best solution (rather than the exclusive index strum I advocated earlier). So we may be in even closer agreement! In short, the down stroke is made by the thumb strumming across two (or more courses) and the upstroke by the index alone raking back across the same two. This, it seems to me, allows a much fine level of control than with just the index and also maintains the strumming style I'm pretty convinced was expected in these situations. I'd be interested to hear if Rob used index alone or this sort of alternating thumb/finger strum (I'm not quite sure from the recording). Interestingly it reminds me rather of what lutenists call the 'thumb under' technique for running passages (used mostly used up to the end of the 16thC) whereby the thumb plucks (down) followed by the index (up) and perhaps this is how the technique came about. Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yes - I think we are more or less in agreement. I used to think with Bartolotti that you should always repeat the chord with the auxiliary note. But I have been re-reading the instructions in the earliest books and suddenly had this feeling that perhaps I got it wrong about Bartolotti as what he say is a bit ambiguous! Monica From: Martyn Hodgson To: Monica Hall Cc: Vihuelalist Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 1:32 PM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again - Yes - I think we're reaching some sort of middle way. However, in the case we were particularly discussing I still return to the strum sign which I think makes all the difference - Rob shows well how it can be translated in practice (even makes me want to return to F). Incidentally, I gave the B example simply to show how general the practice was (as I know you know) not because I'm still confusing the two.. Martyn Monica Hall wrote: Well - we are talking about Foscarini not Bartolotti. In his instructions at the beginning of Book 1 Bartolotti does say that you should hold the chord in place whilst you play the intervening notes but it is not entirely clear whether you should always repeat the chord with the passing note. In some circumstances I think that you should, and in others perhaps not. He quite clearly indicates notes which should be played as single notes - by putting 1 or 2 dots beside them. Foscarini is another matter. His Fourth rule reads as follows Fourthly particular regard must be had when playing those numbers which are placed beside the letter. These must be played singly; that is to say touching neither less nor more strings than those which are shown. In this way the effect of the ornaments will be felt and the parts will follow distinctly one after the other; such is my intention. Which observation will be both in general and especially in the Arie di Firenze Passegiate, Correnti Francese, Toccate, Gagliarde, e Balletti. Otherwise if more or less numbers [than are shown] are played it will succeed in awakening little pleasure in the listener. This is to be observed even if the number is alone; that is to say only touch that string and fret which the said number shows. As I said, in the particular passage under discussion the single figures don't follow an alfabeto chord but it seems to me that the same principle applies. Otherwise the part writing is obscured. However - as far as my specific query was concerned this isn't really relevant, as whether or not you play them as single notes or in combination with the preceding notes there are still only two notes in the strum... As far as the single notes which Stuart was referring to it is fairly obvious that these can't conveniently be played whilst the alfabeto chord is held and Foscarini has in fact said fairly clearly that they shouldn't be. But the general question as to whether you should should incorporate the passing notes into the chords or play them as single notes seems to be a bit of grey area. Perhaps it was left to the discretion of the player. Monica - Original Message - From: Martyn Hodgson To: Monica Hall ; Stuart Walsh Cc: Vihuelalist Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:58 AM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again - Monica, why do you think that the single notes are not played as a chord with any of the preceding note(s)? I realise this is your position but I still don't understand why you hold it: as someone else has said, if F had wanted this there's a perfectly clear way to intabulate it. As you know I disagree with your view and find support in other tabs where just one note changes in a strummed chord progression. Numerous examp
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again -
Yes - I think we're reaching some sort of middle way. However, in the case we were particularly discussing I still return to the strum sign which I think makes all the difference - Rob shows well how it can be translated in practice (even makes me want to return to F). Incidentally, I gave the B example simply to show how general the practice was (as I know you know) not because I'm still confusing the two.. Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Well - we are talking about Foscarini not Bartolotti. In his instructions at the beginning of Book 1 Bartolotti does say that you should hold the chord in place whilst you play the intervening notes but it is not entirely clear whether you should always repeat the chord with the passing note. In some circumstances I think that you should, and in others perhaps not. He quite clearly indicates notes which should be played as single notes - by putting 1 or 2 dots beside them. Foscarini is another matter. His Fourth rule reads as follows Fourthly particular regard must be had when playing those numbers which are placed beside the letter. These must be played singly; that is to say touching neither less nor more strings than those which are shown. In this way the effect of the ornaments will be felt and the parts will follow distinctly one after the other; such is my intention. Which observation will be both in general and especially in the Arie di Firenze Passegiate, Correnti Francese, Toccate, Gagliarde, e Balletti. Otherwise if more or less numbers [than are shown] are played it will succeed in awakening little pleasure in the listener. This is to be observed even if the number is alone; that is to say only touch that string and fret which the said number shows. As I said, in the particular passage under discussion the single figures don't follow an alfabeto chord but it seems to me that the same principle applies. Otherwise the part writing is obscured. However - as far as my specific query was concerned this isn't really relevant, as whether or not you play them as single notes or in combination with the preceding notes there are still only two notes in the strum... As far as the single notes which Stuart was referring to it is fairly obvious that these can't conveniently be played whilst the alfabeto chord is held and Foscarini has in fact said fairly clearly that they shouldn't be. But the general question as to whether you should should incorporate the passing notes into the chords or play them as single notes seems to be a bit of grey area. Perhaps it was left to the discretion of the player. Monica - Original Message - From: Martyn Hodgson To: Monica Hall ; Stuart Walsh Cc: Vihuelalist Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:58 AM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again - Monica, why do you think that the single notes are not played as a chord with any of the preceding note(s)? I realise this is your position but I still don't understand why you hold it: as someone else has said, if F had wanted this there's a perfectly clear way to intabulate it. As you know I disagree with your view and find support in other tabs where just one note changes in a strummed chord progression. Numerous examples in other sources just one (from the real Bartolotti 1640 top of page 19): B,(B)1'/A3,(A)2,13/ etc, etc, etc... Martyn PS I do wish B's book 5 existed Monica Hall wrote: > I wonder if you've added at least one bar towards the end. I'm sure there > is definitely something dodgy about line 8, penultimate bar to final bar > on that line (bars 10-11 in Monica's transcription). I think there is a > bar - or more - missing and you have unconsciously compensated for it. You may be right - I haven't looked at that bit closely! > > Rob, while you have your guitar in one hand and the Edirol in the other, > try playing line one, second half of bar 4. The single note (a) on the > first course is marked with a strum sign. Can you physically play the > preceding chord and add the a? And even if you could, does it sound > remotely plausible as chord? And again the last two bars of line two, > especially the penultimate bar. Can you strum them? Could you make a > recording of a bit more of this piece? All these notes are meant to be played as single notes. They are not intended to be included in the chord. > > Finally , line 9, bar 4. how do you add a top g to a full barre Bb chord? You don't - it's meant to be a G major chord - include the open 2nd and 3rd courses and it modulates to C minor...(K3) And the penultimate note of the penultimate bar: how do you add, > physically, add an a to a C minor chord? Surely this must be single note > (but it's got a strum sign). Yes - it can only be a single note... > > I
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again -
Monica, why do you think that the single notes are not played as a chord with any of the preceding note(s)? I realise this is your position but I still don't understand why you hold it: as someone else has said, if F had wanted this there's a perfectly clear way to intabulate it. As you know I disagree with your view and find support in other tabs where just one note changes in a strummed chord progression. Numerous examples in other sources just one (from the real Bartolotti 1640 top of page 19): B,(B)1'/A3,(A)2,13/ etc, etc, etc... Martyn PS I do wish B's book 5 existed Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I wonder if you've added at least one bar towards the end. I'm sure there > is definitely something dodgy about line 8, penultimate bar to final bar > on that line (bars 10-11 in Monica's transcription). I think there is a > bar - or more - missing and you have unconsciously compensated for it. You may be right - I haven't looked at that bit closely! > > Rob, while you have your guitar in one hand and the Edirol in the other, > try playing line one, second half of bar 4. The single note (a) on the > first course is marked with a strum sign. Can you physically play the > preceding chord and add the a? And even if you could, does it sound > remotely plausible as chord? And again the last two bars of line two, > especially the penultimate bar. Can you strum them? Could you make a > recording of a bit more of this piece? All these notes are meant to be played as single notes. They are not intended to be included in the chord. > > Finally , line 9, bar 4. how do you add a top g to a full barre Bb chord? You don't - it's meant to be a G major chord - include the open 2nd and 3rd courses and it modulates to C minor...(K3) And the penultimate note of the penultimate bar: how do you add, > physically, add an a to a C minor chord? Surely this must be single note > (but it's got a strum sign). Yes - it can only be a single note... > > I think Monica must be right in saying that some of Foscarini's strum > signs aren't actually strum signs. And there are strum signs all over the > place in Foscarini. > > Hooray! Monica > > >> -Original Message- >> From: Rob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 13 January 2008 16:40 >> To: 'Martyn Hodgson'; 'Stuart Walsh'; vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu >> Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again - >> >> I've made a stab at interpreting this on the guitar: >> www.rmguitar.info/temp.htm >> I think this is what Martyn is getting at - please forgive me, Martyn, if >> it >> isn't. Obviously it is only an attempt after a couple of read-throughs, >> and >> I got a little lost, but the general idea is, I think, one being >> forwarded >> by Martyn. So apart from being slightly out of tune and hesitant in >> parts, >> is there anything wrong with the interpretation? I think it is a >> reasonable >> assumption of Foscarini's intentions - anyway, it is his fault for not >> being >> explicit!. >> >> Rob MacKillop >> >> >> >> >> To get on or off this list see list information at >> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >> >> >> >> >> > > - Sent from Yahoo! - a smarter inbox. --
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again -
Thank you Monica - this is why I was wondering why I hadn't got B's '5th' book! (some new find I presumed.). Of course I've got F's and will now rejoin the rest of the world.. Hmm this also adds a new complication: I've got rather less admiration for F than for B. Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It's Foscarini - not BArtolotti! Monica - Original Message - From: "Martyn Hodgson" To: ; "'Stuart Walsh'" ; Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 5:06 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again - > Absolutely Rob - the build up is, I think, precisely what B had in mind > and is more rythmical and passionate than just plucking. > > Thanks > > Martyn > > > > Rob wrote: > Well, my first stupid mistake was to play for the first chord a Gm chord > instead of a Bb chord! Must revise my alfabeto!! After that I more or less > got it right... > > Rob > > www.rmguitar.info > > > > -Original Message- > From: Rob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 13 January 2008 16:40 > To: 'Martyn Hodgson'; 'Stuart Walsh'; vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again - > > I've made a stab at interpreting this on the guitar: > www.rmguitar.info/temp.htm > > I think this is what Martyn is getting at - please forgive me, Martyn, if > it > isn't. Obviously it is only an attempt after a couple of read-throughs, > and > I got a little lost, but the general idea is, I think, one being forwarded > by Martyn. So apart from being slightly out of tune and hesitant in parts, > is there anything wrong with the interpretation? I think it is a > reasonable > assumption of Foscarini's intentions - anyway, it is his fault for not > being > explicit!. > > Rob MacKillop > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > > > > > - > Support the World Aids Awareness campaign this month with Yahoo! for Good > -- - Support the World Aids Awareness campaign this month with Yahoo! for Good --
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini !
Transcription fine - EXCEPT the second bar repeat the Bb on 5th course (so can be 'strummed') Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Prompt action from Stuart!!! You can see my transcription at > It's here: > > http://www.pluckedturkeys.co.uk/FoscariniToccatta1.jpg > Monica >> >> >> >> >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: >> 269.19.2/1222 - Release Date: 13/01/2008 12:23 >> > To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Support the World Aids Awareness campaign this month with Yahoo! for Good --
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again -
Absolutely Rob - the build up is, I think, precisely what B had in mind and is more rythmical and passionate than just plucking. Thanks Martyn Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Well, my first stupid mistake was to play for the first chord a Gm chord instead of a Bb chord! Must revise my alfabeto!! After that I more or less got it right... Rob www.rmguitar.info -Original Message- From: Rob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 13 January 2008 16:40 To: 'Martyn Hodgson'; 'Stuart Walsh'; vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again - I've made a stab at interpreting this on the guitar: www.rmguitar.info/temp.htm I think this is what Martyn is getting at - please forgive me, Martyn, if it isn't. Obviously it is only an attempt after a couple of read-throughs, and I got a little lost, but the general idea is, I think, one being forwarded by Martyn. So apart from being slightly out of tune and hesitant in parts, is there anything wrong with the interpretation? I think it is a reasonable assumption of Foscarini's intentions - anyway, it is his fault for not being explicit!. Rob MacKillop To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Support the World Aids Awareness campaign this month with Yahoo! for Good --
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again -
Stewart, Re yr queries: 1. Yes, I do think that all the 'strum' marks should be taken seriously; this is my general starting point. I have not (yet!) found anything in B which cannot be strummed. Incidentally I take it as read that we're not always speaking about vigourous strumming (say in the modern flamenco manner) but a range of sophisticated movements. The sort of strum in these places is, I suggest, much more of a gentle single finger strum - in fact almost like a gentle plucking but across two, or more, strings [one occasionaly finds a similar sort of thing in Corbetta (and others) where a strum on the strong beat is followed by more strums with the highest course playing a melodic passage but the same chord held on the other strings but I don't want to get side tracked onto this]. 2. In my example I expanded the original simply to show what I believe was happening (or not) on all courses. Similarly I wrote 02 simply to show what one might think of doing if the previous chord was not held (here just one note 'tied' over the 1st on 5th course . 3. Re the 'single' notes; as mentioed and as in my example, they are not in fact single - you must play the previous indicated notes except for the new one (perhaps my newly invented[!] tablatures is not clear). This is quite common practice. So, for example, the chord at the end of the line is -323- (ie strum the chord of 4th course at 3rd fret, 3rd course at 2nd, 2nd course at 3rd) 4. Re the 'dissonant' chords. I think the chords you worry about as being strange are not so in practice: these are simply passing dissonances (also fairly common in vocal music of the period) from one main chord to another. Just strum them (gently!) and I think you may see what I mean. Martyn PS Where did you get your Book 5 from? Stuart Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Martyn Hodgson wrote: > ' > My dog's pennyworth: > > > Why doesn't it make sense to strum? Surely it's a particular effect he's > after: I think he does indeed want it strummed. > > The entire section gradually gets 'higher' and it's all part of a long rising > phrase. I'm using a bourdon on the 4th but even with both 4ths at the upper > octave (I just took off the 4th bourdon to try) there is still the effect of > a gradual rising throughout the section and this is probably what he was > aiming for. Yet another reason to give him the honour of the greatest of the > 'baroque' guitarists: isn't it a great shame there's no other music, other > that is than for guitar, by him to survive. > > I agree there is the problem of whether to play some open courses. However, I > do think he generally assumes a tie over so that, for example, from the > double bar the chord (with the 5th first etc) is not 02 of course but 12. so > the sequence starts from just before the double bar: > 02 isn't in the tablature, is it? There is just a single note on the fifth course at this point (line 7 bar 4). > > 10---/_12---,03---/_13---,310--/_312--,-033-/_-133-,-321-/_-323-,--543-/ etc > lovely stuff... > > - means unplayed course > _ means previous chord played on first beat > > Martyn > Martyn, are you saying that all of Foscarini's strum marks are actually to be strummed? This sounds like a bit of a daft question. But Monica is suggesting that some strum marks aren't actually functioning as strums but as something else. So here's the passage, marked in red. http://www.pluckedturkeys.co.uk/FoscoToccata-1a.jpg Monica suggests it should be played pizzicato, lute style, with the stroke signs indicating that you repeat the note or notes until they change. But why didn't Foscarini just write out the notes twice (or three times). On other pages he has fancy drawings - he doesn't seem like the sort of chap who needs to worry about saving time. And why are there both up and down strokes to indicate this one thing? (Monica says it's just a sort of hangover from alfabeto.) And Martyn suggests that the passage is strummed. Now in this passage on line 7 there are three single notes and you can't strum a single note. And what about the double notes. Yes, they can be strummed but is there much evidence from other Baroque guitar music of strummed note pairs? Indeed is there much evidence of strumming only the inner three courses? Perhaps there is. Perhaps this is what makes Foscarini special. (But I'm getting to get a bit sceptical now. Foscarini is supposed to have influence others. Are there, for example, lots of passages in Corbetta, for example, with longish passages in thirds on adjacent strings that are unequivocally to be strummed?). What I'm saying is that if every
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again -
' My dog's pennyworth: Why doesn't it make sense to strum? Surely it's a particular effect he's after: I think he does indeed want it strummed. The entire section gradually gets 'higher' and it's all part of a long rising phrase. I'm using a bourdon on the 4th but even with both 4ths at the upper octave (I just took off the 4th bourdon to try) there is still the effect of a gradual rising throughout the section and this is probably what he was aiming for. Yet another reason to give him the honour of the greatest of the 'baroque' guitarists: isn't it a great shame there's no other music, other that is than for guitar, by him to survive. I agree there is the problem of whether to play some open courses. However, I do think he generally assumes a tie over so that, for example, from the double bar the chord (with the 5th first etc) is not 02 of course but 12. so the sequence starts from just before the double bar: 10---/_12---,03---/_13---,310--/_312--,-033-/_-133-,-321-/_-323-,--543-/ etc lovely stuff... - means unplayed course _ means previous chord played on first beat Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I wonder if I can elicit another Pavlovian response from Martyn - or anyone else. There is a Toccatta in Foscarini's 5th book on p.105. Stuart has put it on his website for the benefit of those who don't have it to hand at http://www.pluckedturkeys.co.uk/FoscoToccata-1a.jpg There is a particularly interesting passage on stave 7 starting after Chord H at the double bar outlined in red - in particular the three bars which follow the double bar. It seems to me to make no sense to strum those notes on the 4th/5th course - and it doesn't make much sense to include any open courses other than those he has indicated himself throughout the section although in some places it is possible. It is just a bit of 2/3 part counterpoint which should be played in lute style. What I think is that to save himself some trouble he has put in the figures only once and the stroke marks are there to tell you how many times to play the single notes or chords before moving to the next ones. The stroke marks are not there to tell that you must play the notes with a finger or thumb up and down. This is Suart's website again http://www.pluckedturkeys.co.uk/FoscoToccata-1a.jpg Answers on a postcard to... Monica To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Support the World Aids Awareness campaign this month with Yahoo! for Good --
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini/Bartolotti notation - with music
So they do - thank you. However, the problem with my earlier suggestion is that I just can't do it: I played through yesterday and thought it just needed a bit more application and returned to it today but still can't play the third bar from the end of the second line AS WRITTEN without hitting the first course ( I can however using just the index as discussed earlier in a different context). Is it possible that B only used this two fingered strum when strumming the three top courses? Note that all other chords requiring this use the three top courses except for this one - cld it be that perhaps the 30 on the 2nd and 3rd courses are an engraving error and should be on courses 1 and 2 when all wld be well since cld play open 3rd as well (same harmony of course)? Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You spoil us ambassador(ess): I don't know why, but I get into an almost Pavlovian response mode when you pose these questions and feel obliged to come up with something. Not sure whether that's a compliment or not - but I am really interested to know how others would interpret these things and pleased when you come up with such helpful comments.. Here I think it's about emphasis - a firmer/stronger, but controlled, strum than with just the index. On the 2nd beat of course (as a ciaconna - see earlier comms on this) with the first beat in this variation played in the 'bass' by the thumb which can also be played firmly. I presume he'd have used this (and even perhaps others too idiosyncratic to bother notating) in similar situations if he wanted a firmer passage. Yes - that's seems a logical explanation... Incidentally he speaks of two variations with this: where's the other? Or is he counting a repeat as another?. The first two bars of the next section - on the 3rd stave ...down call for the same thing... Monica Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Interesting possibility! We now have at least three possible explanations. There is another interesting passage in the Ciaccona on p.49. The third section on the second stave down. In the preface Barto says Nella ciaccona vi sono due partite de detta, che li colpi non sono attaccati al primo rigo, pero detti colpi si battono in giu con le prime dua dita. In the ciaccona it can be seen that there are two variations where the strokes are not attached to the first line; these strokes are played downwards with the first two fingers. [Bars 16-24] This rather begs the question - how many fingers should you use in places where there are three part chords which he hasn't marked in this way - or should you just use the thumb? Would you be justified in playing 3-part chords in this way if he hasn't marked it so? What are the advantages of doing it this way? What is the different effect you would produce. Answers on a postcard ..to Monica - Original Message - From: "Rob" To: Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 11:48 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini/Bartolotti notation - with music > Another possibility: this could be the earliest notation for the thumb > playing both up and down strokes - a very common flamenco guitar > technique, > called alzapua. It can be very controlled over two strings, and really > requires a thumb nail, but it needn't be long. > > Rob > > www.rmguitar.info > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Sent from Yahoo! - a smarter inbox. - Sent from Yahoo! - a smarter inbox. --
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini/Bartolotti notation - with music
You spoil us ambassador(ess): I don't know why, but I get into an almost Pavlovian response mode when you pose these questions and feel obliged to come up with something. Here I think it's about emphasis - a firmer/stronger, but controlled, strum than with just the index. On the 2nd beat of course (as a ciaconna - see earlier comms on this) with the first beat in this variation played in the 'bass' by the thumb which can also be played firmly. I presume he'd have used this (and even perhaps others too idiosyncratic to bother notating) in similar situations if he wanted a firmer passage. Incidentally he speaks of two variations with this: where's the other? Or is he counting a repeat as another?. Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Interesting possibility! We now have at least three possible explanations. There is another interesting passage in the Ciaccona on p.49. The third section on the second stave down. In the preface Barto says Nella ciaccona vi sono due partite de detta, che li colpi non sono attaccati al primo rigo, pero detti colpi si battono in giu con le prime dua dita. In the ciaccona it can be seen that there are two variations where the strokes are not attached to the first line; these strokes are played downwards with the first two fingers. [Bars 16-24] This rather begs the question - how many fingers should you use in places where there are three part chords which he hasn't marked in this way - or should you just use the thumb? Would you be justified in playing 3-part chords in this way if he hasn't marked it so? What are the advantages of doing it this way? What is the different effect you would produce. Answers on a postcard ..to Monica - Original Message - From: "Rob" To: Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 11:48 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini/Bartolotti notation - with music > Another possibility: this could be the earliest notation for the thumb > playing both up and down strokes - a very common flamenco guitar > technique, > called alzapua. It can be very controlled over two strings, and really > requires a thumb nail, but it needn't be long. > > Rob > > www.rmguitar.info > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Sent from Yahoo! - a smarter inbox. --
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini/Bartolotti notation
I've always assumed these were just light strums across two adjacent strings; simplty an extension of just strumming on three (eg the 630 on the first beat of the fourth full bar of this line). As, I think, you imply, one needs to be a bit careful not to strum any other surrounding strings but with just the index (I presume) this isn't too tricky. regards, Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Following on from the discussion about Foscarini's notation before Christmas I wonder what other people on this list would make of a passage in one of Bartolooti's passacaglias - the one on p.17 of his Libro Primo. On the bottom stave of the first page (17) there is a passage in thirds all marked as if they were to be strummed - including the single note in the second bar. It is possible to play them with a single finger up and down or possibly even thumb down and finger up but I don't think this would be the method of choice. Including any open courses doesn't seem to be an option. Bartolotti has gone to quite a lot of trouble to include a lot of detailed information about right-hand fingering although he is a bit inconsistent. So is he just being inconsistent here - or does he really want some kind of special effect? I'll take this opportunity to wish everyone a Happy New Year! Monica -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Sent from Yahoo! - a smarter inbox. --
[VIHUELA] Re: Preston tuner history
John Cousens always said it was from the use of watch keys - he lent me some when stringing a Preston guittar and they fitted perfectly. My supposition would therefore be that the same people who made watch mechanisms in 18thC London (centre of the industry)made these tuners to P's specifications. MH Alexander Batov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: - Original Message - From: "Gregory Doc Rossi" To: "Cittern NET" Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 8:02 AM Subject: [CITTERN] Preston tuner history > ... Where did > he (if it was Preston) get the idea from? Bow screw perhaps (which, I would imagine, was invented by French). Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Tryit now. --
[VIHUELA] Re: Palmer fretting
Peter, Many thanks for this - look forward to seeing it. May I though comment on one thing: when many lutenists say my lute's fretted in 'meantone' they often really only think of the first course and seem blissfully unaware that the chromatic/diatonic semitone sequence is different on most of the highest 5 courses. My knowledge of the cittern is miniscule so is the tuning of this such that this it isn't so big an issue? But surely with the orpharion tuned with lute intervals one would encounter the problem I outlined above. Grateful for your views. regards, Martyn Peter Forrester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dear Alexander and All, Alexander's discovery of so many ET positions apparent in the fret measurements accompanying the museum plan of the Palmer orpharion has prompted me to produce a drawing which perhaps better illustrates the meantone nature of the fingerboard. I also possess another drawing of the fingerboard made at least thirty years ago which mostly agrees with the bass side measurements, but not with the treble. Something is wrong. Is there anybody out there who has another set please? Meantone fretting implies different sized spaces between frets for chromatic and diatonic semitones. The pattern which lutenists playing renaissance lutes with a 'g' tuning use, is, from the nut: large, small, large, small, large, small, large, large, small, large, small, large. The 12th fret is at the same position for ET and meantone fretting of course, the 5th and 7th frets especially, are very close to the same positions, others vary. These spacings are very much more apparent on a drawing than as a series of numbers. Other considerations are the possible incorporation of 'just' fret positions - these seem to be present in Rose's Helmingham instrument; that equal temperament was known, even if not used; that it is very easy to 'bend' a wire note into tune, especially further up the fingerboard. The drawing shows side-by-side and reduced to the same overall length for the octave, fret positions for ET, 1/6th comma, treble and bass (marked M) from the published plan, treble and bass from the earlier drawing (marked A), 1/6th comma, ET. As the cittern net will not permit attachments I will have to ask that anyone who wishes should email me personally so that I can attach the drawing by reply. While experimenting (as a non-literate internet user) by sending myself copies, I produced attachments at both 72 and 300 dpi, so if you have a preference both work. Best wishes, Peter To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Tryit now. --
[VIHUELA] Re: Palmer orpharion images
Thanks for this. I would tune the open strings in relation to each other and not by using the fingerboard which would be rather begging the question. I believe this sort of analysis is extremely valuable especially since many (not you of course) who claim to use some form of 'meantone' tuning only ever look at the first course and seem blissfully unaware that the chromatic/diatonic sequence is different on different courses! Martyn Alexander Batov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Tuesday, November 27, 2007 4:11 PM Martyn Hodgson wrote: > It would be of further interest to do this for each course so as to see > the different chromatic/diatonic semitone relationships between all the > courses. I agreed first, but I'm not sure if this is actually necessary and / or whether it gives you any 'enhanced' picture of chromatic / diatonic relationships ... For example it would depend how you tune intervals between open courses: by unisons from the fingerboard, from other fixed-pitch instruments or, indeed, from the tuner and, either to pure intervals or with deviations. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Tryit now. --
[VIHUELA] Re: Palmer orpharion images
It would be of further interest to do this for each course so as to see the different chromatic/diatonic semitone relationships between all the courses. Alexander Batov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Palmer orpharion: fret positions and their corresponding temperaments. The + sign shows which temperament each individual fret position is closest to. It is assumed that the first course is tuned to the nominal G (which should not be confused with the absolute pitch!) and that the following sequence of chromatic and diatonic semitones is produced when it is fingered on 1st to 11th frets: g#, a, b-flat, b, c, c#, d, e-flat, e, f, f# (* sign signifies if a-flat is chosen instead of g#). As for the bass side of the fingerboard, one would need a full-size drawing to determine fret distances along the line of the 6th course. So the calculations are made following the same sequence of intervals (i.e. as for the first course), as well as on the assumption that the 6th course is there instead of the 9th. The results show how far from any fixed arrangement fret positions are, which is, in a way, hardly surprising. At the same time, fret positions on both the treble and bass sides are fairly congruous (with the exception perhaps for the 7th fret). TREBLE BASS frets 1/4 1/5 1/6 1/8 equal 1/4 1/5 1/6 1/8 equal 1 * + * + -- 2 + + -- 3 + + -- 4 + + -- 5 + + -- 6 + + -- 7 + + -- 8 + + -- 9 + + -- 10 + + -- 11 + + -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Tryit now. --
[VIHUELA] Re: Palmer orpharion images
It seemed OK when I received it, but it corrupted when I enclosed it in my reply to you! I get these sort of problems when answering emails - the page format suddenly changes for no apparent reason. MH Alexander Batov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I do apologize to everybody again. It's sort of ridiculous: I did the whole message and the table separately all in Courier and it still wouldn't work, I'm getting back corrupted table again (although it works fine if I sent it to myself). I give up ... Stewart, help! Alexander -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit Yahoo! For Good this month. --
[VIHUELA] Re: Palmer orpharion images
I guess it's not surprising that the fret settings of the 1st and 6th course are close since they're supposed to be a double diapason (2 octaves) apart. It would be of great interest to do this sort of analysis for each course so as to see the how the different chromatic/diatonic semitone relationships between all the courses are dealt with (or not); have you done this by any chance and if so cld you kindly give the results? MH lexander Batov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Palmer orpharion: fret positions and their corresponding temperaments. The + sign shows which temperament each individual fret position is closest to. It is assumed that the first course is tuned to the nominal G (which should not be confused with the absolute pitch!) and that the following sequence of chromatic and diatonic semitones is produced when it is fingered on 1st to 11th frets: g#, a, b-flat, b, c, c#, d, e-flat, e, f, f# (* sign signifies if a-flat is chosen instead of g#). As for the bass side of the fingerboard, one would need a full-size drawing to determine fret distances along the line of the 6th course. So the calculations are made following the same sequence of intervals (i.e. as for the first course), as well as on the assumption that the 6th course is there instead of the 9th. The results show how far from any fixed arrangement fret positions are, which is, in a way, hardly surprising. At the same time, fret positions on both the treble and bass sides are fairly congruous (with the exception perhaps for the 7th fret). TREBLE BASS frets 1/4 1/5 1/6 1/8 equal 1/4 1/5 1/6 1/8 equal 1 * + * + -- 2 + + -- 3 + + -- 4 + + -- 5 + + -- 6 + + -- 7 + + -- 8 + + -- 9 + + -- 10 + + -- 11 + + -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Tryit now. --
[VIHUELA] More re advice on 'passacailles'/chaconnes AND Piccinini....
Martyn Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 15:43:50 + (GMT) From: Martyn Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: advice on 'passacailles'/chaconnes To: Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I think we are in similar teritory but maybe only up to a point Lord Copper: Since Stuart was asking about a mid 17thC source it seemed reasonable to focus on the dance form known in the period immediately preceding this rather than even earlier Spanish sources. Thus the common Italian form (used by Monteverdi, Falconieri, et als) in the early 17thC is the one which I thought most relevant - in these, where barred at all, the ciacona ground is usually expounded in just two bars (not four as later) in the manner I described earlier (wether 6 crotchets or 6 minims in a bar is immaterial - both are found). Only later did the change to barring the chacone statement in four bars (ie in three crotchets/3 minims) become common - I think this has a bearing on stresses even in these mid century and later forms. It also perhaps relates to a general slowing of the tempo over the period and a gradual move away from the earlier ciaconna - but in the middish 17thC the earlier form would still have been recognised. However, as far as I can see, notated passacaglias always look like this later triple time barring with just three in a bar. I think we agree where the the stressed downbeat of the passacaglia is but, and apologies for repeating myself, early non guitar sources frequently start the ciaccona sequence with a weak beat before the strong beat - this seems a real distinuighing feature of the form not found in the passacaglia . Finally, you may prefer to sniff to replace the 'missing' initial weak downbeat to ensure you get into the correct rythm and stress of a chaconne Sniff l l l 0 / l 0 l 0 rather than l l l l 0 / l 0 l 0 Martyn PS I forgot to mention that there is indeed a plucked string chiaccona intabulation which starts precisely as I describe (with 4 crotchets followed by a minim): it's the last piece in Piccinin's Intavolatura di chitarrone of 1623. Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yes - I have with you now - but are you saying that the passacaglia doesn't exhibit any of these features? In what way do you think that the rhyhthm/barring of pieces labelled passacaglia is diffferent from pieces labelled ciacona? What I said was What originally distinguished the two forms was the harmonic formula on which they are based and the context in which they were used when dancing. I didn't mean to say that these were the only distinguishing features by any means. However way back at the beginning of time the chacona was a sung a dance in triple time, and featured hemiola. It is based on the descending bass line and is usually in a major key. The passacalles has a completely different function. It is based on the I IV V progression and is used as a refrain to different dances. It can therefore be in a major or minor key and in triple or common time but most of the dances are in triple time anyway. Presumably it can also exhibit some of the rhythmic features of the dance to which it is attached. You seem to be suggesting in your examples that there are six crotchets in a bar Just looking at Colonna's book and Foscarini's 1629 book (which is a plagiarised edition of Colonna's books) the distinction they make between the two is that the passacalles starts on the second beat with a down stroke - D U / D D U / D D U / D D U / D The Chiacone starts on the first beat and is D D U / D D - / D D U / D D - / They neither of them give any note values or bar lines of course. Obviously when you get to Monteverdi, things get a lot more complex... All this is a long way from Stuart's original query which was about the appropriate tempi for these two pieces in the Gallot ms. The Passacaille on f.27v includes at least one section from the Passacaille in A minor in Corbetta's 1643 book. I think the Chaconne hs is referring to is on f.114v. It also starts on the second beat of the bar as do most of the other ones in Gallot although that on f.90 which I think is partly derived from the Piccinini chaconne starts on the first beat of the bar I should think that it is anyone's guess how fast you should play them. As fast as you can... Monica From: Martyn Hodgson To: Monica Hall ; Vihuela Net Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 9:07 AM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: advice on 'passacailles'/chaconnes Aargh - well also to be honest I did indeed mean minim but, by way of a rather lame excuse, I had C's 1648 book in front of me which does, indeed use minims rather than crotchets (so semibreves rather than minims) as the basic unit! If you therefor
[VIHUELA] Re: advice on 'passacailles'/chaconnes
h it would be in the metre and major or minor key which matched this. Both Guerau and Murcia include passacalles in common time. The real point is that these dances were not Italian in the first place, but Spanish. By the time they were taken up in Italy they may have acquired other charactersitics. Monica - Original Message - From: Martyn Hodgson To: Monica Hall ; Vihuela Net Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 12:55 PM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: advice on 'passacailles'/chaconnes I can't agree with this Monica: that all that distinguished the two forms was the harmonic formula. As outlined in my earlier response, it is primarily the placing of the accent and number of beats in a bar (especially in the earlier, original, form) - as also mentioned, this soon became corrupted so that even contemporaries often had difficulty in distinguishing.. plus ca change.. Martyn Monica Hall wrote: I am still not exactly sure which ones you are referring to without the folio numbers. There is a Passacaille in A minor called Bonne (which I think just means good in the context), on f. 27v. It is possible that this is by Bartolotti. It looks sort of Italian. The passacaille on f. 27 and the allemandes on f. 26 and f.28 are both by Bartolotti. 4 of the other A minor pieces are from Corbetta's 1648 book. I can't find the chaconne in G (1679). If all you are worried about is the speed at which they should be played I don't think there any hard and fast rules. It depends a lot on the texture and also the competence of the player. What originally distinguished the two forms was the harmonic formula on which they are based and the context in which they were used when dancing. Early guitar books include examples of the Passacaille in all the different keys - partly so that the player could learn the chords and partly so that they can be matched up with the keys of the appropriate dances. Following on from this the guitar books of Bartolotti and Corbetta also include sequences of Passacailles in all the different keys. I would consider these to be more in the nature of studies so that you can gain practice in playing in different keys. The speed at which you play them would be whatever you were comfortable with. Sources in general never give tempo indications. The problem with Gallot is identifying the sources. But also the pieces are often inaccurate and very sketchy. It was copied for him for his own use and he wouldn't just have played the pieces note for note as they are written. It is manuscript, not a finished product intended for consumption by the public at large. Monica > Monica Hall wrote: >> I am curious to know which ones you are playing. The relationship >> between the two forms is complex. >> >> In Gallot from f.117to .f.123v some of the the pieces are called >> passacaglio and others chiacona. All are actually from Corbetta's 1643 >> book. They don't have individual titles but in the index Corbetta refers >> to them as Passachali con Chiacone. In Gallot those called >> Passacaglie tend to be in minor keys and the Ciacone in major keys >> although not consistently. This distinction is found in early guitar >> books in that chacona are usually in major keys. The Chaconne on f.18v >> of Gallot is also by Corbetta and some of the others with that title >> include variations from versions by Corbetta - and Foscarini/Piccini. >> >> Originally the Chacona was indeed a very lively Spanish dance noted for >> its lascivious dance steps... etc The passacalles was a refrain which >> was played between each section of dance to allow dancers to regroup. >> The passacalles is based the chords I/ IV//V or i/ iv/ V. The Chacona >> should have a descending bass line - along the lines of I VII VI >> IV V - but can vary. These distinctions are also blurred. Murcia's >> passacalles are all based on I IV V but often include odd variations >> based on the descending bass line. >> >> The distinction between the two forms is often a bit blurred and how you >> play them would depend a bit on the source. Gallot being a bit rag bag >> I should think you could play them any which way. >> >> Monica >> > > I'm looking at a Chaconne in G by 'De Gallot' (1679) and a 'Passacaille' > in A minor by someone unreadable...it looks a bit like 'Bonne' but not > much! Anyway, the chaconne is in a major key as you suggest. > > Both are notated in 3 and begin on the second beat - as usual, I think. > Both have mainly four bar sections but sometimes 8, 12 and there's a 7 bar > section in the Chaconne - presumably a mistake. > > I suppose that its possible to dance lasciviously to anything but it'
[VIHUELA] Re: advice on 'passacailles'/chaconnes
I can't agree with this Monica: that all that distinguished the two forms was the harmonic formula. As outlined in my earlier response, it is primarily the placing of the accent and number of beats in a bar (especially in the earlier, original, form) - as also mentioned, this soon became corrupted so that even contemporaries often had difficulty in distinguishing.. plus ca change.. Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I am still not exactly sure which ones you are referring to without the folio numbers. There is a Passacaille in A minor called Bonne (which I think just means good in the context), on f. 27v. It is possible that this is by Bartolotti. It looks sort of Italian. The passacaille on f. 27 and the allemandes on f. 26 and f.28 are both by Bartolotti. 4 of the other A minor pieces are from Corbetta's 1648 book. I can't find the chaconne in G (1679). If all you are worried about is the speed at which they should be played I don't think there any hard and fast rules. It depends a lot on the texture and also the competence of the player. What originally distinguished the two forms was the harmonic formula on which they are based and the context in which they were used when dancing. Early guitar books include examples of the Passacaille in all the different keys - partly so that the player could learn the chords and partly so that they can be matched up with the keys of the appropriate dances. Following on from this the guitar books of Bartolotti and Corbetta also include sequences of Passacailles in all the different keys. I would consider these to be more in the nature of studies so that you can gain practice in playing in different keys. The speed at which you play them would be whatever you were comfortable with. Sources in general never give tempo indications. The problem with Gallot is identifying the sources. But also the pieces are often inaccurate and very sketchy. It was copied for him for his own use and he wouldn't just have played the pieces note for note as they are written. It is manuscript, not a finished product intended for consumption by the public at large. Monica > Monica Hall wrote: >> I am curious to know which ones you are playing. The relationship >> between the two forms is complex. >> >> In Gallot from f.117to .f.123v some of the the pieces are called >> passacaglio and others chiacona. All are actually from Corbetta's 1643 >> book. They don't have individual titles but in the index Corbetta refers >> to them as Passachali con Chiacone. In Gallot those called >> Passacaglie tend to be in minor keys and the Ciacone in major keys >> although not consistently. This distinction is found in early guitar >> books in that chacona are usually in major keys. The Chaconne on f.18v >> of Gallot is also by Corbetta and some of the others with that title >> include variations from versions by Corbetta - and Foscarini/Piccini. >> >> Originally the Chacona was indeed a very lively Spanish dance noted for >> its lascivious dance steps... etc The passacalles was a refrain which >> was played between each section of dance to allow dancers to regroup. >> The passacalles is based the chords I/ IV//V or i/ iv/ V. The Chacona >> should have a descending bass line - along the lines of I VII VI >> IV V - but can vary. These distinctions are also blurred. Murcia's >> passacalles are all based on I IV V but often include odd variations >> based on the descending bass line. >> >> The distinction between the two forms is often a bit blurred and how you >> play them would depend a bit on the source. Gallot being a bit rag bag >> I should think you could play them any which way. >> >> Monica >> > > I'm looking at a Chaconne in G by 'De Gallot' (1679) and a 'Passacaille' > in A minor by someone unreadable...it looks a bit like 'Bonne' but not > much! Anyway, the chaconne is in a major key as you suggest. > > Both are notated in 3 and begin on the second beat - as usual, I think. > Both have mainly four bar sections but sometimes 8, 12 and there's a 7 bar > section in the Chaconne - presumably a mistake. > > I suppose that its possible to dance lasciviously to anything but it's a > bit of a stretch of the imagination to hear this as 17th century bump 'n' > grind, pole dance music. On the other hand, listening to Taro Takeuchi > masterfully playing two Corbetta ciacconas his Folias CD), I could imagine > the involvement of mind-altering substances. > > > Stuart >> - Original Message - From: "Stuart Walsh" >> To: >> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 10:56 PM >> Subject: [VIHUELA] advice on 'passacailles'/chaconnes >> >> >>> In particular, I'm looking at the the de Gallot MS from the 1670s - but >>> generally, too. >>> >>> 1) Is there a significant difference between the two forms - a >>> difference that should be made clear in the way that you play them? On >>> the face of it they look very similar. >>> >>> >>> 2) Very roughly, wh
[VIHUELA] Re: advice on 'passacailles'/chaconnes
The ciaconna (lItaly early 17thC) was originally fast with a syncopated triple rythm: l l l l 0 / l 0 l 0 (where l = a crotchet; 0 = semibreve; / = bar line) with the accent on the second crotchet of each bar. As well as for dance movements, various composers wrote vocal pieces to this ground; outstandingly Monteverdi (eg 'Voglio di vita uscir' etc). It was originally often associated with what we now call the the key of G. Over time (certainly by the mid 17thC in France) this became corrupted to l l l / 0 l / 0 l (note the same note lengths but now often starting on the beat -not always tho). This seems to have been accompanied by a slowing of the pulse. The passacaille had always had this sort of rythm, but generally starting on the second beat of this corrupted ciaconna form, and became increasingly indistinguishable from the chaconne (much to the confusion of many early writers and composers) - the same piece can also be called chaconne or pasacaille in different sources. However the expatriate Italians continued to write in a similar form as the original ciaconnas but notated in the later rythmic barring - it is often helpful to excavate the underlying earlier form and mentally rebar (eg Corbetta's ciaconnas). Interestingly many guitar chaconnes of the period are more often in C than G and the same passages occur in many different sources and often attributed to different composers - I guess that Corbetta was the first to establish this pattern which became a hall mark of the form, but... Martyn Stuart Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: In particular, I'm looking at the the de Gallot MS from the 1670s - but generally, too. 1) Is there a significant difference between the two forms - a difference that should be made clear in the way that you play them? On the face of it they look very similar. 2) Very roughly, what sort of speed should they be? I mean, what sort of speed on a guitar. (Everything can go slower and sound very grand on a lute.) 3) A long time ago, I had a lesson with Nigel North on the Baroque lute, looking at a De Visee piece in the same territory. He suggested a triple time feel for the eighth note passages and repeats for each section. Would this be appropriate for the de Gallot passacailles/chaconnes? The problem with repeating each section is that there are both four bar sections (which would be straightforward to repeat) but also eight bar sections which look like complete entities in their own right. So it seems easier just to play the piece through without repeats. Mainly I'm wondering: repeats - yes/no. notes inegales? - yes/no for this music? To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Tryit now. --
[VIHUELA] Re: A strange 'Baleto' in de Gallot
My feeling of the speed is that it needs a certain lightness and rythmic pulse to be a dance form rather than sounding, as you suggest, like a sort of anthem. Regarding stringing: I really would suggest that you to persist with octaves on the 4th and certainly try high unison on the 5th which will, at a stroke, solve your problem of octave intrusion on the 5th as well as making more sense of the common passage work involving the open 3rd and open 5th. Also use gut on the 4th rather than a powerful modern overwound string: this may seem counter-intuitive, but the thicker, more protruding, bourdon may make it easier for you to strike the lower of the pair as well as the upper. Rather like a violin, much depends on the attack; here of the thumb rather than the bow - playing well through the course and somewhat down into the belly should strengthen the bass of the pair. Indeed, I think much baroque guitar music is often closer to that of the violin than the lute: solo note passages interspersed with chords and emphasise on up and down bows(strums). There's good exceptions to this of course: in particular some of Sanz's pieces and Guerau Interestingly, the piece you mention does not, of course, conform to this more common pattern which is why, having failed to spot anything in Sanz or Guerau, I suspected a transcription: either from lute or other instrumental source. There are, as you'll have noted, other pieces from the Gallot collection in the same style ie largely treble and bass with no strumming and no campanella play (eg including Pavanne 71v, the long Gaillarde and suite 69v-70v, two courantes 68v-69) - maybe others can find concordances for these which may also be a clue to the source of this Baleto. Martyn Stuart Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm pleased someone else plays music from this wonderful MS which must > contain the logest piece ever written for baroque guitar (if, of course, it > was ever expected to be played in one sitting). > > Regarding the particular piece: the harmonies and structure are reminiscent > of Gianoncelli's 'IL LIUTO' (Venice 1650) with its passing dissonances > (intentional I think) and variation form. However, whilst there is indeed a > 'Baletto' with 5 variations (pgs 6,7) it isn't this one. > > It may seem a strange thing: to transcribe from the 14 course arciliuto to > the 5 course guitar, but much of this music is only two part and the low > basses are either used for effect or to free the left hand in higher > positions (much as the extra basses on the Dm lute) so putting them up an > octave or even two on a re-entrant tuned guitar may bring unexpected > inversions - but to good effect here. Incidentally, I don't think this music > it requires a bourdon on the fifth course altho' I do use one on the fourth. > Perhaps it could go a little faster as well - but nicely played. > > rgds > > M. > Thanks for your reply. Yes, it drags at the end at the speed I'm playing it. But it felt wrong to play it faster at the beginning of the piece. Seems more like a sort of anthem at the beginning. I've finally made a decision about playing the Baroque guitar: I just cannot anymore stand the sound of the intrusive high d on the fourth course. To me it ruins everything. Maybe a pair of gut strings an octave apart could sound pleasantly ambiguous but with modern strings (my current ones are from a reputable maker) all I hear is the high string - so often managing to wreck the melodic line or the harmony. Full re-entrant tuning on the guitar is just a complete and utter mystery to me. There's no issue with re-entrant tuning on the Renaissance cittern - you are bobbing about on different strings but the notes are in the same octave. And the same with the archlute or theorbo (can't remember which) with the top courses an octave lower. I've read that that is fully accounted for in the tab - there's no octave hopping. So I've resolved to 'do' something: - in some circumstances to split the courses and, as far as possible, to play the lower octave when that makes musical sense and the higher octave in campanella passages. Or, as in my attempt to play this Baleto, to play the fourth course (sometimes even the fifth) with the fingers. I wish I'd resolved to do this years ago. It's like getting an image suddenly in focus. For me (this is obviously a personal thing) it puts the Baroque guitar back in line with every other plucked instrument - rather than (in my opinion) an unsatisfactory anomaly. I used to play the Baroque lute and often the thumb is miles away from the fingerboard. I'm not exactly sure but I think it was a lesson as at a summer school with Nigel North who suggested I should sometimes use fingers to play both the low and high notes on the fingerboard rather than have the thumb continually moving form the low bas strings to the fingerboard. In effect, one is
[VIHUELA] Re: A strange 'Baleto' in de Gallot
I'm pleased someone else plays music from this wonderful MS which must contain the logest piece ever written for baroque guitar (if, of course, it was ever expected to be played in one sitting). Regarding the particular piece: the harmonies and structure are reminiscent of Gianoncelli's 'IL LIUTO' (Venice 1650) with its passing dissonances (intentional I think) and variation form. However, whilst there is indeed a 'Baletto' with 5 variations (pgs 6,7) it isn't this one. It may seem a strange thing: to transcribe from the 14 course arciliuto to the 5 course guitar, but much of this music is only two part and the low basses are either used for effect or to free the left hand in higher positions (much as the extra basses on the Dm lute) so putting them up an octave or even two on a re-entrant tuned guitar may bring unexpected inversions - but to good effect here. Incidentally, I don't think this music it requires a bourdon on the fifth course altho' I do use one on the fourth. Perhaps it could go a little faster as well - but nicely played. rgds M. Stuart Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've been rummaging through my stuff for Baroque guitar and there is a very odd piece I look at every so often. It's a strange little thing and I'd be interested if anyone would have a quick play through and offer any comments on it. Here it is: http://www.tuningsinthirds.com/Baleto/Baleto.jpg It's from the De Gallot MS (f.68), an English source from the 1670s. As I recall, it's from a section of the MS which has pieces in D major. The piece that immediately precedes it is very different; a courante in mixed tablature and alfabeto. The title looks like 'Baleto', but it doesn't seem anything like a dance piece from a suite. If anything it's more like an aria. I get the impression that it's an arrangement: something with a slow melody and a chugging bass line, perhaps. It also sounds vaguely familiar and - although it probably isn't - it sounds very English. Sturdy and plodding. The harmonies are unusual too - especially line two, final bar and line three, first three bars. Lots of suspensions and sevenths. I'm not sure it sounds quite right, but it's certainly interesting. Maybe someone was trying to realise a complicated figured bass. On the other hand it's nothing like those learned harmonic progressions you get in some Sanz pieces or the remarkable Preludio de 1 tono (D minor) in the Resumen of Santiago de Murcia.(Does anyone play that piece?) The varied repeat in the Baleto [sic] is even more speculative and there are some errors in the rhythm signs. And more curious harmonies all over the place. Perhaps unwisely again, I've uploaded a very amateur effort at just one run through of the piece. http://www.tuningsinthirds.com/Baleto/Baleto.mp3 Any ideas? Stuart To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit Yahoo! For Good this month. --
[VIHUELA] Re: Bartolotti's theorbo AND TIORBA NOTATION
Dear Monica, At the back of MS 17.706 (Nationalbibliothek Vienna), which mostly contains 11 course lute music (first decades of 18thC), are 7 folios of theorbo pieces in French tablature. The 'Accordo della Tiorba' clearly shows octave down for the first two courses and an instrument in A. On f. 89v is an 'Allemanda di Angelo Michiele' which I presume to be our man. This piece also requires the first two courses tuned at the lower octave (eg pre-penultimate bar with campanella passage). None of the other pieces name a composer but on stylistic grounds could be by A.M. I've spotted no concordances with B's guitar works, but. --- This MS also has another interesting and unique(?) marking in a fine 'Preludio' for theorbo on f. 88v - 89 (cld again be by A.M.). I've previously asked for any information on this marking both on this list and elsewhere but with no results. I'd be grateful for any fresh insights from you or anyone else. In short, the numbers 2 or 3 are written under some two, three, four and five note chords which generally form some sort of sequence. What do they mean? - how are they to be played? A few observations: a) The seemingly obvious answer that they indicate the 8th and 9th bass courses doesn't fit the evidence since the more conventional (in French tablature) signs of /a and //a are used throughout this MS and, indeed, in this piece. Moreover in one case the figure 2 is placed under a three note chord with /a in the bass. b) It might be to indicate how to arrpegiate/break the chord but how - the figures 3 and 2 are found below two succesive three note chords - the figure 2 is found under three and four note chords and the figure 3 under five, three and two(!) note chords c) Is it to show how many times a chord is to be struck? but it seems and odd way to indicate this (especially marking underneath the chord) as well as making no stylistic sense in the sequence. d) There is one piece of evidence to support a hypothesis that the figures indicate some way of breaking a chord in - under a six note chord and a four note chord is the common Italian sign ://: for an arpeggio so perhaps these figures are indeed a shorthand for something similar - but what? and how? Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Does anyone on this list know the correct tuning for Bartolotti's theorbo music. Looking at the tablature it seems to be standard lute tuning for the six courses on the fingerboard and diatonic basses but are the top two courses tuned down an octave? Monica -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Tryit now. --
[VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? (battente guitar)
Thank you for this Alexander, As I previously said, much of this is speculation (or as you would have it 'imaginings'). My concern is that you appear to be certain that such instruments did not exist before the mid 18thC whereas I'm prepared to accept that we just do not know at the present the time and am prepared to accept that an instrument MAY be 17thC if there is equivocal evidence. I would be grateful to have the firm evidence on which you base your belief that these instruments didn't exist before the Neopolitan mandolin (as said earlier, there's no dispute that some instruments were converted but, of course, this does not mean that earlier wire string/folded top/end-fastening guitars did not exist). The most relevant evidence for suggesting that such instruments may have existed before the 18thC is: - extant 17thC instruments (eg that shown in Baines to which I drew your attention - incidentally I don't recall mentioning the text, I simply identified the illustrations); - known use of wire strings/end fastening on a number of plucked instruments in 17thC (eg cittern). Other things like changes in musical styles (eg towards a more 'modern' tonal based system favouring block chords) and performance requirements (eg opera) are more indirect but may present a reason for such instruments (or 'need' as you put it). Martyn - Alexander Batov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: - Original Message - From: "Martyn Hodgson" To: "Alexander Batov" ; "Cittern NET" ; "Vihuela Net" Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 8:24 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? (battente guitar) > However, I'm still puzzled why you are so certain that folded top guitars > were not introduced until the mid 18thC: that some/many instruments were > converted in the 18thC does not, of course, mean that they were not known > earlier. I'm neither certain nor uncertain! May I quote again what I've said in my previous posting: "If there is such evidence (perhaps you know), then we can deal with it ... instead of doing so with imaginings". > Regarding evidence for earlier instruments might I respectfully suggest > you look at a wider range of instruments: the instrument illustrated in > Baines (possibly the most widely known and readily available standard > illustrated reference work) is just one that might be a 17thC instrument > in original state. Thanks for your suggestion. May I also in return respectfully suggest you either not to read the texts that accompany such illustrations in Baines, including the naming of the instruments, or at least do this with a pinch of salt. Perhaps then we can move on a bit further from the dead point. And we can't seriously discuss things applying a 'might be a 17thC instrument' sort of definitions and build our conclusions based on such presumptions. We either know that it is a 17th century instrument or it is not. > P's Theatrum Instrumentorum (Barenreiter facsimile 1976) has on plate XVI > an instrument P calls 'Laute mit Abzugem oder Testudo Theorbato' which > looks very similar to an archlute but with end fastening strings passing > over (ie not ending on) a bridge. I'm glad that we've finally established what we are talking about! So, can you actually see the fold where the bridge is situated? > Finally, I'm not the only one who thinks the instrument may have been > around earlier than you suppose (see Peter Forrester's recent > communication). I know you aren't. And that's what keeps us going ;)) Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail . "The New Version is radically easier to use" The Wall Street Journal --
[VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? (battente guitar)
Thank you fr ths Alexander, However, I'm still puzzled why you are so certain that folded top guitars were not introduced until the mid 18thC: that some/many instruments were converted in the 18thC does not, of course, mean that they were not known earlier. Regarding evidence for earlier instruments might I respectfully suggest you look at a wider range of instruments: the instrument illustrated in Baines (possibly the most widely known and readily available standard illustrated reference work) is just one that might be a 17thC instrument in original state. P's Theatrum Instrumentorum (Barenreiter facsimile 1976) has on plate XVI an instrument P calls 'Laute mit Abzugem oder Testudo Theorbato' which looks very similar to an archlute but with end fastening strings passing over (ie not ending on) a bridge. Finally, I'm not the only one who thinks the instrument may have been around earlier than you suppose (see Peter Forrester's recent communication). M Alexander Batov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? On Wednesday, October 18, 2006 8:42 AM, Martyn Hodgson" wrote: > Indeed, the Preatorius depiction clearly shows the folded belly used in > the early 17thC (predating the use on the Neopolitan mandolin by over 100 > yrs). I wouldn't say it's all that clear, I can't see any visible fold on my illustration, unless you've got a better one or are looking into a different Praetorius ;) > What evidence is there that 'there wasn't any need' for a wire strung > folded belly etc guitar before the mid-18thC. Well, perhaps "there was a need", for example, for a hammered clavier in the early 17th century (one can easily imagine that the musicians then were craving for more expanded dynamic range on their harpsichords) but it took another 150 years or so for it to appear. As far as I know, there is no evidence (in form of surviving instruments, iconography, historical records etc) for the existence of the folded belly design on "guitar-like" instruments before c. mid-18th century. If there is such evidence (perhaps you know), then we can deal with it ... instead of doing so with imaginings. My reasoning for "there wasn't any need" is exactly the same as it was the case with some other instruments during the 16th - 18th centuries which have evolved as a result of changes and / or emergencies of either new musical styles or technological innovations and advances etc or , indeed, all of these combined. (I don't think one can ever be so precise in tracking down the exact picture why such and such line of development of a particular instrument took place in the history.) Battente guitars (as a family of different size instruments) seem to have emerged as a side line development of the Neapolitan mandoline family around 1740s; what we might now call as a "folk instrument" and it still remained as such in the Southern province of Italy (Calabria). It is also worth to have in mind that this seemingly large scale conversion of the 17th century guitars to folded belly construction around the mid-18th century and later, with subsequent shortening of the neck etc, also encompassed, although to a lesser extent, lute family instruments too ... and 'spoiled' some really beautiful ones (as for, example, an archlute E 528 from the Paris collection, with a possible attribution to Magno Dieffopruchar). > The question is wether such > instruments were played in the earlier period (ie 17thC): the 'need' for > a louder instrument in etc may have encouraged > such a development. Firstly, I don't quite see how we can project our modern ideas as to what would be suitable for the 17th century 'large scale entertainments' . Secondly, I don't quite see how the combined folded belly / metal strings construction can result in a louder instrument ...? Talking of wire-strung instruments, the contemporary members of the cittern family instruments could have easily satisfied such a role, by having: unconstricted soundboard in place where the bridge is situated (i.e. with no fold in there), higher bridge and shallower body - the qualities much more likely to result in a louder instrument (as compared to that with the deep-bodied, folded belly design). This is not to say that the flat bellied gut-stung 17th century "guitarra spanguola" (as we now know it could have been occasionally strung with silk strings too) could lend even more higher sound output than the metal-strung instruments of the time. Introduction of fan-brace pattern to the guitar (again around mid-18th century, this time in Spain) have taken it even further along the "loudness line" (unfortunately to the detriment of the sound, imho). > The examplar instrument is illustrated
[VIHUELA] Re: Re-entrant basses and harmony
Dear Lex (and Monica), I'm afraid I've not had the time to be involved in yr interesting recent exchange of views but have quickly scanned most of the messages. One thing which now seems to be pretty central to how you see the chords is the harmonic importance you're placing on the low basses of the 4th @ 5th courses. I would differ from you in that I find the high octave generally very clearly predominates (even when tried at a significantly lower tension than the low bass and the 'Strad' records indicate the high octave was at a higher tension than the low bass) - this is partly due to being struck first (if using the thumb) but also the higher (and more penetrating) upper harmonics of the higher string. In short, describing the thoeretical harmony by reference to the lowest pitched note being played may well be misleading in terms of how the Old Ones were thinking when creating a passage. The use of 7th chords (sometimes without a thoeretical root as I see it) can also lead to confusion - this was discussed in an earlier chain of messages before this most recent one. Having said this, plse keep up the good work: - highly entertaining as well as instructive. rgds Martyn PS Incidentally did you see my exchange a few weeks ago with Alexander (Batov) about wire strung folded belly battentes? Do you have a view about their existence before the 18thC? Do you know the whereabouts of the instrument I mentioned (Baines- pictures 294, 295) M. Lex Eisenhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At this point we probably part company as to how we interpret notes on > the 4th course and 5th courses. I think one > should take into account the fact that all notes on these course will sound > an octave above more prominently than the bourdon and when > transcribing the music you should put them in (unless they are duplicated on > a higher course). You can't ignore them. > I would therefore read this chord downwards as A G D C [G] - the low G is > extraneous. The E is certainly lacking - the D is substituted for it. > > The D on the 5th course remains; the G in the upper octave resolves onto > the F# on the 2nd course. And the low G of the 4th course does not. I do not agree that the notes on the 4th and 5th courses do sound more prominently in the higher octave. The tradition of the 'bourdon tuning' in Italy seems to have been that people thought of those as the bass. Sanseverino remarks: 'the fifth, known as the bass'. You could argue that Corbetta saw the guitar from the "French side": stringed in re-entrant tuning, with an added octave on the fourth course. I'm aware that we have different views on this. == > > This may seem procrustean to you but I don't think that you can ignore the > fact that because the treble strings are on the thumb side they will > predominate. But certainly not in strums. = What I would call the "re-entrancy" is pervasive. We are so > used to thinking of the lowest lines as representing the lowest notes from > childhood upwards. But they don't have to. What you think of as > dissonances on the lowest courses not resolving are actually resolving > happily on the upper courses. Not the low octave(s). What makes you think that people in the 17th century had different listening habits, in this respect? == > The same progression occurs in the prelude and at the end of the sarabande. > Here - in the previous bar he has actually put the line under the stave to > indicate where you should anticipate the barre before you get to the chord. > I can't see the point of his putting in the notes on the 4th and 5th course > if they are not to be played. I would then just use a half barre - maybe > you wouldn't - I don't know. It depends on the anatomy of the hand. Sometimes it is easier to put a full barre than a short one. Maybe it was something specific of Corbetta's technique. It can also become a habit of doing things. You suppose that people were used to understand things in a certain way, like ignoring the sound of the low octave of the 4th course (and maybe even of the 5th course, if I am right). In what we call campanela-playing today, this may certainly be true, we have the possibility to make nuances in the way we touch the course(s) tuned in an octave. In strummed chords this is not well possible. The discussion is obscured by the fact that, specificly in the early times, there has been a lot of harmonic experiment, several guitarists did break the rules all the time. This can be explained, at least partly, by their amateuristic background. The comparison to the culture of Rock music is certainly adequate in some resperts. Corbetta was one of the biggest stars, and he kept on writing very crude chord progressions, also in his later works. In an environment like that, music notation can have been looked upon as a necessary evil, an intellectual means (in notes and figures - Montes
[VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning?
Dear Alexander, Indeed, the Preatorius depiction clearly shows the folded belly used in the early 17thC (predating the use on the Neopolitan mandolin by over 100 yrs). What evidence is there that 'there wasn't any need' for a wire strung folded belly etc guitar before the mid-18thC. The question is wether such instruments were played in the earlier period (ie 17thC): the 'need' for a louder instrument in large scale entertainments etc may have encouraged such a development. The examplar instrument is illustrated in Baines (European and American /MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS) by two pictures Nos 294 and 295. Do you know its whereabouts now? MH Alexander Batov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: - Original Message - From: "Martyn Hodgson" To: "Cittern NET" ; "Early Guitar NET" ; "Vihuela Net" Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 2:48 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? Dear Martyn, Thanks very much for your reply (also privately) and I do apologise for the delay wit my. I'm just a bit hectic at the moment preparing for the Greenwich exhibition starting at 10 November and hence my time in front of computer screen is rather limited. Anyway, perhaps you'd like to come round on one of the days. It would be great to meet you and discuss things in more detail. > I am genuinely open minded about all this and remain to be convinced > either way: clearly, some guitars seem to have been converted to be wire > strung with shorter necks and folded bellies - possibly in the mid 18th C > (but why done not earlier?), however there seem to be examples (eg the > Hill one) where this is not the case and we have an earlier instrument set > up with folded belly, end string fastening and short neck. I think much > more work needs to be done here. I'm as open-minded as it can only be on this subject too! Why the conversion started at appr. mid-18th century onwards and not earlier, because there wasn't any need to do so before. Large size (regarding string length) early - mid 17th century guitars largely became obsolete by the mid-18th century, so they were simply most 'convenient' object for such a conversion. And it was mostly vaulted back ones that were converted, not many flat backs. I'm starting to get a bit confused about the Hill guitar that you mention. Do you mean the guitar with the inscription "Giogio Sellas ... Venetia / 1627 ...", described under No. 39 in Boyden's catalogue? > Also, I'm not so sure about the presumption that the folded mandolin > belly had to be invented before such a constructional technique could be > applied to the guitar. I agree but where are such guitars (surviving instrument, depictions etc)? In my earlier posting I only mentioned of chronological coincidence of folding tops being added (by means of conversion or whatever) to guitars and arising Neapolitan mandoline tradition. In fact the use of such construction may well have already been there in Praetorius' time (re: his illustration of 'Testudo Theorbata') and not obligatory related to the use of metal stings at all. It could simply be re-adopted, as the most convenient one in form of design, for the use of metal stings (or mainly metal strings to be precise) on the Neapolitan mandoline and the contemporary chitarre battente. It is also interesting that in the Portuguese tradition (perhaps not without a good deal of influence from the Italian battente guitar ...?) a somewhat different way of fixation of metal strings to a flat soundboard was adopted: with stings fastened to what appears as a 'conventional' fixed bridge and then passing over a separate movable one, just in vicinity of it. > Battente guitars could make use of Alfabeto which, presumably, pre-dates > the 6 course tablature Ricetti mentions. They could but there is no evidence, unless I've missed something. Again Ricetti's tablature was _supposedly_ for the battente guitar. > Finally, I'm even more unclear about non-folded belly instruments which > have string end fastening - like Coste's Lacote guitar much later, this > could be simply an alternative gut stringing arrangement. Well, Lacote was doing all sorts of experimental designs. We'd better not mix his 19th century 'innovative spirits' to this particular topic. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider. --
[VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning?
Martyn Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 09:00:21 +0100 (BST) From: Martyn Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? To: Alexander Batov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Dear Alexander, I am genuinely open minded about all this and remain to be convinced either way: clearly, some guitars seem to have been converted to be wire strung with shorter necks and folded bellies - possibly in the mid 18th C (but why done not earlier?), however there seem to be examples (eg the Hill one) where this is not the case and we have an earlier instrument set up with folded belly, end string fastening and short neck. I think much more work needs to be done here. Also, I'm not so sure about the the presumption that the folded mandolin belly had to be invented before such a constructional technique could be applied to the guitar. Battente guitars could make use of Alfabeto which, presumably, pre-dates the 6 course tablature Ricetti mentions. Finally, I'm even more unclear about non-folded belly instruments which have string end fastening - like Coste's Lacote guitar much later, this could be simply an alternative gut stringing arrangement. MH der Batov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Martyn, With no attempt to convince you but there is hardly any point to look for chitarra battente much further beyond mid-18th century (i.e. chronologically coinciding with the arrival of Neapolitan mandoline). Perhaps this can also suggest what sort of strings it could be strung with ... The most comprehensive research on surviving battente guitars was made, as far as I know, by Valentina Ricetti around mid-80s and published in the Liuteria magazine (in two subsequent issues). I corresponded with her at the time and supplied information on the three original battente guitars from the St-Petersburg collection (she reproduced the picture of one of them in her article). She also send me what in her words was _supposedly_ the earliest surviving tablature for battente guitar which, if I remember it right, looked like a chart of chords written out on six lines. Unfortunately I don't have neither the magazines not the tablature fragment with me at the moment, otherwise I could have given you more precise information. Alexander - Original Message - From: "Martyn Hodgson" Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? > Ta Monica. > > Re low breaking stress of early wire, I find it of interest that many > extant battente seem to have a shorter neck than conventional 17thC > guitars. However the position of the 11th fret (ie generally close to the > neck/body join) remained the same as with gut strung instruments and this > is, of course, possible because the battente with folded/bent belly had a > much higher bridge position than 'conventional' instruments. > > I'm aware of a few late 90's revisionist theories that all these are > fakes or 19/20thC instruments apeing ealier instruments, but am > unconvinced. > > A good example of an early short necked battente is in Baines (Nos > 294/295) - I wonder where it is now? It's always seemed very genuine to > me, but... > > Interestingly, on the opposite page is a guitar by 'Matteo Sellas' dated > c. 1630(?) (Nos 285-7) which I think was rebuilt in the 18thC as a > conventional gtr but was probably originally a battente (ie folded belly - > the mark is clear, short neck) - prhps this is indirect evidence that the > earlier battente tradition had declined by then. > > MH To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com --
[VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning?
Ta Monica. Re low breaking stress of early wire, I find it of interest that many extant battente seem to have a shorter neck than conventional 17thC guitars. However the position of the 11th fret (ie generally close to the neck/body join) remained the same as with gut strung instruments and this is, of course, possible because the battente with folded/bent belly had a much higher bridge position than 'conventional' instruments. I'm aware of a few late 90's revisionist theories that all these are fakes or 19/20thC instruments apeing ealier instruments, but am unconvinced. A good example of an early short necked battente is in Baines (Nos 294/295) - I wonder where it is now? It's always seemed very genuine to me, but... Interestingly, on the opposite page is a guitar by 'Matteo Sellas' dated c. 1630(?) (Nos 285-7) which I think was rebuilt in the 18thC as a conventional gtr but was probably originally a battente (ie folded belly - the mark is clear, short neck) - prhps this is indirect evidence that the earlier battente tradition had declined by then. MH Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There is another interesting paper on wire strung guitars in the most recent Galpin Society Journal. Darryl Martin The early wire-strung guitar - G.S.J. no. 59, May 2006, p.123-137. M ----- Original Message - From: "Martyn Hodgson" To: "Lex Eisenhardt" ; "Cittern NET" ; "Early Guitar NET" ; "Vihuela Net" Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 2:51 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? > > Thanks Lex, I hope Sebastian can let me have some more info on stringing. > > One of the reasons I mentioned low tensions was that the instrument I made all those years ago had a fold/bend in the belly ( like a neopolitan mandolin) and I had always rather assumed this constructional feature was there to enable higher tension stringing (as appears to be the case with the neop mand) - even tho' in the event the customer ewventuaslly decided on a fairly low tension. If such relatively low tensions were in fact used (ie less than ordinary gut stringing, say) then I wonder about the point of having a fold. > > There was a v interesting paper, that I'm sure you'll know, in the Galpin Soc Journal many (20?) years ago about surviving battente tradition in Calabria but unfortunately didn't (as I recall) give much about detailed stringing - I'll dig it out if you don't have a copy. > > I have in mind to make a battente for my own use and had initially thought of using quite high tensions and a plectrum - might certainly be effective in early opera as well as in songs. Your experience of low tensions makes me have second thoughts and I quite like the idea of gently strumming wire strings - but I still wonder about the fold (or doesn't yours have one - not all end fastening guitars seemed to..). > > Any other experiences etc welcome. > > MH > > > > Lex Eisenhardt wrote: > Martyn, > > The stringlength is 67, the pitch 415. I relied on Sebastian's advice in the choice of the strings. I hope he can give you the details of the manufacturing. It works well, not too many stringbreaks, although tuning is certainly a bit problematic. Sebastian made bass strings of twisted wire. Not so pleasant if you pluck those (with nails...). I have not played much on the instrument lately (the recording was made for a long time.) > Sebastian is probably on the list > - Original Message - > From: Martyn Hodgson > To: Lex Eisenhardt ; Early Guitar NET ; Vihuela Net ; Cittern NET > Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 5:41 PM > Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? > > > Lex, > > Many years ago I made a battente for a customer (from Italy - talk about coals to Newcastle) and recall having problems with getting 'authentic' iron/steel strings (I used harpsichord wire from Thomas I recall up to pitch (even as low as a tone below modern): the trebles kept snapping. I put this down to either better quality steel was actually readily available than generally supposed nowadays or the wire strung battente was strung at a lower pitch and/or had a shorter neck (as indeed some extant examples seem to exhibit). > > I also understood (Eph Segerman's work, et alia) that the problems with supplies of reasonably high tensile steel wire (ie the factory in Germany ceased production in early 17thC) were amongst the reasons some thought for the decline of the orpharion (not the Bandora tho' which had a lower string stress on its highest course). > > Many modern copies of early wire strung plucked instruments seem to be strung at v low tensions (again after early work by Segerman et alia) which makes seems to make playing well in tune
[VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning?
Thanks Lex, I hope Sebastian can let me have some more info on stringing. One of the reasons I mentioned low tensions was that the instrument I made all those years ago had a fold/bend in the belly ( like a neopolitan mandolin) and I had always rather assumed this constructional feature was there to enable higher tension stringing (as appears to be the case with the neop mand) - even tho' in the event the customer ewventuaslly decided on a fairly low tension. If such relatively low tensions were in fact used (ie less than ordinary gut stringing, say) then I wonder about the point of having a fold. There was a v interesting paper, that I'm sure you'll know, in the Galpin Soc Journal many (20?) years ago about surviving battente tradition in Calabria but unfortunately didn't (as I recall) give much about detailed stringing - I'll dig it out if you don't have a copy. I have in mind to make a battente for my own use and had initially thought of using quite high tensions and a plectrum - might certainly be effective in early opera as well as in songs. Your experience of low tensions makes me have second thoughts and I quite like the idea of gently strumming wire strings - but I still wonder about the fold (or doesn't yours have one - not all end fastening guitars seemed to..). Any other experiences etc welcome. MH Lex Eisenhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Martyn, The stringlength is 67, the pitch 415. I relied on Sebastian's advice in the choice of the strings. I hope he can give you the details of the manufacturing. It works well, not too many stringbreaks, although tuning is certainly a bit problematic. Sebastian made bass strings of twisted wire. Not so pleasant if you pluck those (with nails...). I have not played much on the instrument lately (the recording was made for a long time.) Sebastian is probably on the list.... - Original Message - From: Martyn Hodgson To: Lex Eisenhardt ; Early Guitar NET ; Vihuela Net ; Cittern NET Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 5:41 PM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? Lex, Many years ago I made a battente for a customer (from Italy - talk about coals to Newcastle) and recall having problems with getting 'authentic' iron/steel strings (I used harpsichord wire from Thomas I recall up to pitch (even as low as a tone below modern): the trebles kept snapping. I put this down to either better quality steel was actually readily available than generally supposed nowadays or the wire strung battente was strung at a lower pitch and/or had a shorter neck (as indeed some extant examples seem to exhibit). I also understood (Eph Segerman's work, et alia) that the problems with supplies of reasonably high tensile steel wire (ie the factory in Germany ceased production in early 17thC) were amongst the reasons some thought for the decline of the orpharion (not the Bandora tho' which had a lower string stress on its highest course). Many modern copies of early wire strung plucked instruments seem to be strung at v low tensions (again after early work by Segerman et alia) which makes seems to make playing well in tune a problem. Have you a view on all this? I would be grateful to know the string length of your battente, the pitch, the stringsand string tensions you are in fact using? regards, Martyn Lex Eisenhardt wrote: Dear Monica As I understand this CS2 is from the late 17th c. It is hard to tell if -and how- the mutual influence from cittern and guitar has worked out. It certainly could be a subject where we guitarists could learn some. >> I wanted to ask you if you played your wire string guitar with a plecturm? My battente is strung very lightly and is well 'strummable' with the fingers. A Cd is going to be released a few weeks from now, on which I use this instrument (by Sebastian Nunez) for song-accompaniment. Venetian songs (1620-1640) and some Foscarini (on the Chitarra Spagnuola, of course). > > I don't think that campanellas are really an issue here. It seems to be a > common mis-conception re-entrant tunings have something to do with > campanellas. I could not agree more. A whole generation of scholars and players have been following the wrong star. L. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com --
[VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning?
Lex, Many years ago I made a battente for a customer (from Italy - talk about coals to Newcastle) and recall having problems with getting 'authentic' iron/steel strings (I used harpsichord wire from Thomas I recall up to pitch (even as low as a tone below modern): the trebles kept snapping. I put this down to either better quality steel was actually readily available than generally supposed nowadays or the wire strung battente was strung at a lower pitch and/or had a shorter neck (as indeed some extant examples seem to exhibit). I also understood (Eph Segerman's work, et alia) that the problems with supplies of reasonably high tensile steel wire (ie the factory in Germany ceased production in early 17thC) were amongst the reasons some thought for the decline of the orpharion (not the Bandora tho' which had a lower string stress on its highest course). Many modern copies of early wire strung plucked instruments seem to be strung at v low tensions (again after early work by Segerman et alia) which makes seems to make playing well in tune a problem. Have you a view on all this? I would be grateful to know the string length of your battente, the pitch, the stringsand string tensions you are in fact using? regards, Martyn Lex Eisenhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dear Monica As I understand this CS2 is from the late 17th c. It is hard to tell if -and how- the mutual influence from cittern and guitar has worked out. It certainly could be a subject where we guitarists could learn some. >> I wanted to ask you if you played your wire string guitar with a plecturm? My battente is strung very lightly and is well 'strummable' with the fingers. A Cd is going to be released a few weeks from now, on which I use this instrument (by Sebastian Nunez) for song-accompaniment. Venetian songs (1620-1640) and some Foscarini (on the Chitarra Spagnuola, of course). > > I don't think that campanellas are really an issue here. It seems to be a > common mis-conception re-entrant tunings have something to do with > campanellas. I could not agree more. A whole generation of scholars and players have been following the wrong star. L. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com --
[VIHUELA] Re: 'Tastini' - lack of evidence
Dear Monica, Frthr to my last, you may find this of interest Martyn Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 10:20:29 +0100 (BST) To: Daniel Shoskes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Lute Net CC: Lute Net From: Martyn Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: 'Tastini' - lack of evidence Thank you Daniel. So, as I understand it, the sole piece of HISTORICAL evidence is from Vincenzo Galilei's 'Fromino Dialogo' (1568,1584) translated by MacClintock (AIM 1985) as: "..Now I come to the matter of 'tastini' which lately some people seek to introduce to remove some of the sharpness from the thirds and major tenths (as they try to persuade those who are more foolish than they)" MacClintock goes on to say that he later 'points out that those using 'tastini' do not know much about thoery'. (Incidentally I can't find the original Italian quotes in my copy of the 1584 book - have you any source page numbers?) In short, the ONLY piece of historical evidence for 'tastini' seems to be a passing reference in the pedagogic writings of Galilei who himself eschews their use and mentions that some foolish and ignorant people 'seek'' to introduce them: - hardly, I suggest, a convincing case for their adoption in modern times. And particularly so considering that when other early sources write about fretting they signally fail to mention these extra little frets (eg Dowland 'Varietie') and they is no trace of them in contemporary iconography. If anybody else has other HISTORICAL evidence, I'd be grateful for it. rgds Martyn ' Daniel Shoskes wrote: On Monday, April 04, 2005, at 12:57PM, Martyn Hodgson wrote: > >Would someone kindly remind me of all the historical evidence for ''tastini', >for their actual widespread use and examples of any iconography depicting them. I can only refer to what others have said: http://home.planet.nl/~d.v.ooijen/lgs/meantone.html http://www.luteshop.fsnet.co.uk/tuning.htm http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/wikla/mus/fronimo.html Some professional players use them: http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/Heringman.html (both my teachers, Pat O'Brien and David Dolata do) To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- - Win a BlackBerry device from O2 with Yahoo!. Enter now. --
[VIHUELA] Re: Mean tone temperament
All good stuff Stewart, but does it apply to the 'baroque' guitar? As has already been pointed out, the use of 'alfabeto' moveable chord shapes impies equal temperament (or near). In particular, the M, N and H chords frequently occur in Italian printed collections using all frets from 1 to 5; even in the same piece it's not uncommon to find the same shape used on two or three adjacent frets eg Asioli 1674, Bottazzari 1663, Bartolotti 1640. rgds Martyn Stewart McCoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dear Monica, There is plenty of evidence that players of fretted instruments had different ideas of where to tie the frets. For example, 1) Certain vihuelists wrote about moving the 4th fret towards the bridge for pieces in very flat keys, which means that at least some of them played in some form of meantone; 2) Galilei devised a fretting system which was more or less in equal temperament, and he wrote music for the lute in all keys. 3) Christopher Simpson wrote in his _Compendium_ about some viol players and theorbo players having an extra first fret on their instrument, to enable them to play in a meantone temperament and avoid bad notes at the first fret. The implication is that Simpson didn't have an extra fret and preferred equal temperament, which is confirmed by the picture of a viol being played in his book on playing divisions, but he accepts that others did. We have our own preferences today, just as players did in the past. We may opt for equal or unequal systems out of ignorance (the frets were like that when I bought the instrument, guv), or by studying what people wrote in the past (Galilei, Simpson, et al), or by examining old instruments (all citterns were fretted in various kinds of meantone close to 6th-comma meantone), or by playing the music to see what works. Although the same problems of temperament are faced by players of all fretted instruments, the music which survives pushes us in different directions. I have come to the conclusion that, apart from people like Galilei, the lute and vihuela in the 16th century were usually fretted in some form of meantone temperament, whereas the baroque guitar was usually fretted at or close to equal temperament. I am sure Howard is right to say that chords of E minor were more often played on the guitar than chords of E flat minor, but I think he is wrong to conclude from this that guitars were not fretted in equal temperament. I can think of quite a bit of baroque guitar music which explores remote keys, and where equal temperament would have to be the order of the day. I would be very interested to know statistically how many books of baroque guitar music there are, where distant keys are explored. I have one small observation to make with regard to 16th-century lutes and 17th-century guitars. Both instruments have similar tunings: 4ths with a 3rd bunged in the middle. It is the string which supplies the lower note of that major 3rd, where the biggest problem lies. Guitarists will know only too well the difficulty of tuning the 3rd course, tuning it very slightly flat for G major _d_ _d_ _a_ _a_ _c_ so that the G# isn't too sharp for E major: _a_ _a_ _b_ _c_ _c_ The same problem is faced by the renaissance lutenist, except the problem occurs at the 4th course. If you tune it to a nice f natural for F major, _c_ _d_ _d_ _a_ ___ ___ the f# at the 1st fret is likely to be too sharp for D major: _c_ _a_ _a_ _b_ _c_ ___ There are three solutions to the problem: 1) Tie on an extra fret (like Simpson's theorbo friends), or a tastino (as some players do today). 2) Go for equal temperament, which I believe is the baroque guitarist's solution. 3) Avoid the 1st fret of the 4th course, which is the lutenist's solution. Why else do they so often go for awkward D major chords like ___ _e_ _f_ _e_ _c_ ___ instead of the much easier ___ _a_ _a_ _b_ _c_ ___ ? Albert da Rippe avoided that last chord, preferring to end his pieces with ___ _a_ _a_ ___ _g_ _h_ instead, presumably because his lute was fretted in a meantone system. Thomas Campion, on the other hand, is more likely to have fretted his lute towards equal temperament, because he so often uses the easy D chord. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy. - Original Message - From: "Monica Hall" To: "vihuela" Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 6:00 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Mean tone temperament > I don't know whether there is still anyone on this list - but if there is perhaps they can tell me what they know about Mean Tone Temperament on plucked stringed instruments, especially the baroque guitar. > > I have got these two CDs of baroque guitar music to review. One of them says that the instrument is tuned to A=415 in mean-tone temperament; the other to A = 440 in mean tone temperament. No more information than that is given in the notes, but one of the CDs has 2 photos of the artists and it seems that this refinement is achieved by putting strips of something - ca
[VIHUELA] Re: Mean tone temperament
Dear Monica, Yes, like you I wonder at it all - surely the point of moveable chord shapes (alfabeto) is that equal temp is taken as read Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't know whether there is still anyone on this list - but if there is perhaps they can tell me what they know about Mean Tone Temperament on plucked stringed instruments, especially the baroque guitar. I have got these two CDs of baroque guitar music to review. One of them says that the instrument is tuned to A=415 in mean-tone temperament; the other to A = 440 in mean tone temperament. No more information than that is given in the notes, but one of the CDs has 2 photos of the artists and it seems that this refinement is achieved by putting strips of something - cardboard? plastic?! partly under sections of some of the frets. The frets themselves look very thick and as if they were of a single thick strand of whatever - gut? nylon? rather than tied in a loop like I do mine. As far as I'm aware the guitar was usually tuned to a sort of equal temperament - at least that is what Doisi de Velasco says and how else would they have been able to play in the 12 different major and minor keys - as they were wont to do? But I do vaguely remember also reading somewhere that lutenists sometimes did something like this and even that there was a name for the practice. So if anyone has any ideas I'd love to hear from them. Monica -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now - --
[VIHUELA] Re: Query: Position of octaves on courses 4 & 5 in late 18thC guitars
Thanks Monica,
Just one thing you may be able to help with: in your view do Ferandiere's
stringing instructions mean that the bourdon on the 6th is on the 'bass' side
of the instrument (ie struck by the thumb first)?
Martyn
Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I can't really cast any further light on this, but I thought it might be
useful to note that Vargas y Guzman, writing in 1776 says that although
octave stringing is used on the 4th, 5th and 6th courses for playing rasgado
and punteado, it is better to use double bourdons when accompanying a bass
line - especially if it is accompanying several instruments.
Monica
>
>
> Martyn Hodgson wrote: Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005
12:07:37 + (GMT)
> From: Martyn Hodgson
> Subject: Query: Position of octaves on courses 4 & 5 in late 18thC guitars
> To: Early Guitar NET
>
>
> As Monica (Hall) reports in her monograph on baroque guitar stringing
(Lute Soc 2003), Corrette (1763) and Merchi (1761) indicate bourdons on the
4th and 5th courses. Monica was primarily concerned with the 'baroque'
guitar and I presume this is why she didn't mention other late 18thC
sources.
>
> My query is whether there is any evidence from the late 18thC for the
low octave (ie the bourdon) being placed on the 'bass' side of the octave
pair (ie plucked first by the thumb).
>
> Later sources not mentioned by Monica include:
>
> Baillon (1781) 5 course guitar - also tells us that there are high
octaves on the 4th and 5th with the bourdons being overwound. His
description of their position (at least based on my own, almost certainly
less than perfect, translation) seems to say that the strings (the high
octaves presumably?) which accompany the 4th and 5th are positioned AFTER
the wound strings.('il faut observer que les cordes qui accompagnent la
quatrieme et la Cinquieme doivent etre posees apres les cordes filees,').
Since he counts courses down with the chanterelle being 1, presumably this
implies the high octaves are towards the bass side of the instrument. He
seems to confirm this by adding that they are struck by the thumb firstly ('
il faut qu'elles soient les premieres du cote du poulce') - as for earlier
'baroque' guitars.
>
> Le Moine (c.1790?) 5 course guitar - gives us the tuning method for
single strings but adds that to string a guitar with double courses requires
a high octave on the 4th and 5th (but no position specified)
>
> Bailleux (1773) 5 course guitar - an engraved representation of a guitar
shows double stringing on all courses except the first. However there's no
mention of octave doubling and , indeed, his tuning instructions seem to
imply both strings of course 4 and 5 at the lower octave ('the 5ths are in
unison with the thirds at the second fret' & ' the fourths are in unison
with the seconds at the third fret' my translation)
>
> Merchi (1777) 5 course guitar - mentions that single strings are easier
to put in tune and render the sound purer, loud etc.
>
> Ferandiere (1799) 6 course guitar - the guitar is generally double
strung except for the first which is better single. Only the low 6th
('sextos) has a high octave and this is placed first (' el primero se llama
sextillo, por sermas delgado que el otro, y debe estar una octave mas
alta'). I can't quite be certain whether he means on the 'bass' side of the
pair. However if it is so then, as far as I'm aware, this is the only 18th
instruction which requires this placing of the octave string.
>
> For me, it's particularly interesting since this disposition of each
string of an octave pair reflects how the Gallichon/Mandora was strung
throughout the 18thC and may represent yet another strand of cross
fertilization between the two families of instruments.
>
> Grateful for any further evidence on this matter
>
> rgds
>
> MH
>
>
>
>
> -
> To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new
Yahoo! Security Centre.
>
>
>
> -
> Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with
voicemail
> --
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at
> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>
-
Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail
--
[VIHUELA] Re: Query: Position of octaves on courses 4 & 5 in late 18thC guitars
Sorry, but I don't understand the point you trying to make: I'm asking for
18thC evidence of stringing practice on the guitar. But thank you for your
time.
MH
bill kilpatrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
i assume that with a wide variety of shapes, sizes and
string configurations within the basic, two-bout,
"guitar"-like structure, the basic "set up" of south
american chordaphones arrived with settlers from the
old world. to think other wise would suggest that
over the years - 15th cent. and counting - generations
of south american luthiers developed a mania for the
placement of octaves, peculiar and unique to
themselves.
i don't want to stir up an old debate but the names of
these instruments could be the only new world thing
about them.
of the 105 instruments listed in the string
instruments section of the following site (excluding
mandolins, violins, harps, tiples, etc.) ...
http://pacoweb.net/Cuerdas/cuerdas.html
.. i found a variety of tunings with examples of
octave placement on every course. from the guitar
section alone (with 24 individually named instruments)
there are the following:
bajo sexto - 3 octave placements
requintada - 2 octave placements
iguana - 4 octave placements
jarana - 1 placement
and from the 46 types of charango listed there was one
"temple requintado" tuning with an octave placed on
all 5 courses!
loaded with options ... pluralism triumphant ...
- bill
--- Martyn Hodgson wrote:
>
>
> Martyn Hodgson wrote:
> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 12:07:37 + (GMT)
> From: Martyn Hodgson
> Subject: Query: Position of octaves on courses 4 & 5
> in late 18thC guitars
> To: Early Guitar NET
>
>
> As Monica (Hall) reports in her monograph on
> baroque guitar stringing (Lute Soc 2003), Corrette
> (1763) and Merchi (1761) indicate bourdons on the
> 4th and 5th courses. Monica was primarily concerned
> with the 'baroque' guitar and I presume this is why
> she didn't mention other late 18thC sources.
>
> My query is whether there is any evidence from
> the late 18thC for the low octave (ie the bourdon)
> being placed on the 'bass' side of the octave pair
> (ie plucked first by the thumb).
>
> Later sources not mentioned by Monica include:
>
> Baillon (1781) 5 course guitar - also tells us
> that there are high octaves on the 4th and 5th with
> the bourdons being overwound. His description of
> their position (at least based on my own, almost
> certainly less than perfect, translation) seems to
> say that the strings (the high octaves presumably?)
> which accompany the 4th and 5th are positioned
> AFTER the wound strings.('il faut observer que les
> cordes qui accompagnent la quatrieme et la Cinquieme
> doivent etre posees apres les cordes filees,').
> Since he counts courses down with the chanterelle
> being 1, presumably this implies the high octaves
> are towards the bass side of the instrument. He
> seems to confirm this by adding that they are struck
> by the thumb firstly (' il faut qu'elles soient les
> premieres du cote du poulce') - as for earlier
> 'baroque' guitars.
>
> Le Moine (c.1790?) 5 course guitar - gives us the
> tuning method for single strings but adds that to
> string a guitar with double courses requires a high
> octave on the 4th and 5th (but no position
> specified)
>
> Bailleux (1773) 5 course guitar - an engraved
> representation of a guitar shows double stringing on
> all courses except the first. However there's no
> mention of octave doubling and , indeed, his tuning
> instructions seem to imply both strings of course 4
> and 5 at the lower octave ('the 5ths are in unison
> with the thirds at the second fret' & ' the fourths
> are in unison with the seconds at the third fret' my
> translation)
>
> Merchi (1777) 5 course guitar - mentions that
> single strings are easier to put in tune and render
> the sound purer, loud etc.
>
> Ferandiere (1799) 6 course guitar - the guitar is
> generally double strung except for the first which
> is better single. Only the low 6th ('sextos) has a
> high octave and this is placed first (' el primero
> se llama sextillo, por sermas delgado que el otro, y
> debe estar una octave mas alta'). I can't quite be
> certain whether he means on the 'bass' side of the
> pair. However if it is so then, as far as I'm aware,
> this is the only 18th instruction which requires
> this placing of the octave string.
>
> For me, it's particularly interesting since this
> disposition of each string of an octave pair
> reflects how the Gallichon/Mandora was strung
> throughout the 18thC and may r
[VIHUELA] Re: Query: Position of octaves on courses 4 & 5 in late 18thC guitars
Martyn Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 12:07:37
+ (GMT)
From: Martyn Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Query: Position of octaves on courses 4 & 5 in late 18thC guitars
To: Early Guitar NET
As Monica (Hall) reports in her monograph on baroque guitar stringing (Lute
Soc 2003), Corrette (1763) and Merchi (1761) indicate bourdons on the 4th and
5th courses. Monica was primarily concerned with the 'baroque' guitar and I
presume this is why she didn't mention other late 18thC sources.
My query is whether there is any evidence from the late 18thC for the low
octave (ie the bourdon) being placed on the 'bass' side of the octave pair (ie
plucked first by the thumb).
Later sources not mentioned by Monica include:
Baillon (1781) 5 course guitar - also tells us that there are high octaves
on the 4th and 5th with the bourdons being overwound. His description of their
position (at least based on my own, almost certainly less than perfect,
translation) seems to say that the strings (the high octaves presumably?)
which accompany the 4th and 5th are positioned AFTER the wound strings.('il
faut observer que les cordes qui accompagnent la quatrieme et la Cinquieme
doivent etre posees apres les cordes filees,'). Since he counts courses down
with the chanterelle being 1, presumably this implies the high octaves are
towards the bass side of the instrument. He seems to confirm this by adding
that they are struck by the thumb firstly (' il faut qu'elles soient les
premieres du cote du poulce') - as for earlier 'baroque' guitars.
Le Moine (c.1790?) 5 course guitar - gives us the tuning method for single
strings but adds that to string a guitar with double courses requires a high
octave on the 4th and 5th (but no position specified)
Bailleux (1773) 5 course guitar - an engraved representation of a guitar
shows double stringing on all courses except the first. However there's no
mention of octave doubling and , indeed, his tuning instructions seem to imply
both strings of course 4 and 5 at the lower octave ('the 5ths are in unison
with the thirds at the second fret' & ' the fourths are in unison with the
seconds at the third fret' my translation)
Merchi (1777) 5 course guitar - mentions that single strings are easier to
put in tune and render the sound purer, loud etc.
Ferandiere (1799) 6 course guitar - the guitar is generally double strung
except for the first which is better single. Only the low 6th ('sextos) has a
high octave and this is placed first (' el primero se llama sextillo, por
sermas delgado que el otro, y debe estar una octave mas alta'). I can't quite
be certain whether he means on the 'bass' side of the pair. However if it is so
then, as far as I'm aware, this is the only 18th instruction which requires
this placing of the octave string.
For me, it's particularly interesting since this disposition of each string
of an octave pair reflects how the Gallichon/Mandora was strung throughout the
18thC and may represent yet another strand of cross fertilization between the
two families of instruments.
Grateful for any further evidence on this matter
rgds
MH
-
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo!
Security Centre.
-
Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail
--
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Doubts over the additional 'peghole'
Alexander, I understand your point precisely but, in my view the weight of evidence lies towards not regarding it as an original hole: in this case the maker went to pains to include the pegholes proper in the inlay design; I'm struggling to understand why he would be so cavalier with this other hole if it was hisoriginal work. I really have no firm view of what it's there for - that's not really the point is it. Other than your straps/nails all I can think of is that it is later work. rgds Martyn Alexander Batov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Martyn, I've explained this point already a few times, i.e. why the original _thinner_ peg wouldn't cut through the purfling but just be next to it, as well as why it is not surrounded by the ornamental pattern. Also it is not unusual for pegs to cut through stripes and purflings of peghead ornament on original guitars (there are plenty of examples of this). If you are really so sceptical about my way of reasoning as regards to the purpose of the central hole in the Dias why can't you propose an alternative, from your point of view right reason for its origin (no straps and nails in the wall please!). Alexander - Original Message - From: "Martyn Hodgson" To: "Vihuela Net" Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 8:41 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] Doubts over the additional 'peghole' > > Further to all this, I'm not at all persuaded that the extra 'peg hole' is > original: as mentioned in previous communications with Alexander, this > particular hole cuts through the inlaid decoration rather than being > incorporated into the overall pattern as with the pegholes proper. > > rgds MH - Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Doubts over the additional 'peghole'
Further to all this, I'm not at all persuaded that the extra 'peg hole' is original: as mentioned in previous communications with Alexander, this particular hole cuts through the inlaid decoration rather than being incorporated into the overall pattern as with the pegholes proper. rgds MH Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 14:09:37 - To: "Alexander Batov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: "vihuela" From: "Monica Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [LUTE] Re: *** SPAM *** Re: [VIHUELA] What is the historical vihuela? As far as the Quito instrument is concerned, few people have actually seen it, and as far as I am aware no one has actually been allowed to examine it thoroughly. Even the string length seems to be in some doubt. > For those who adhere to the Dias' attribution to a guitar, one's got to > reverse the above procedure, with only one major inconvenience of accepting > its "third eye" for a peg hole. It would certainly help if more > musicologists (who largely write about the vihuela) could get to grips with > organology. If you are referring to me - I have visited the R.C.M. and spent a lot of time looking at this particular instrument- in so far as one is able to without being able to handle it. It seems to me that there is no way in which you can prove that it was originally a 6-course instrument rather than a 5-course one. > In the time of Bermudo, the vihuela was, so to say, a consort family > instrument (as was its contemporary the lute in Italy) and so the > guitar was its smaller family member The problem with Bermudo (without going into too much detail) is that he seems to suggest that the "guitarra" is actually a different instrument from the vihuela, mentioning for example 5 & 6 course instruments as well as the 4-course one. There are separate chapters for it along with the bandurria and it is just possible, although like everything else to do with the vihuela/guitarra rather speculative, that he is referring to a mandola/mandora/vandola. > >> academic, technical term) into the baroque guitar. Fuenllana's > >> five-course > >> 'vihuela' (1554!) is tuned the same way as a 5c guitar. What was the > >> difference? > > > That's another good question - to which there is no answer! > > No need to repeat, see above. No need to see above - we simply don't know as he doesn't say anything more than that he has included some pieces for vihuela de cinco ordenes. Monica To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. --
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini/Corbetta - low basses
Monica, Thank you for this long reply - I am now feeling terribly guilty because I am very well aware of the historical literature, the various tunings proposed in modern times (Pinnell et al) and the state of the current debate. My aim in asking these questions of perhaps the leading authority on the instrument, is rather simply to push the envelope and see if there are any possibilities we might all be overlooking. I was, in fact, asking you the question, in relation to the 1648 Corbetta example I gave, of why you said both the 4th and 5th course strings were indisputedly at the upper octave. My reason for this is that I had previously held the view, like yours currently and based on the same evidence, that these early Corbetta books required the re-entrant tuning (ie both 4 and 5 course strings at the upper octave). However, Lex's indefatigable advocacy of low basses gave me food for thought and I searched for an example which might support his view; this was the example I found. By stating that the 4th and 5th course strings were both at the upper octave is simply begging the question. These are plucked chords which, if re-entrant, he could have got by other more common fingerings (eg the last chord in bar two by - 0 0 0 - ). That he didn't choose to do this was, I thought, interesting and might support Lex's position. Regarding the position of the lower string of an octave pair in later 17thC continuo play, like you and, I think, everybody else, I currently hold the view that it is towards the treble side of the instrument. I raised the matter by way of testing the thesis put forward by some that a 'proper' bass line should be discernable rather than just appropriate chords (irrespective of inversion). Placing the lower pitched note as on the lute (and the continuo Gallichon/Mandora for that matter) might enable a stronger lower pitched 'thorough' bass to be effected by striking the lower of the pair first. In short, IF low basses are employed, we all agree their disposition for solo music, however, is there any evidence of a different layout used for continuo? I know of none but, of course, with the dearth of historical information, this tells us little. regards Martyn PS By procrustean in this context I mean trying to make all the evidence fit a particular preconception. For those who don't know, Prokroustes was a fabulous robber who required his victims to be of his identical stature and fitted them to his bed by stretching (if short) and amputation (if long)! Definitely not what Monica does. Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Further to the below, grtfl if you cld respond to my earlier message on precisely this matter: I'm not always convinced by yr procrustean analysis. I hope I am not trying to enforce uniformity by violent methods - which is how my dictionary defines procrustean! It is difficult to explain some things without musical examples or better still a guitar (or three) in hand. The standard alfabeto chords are not treated as if they were in the inversions represented by the order of the notes as they are played on the guitar (except perhaps in exceptional circumstances). Amat for example says that each chord consists of a bass, mean and treble but however these are arranged or doubled, they are still the same chords - one can be substituted for another - for example when transposing. When analysing baroque guitar music, and in particular trying to create the correct bass line, they are usually treated as if they were all in root position. In this particular piece Chord P is an F minor chord. With an octave string on the 5th course it will be a 6-4 chord. The true bass note will be the F on the 4th course. (I think Lex might leave out the note on the 5th course, although I shouldn't speak for him.) But with completely re-entrant stringing it would be a 6-3 chord with A flat in the bass which would work just as well in the context. In the next bar the true bass note is really the G on the 3rd course. The notes on the 4th and 5th courses will sound an octave higher, whichever method of stringing is used. Octave strings will double them below the bass note. In the very last bar you have a more complicated situation. Without octave stringing, the notes on the 4th and 5th course will sound an octave higher. The chord will read from bass to treble B/D/G all resolving on to a single note C. With octave stringing you get different results. The point of this labyrinthine explanation is that no method of stringing really results in an uninterrupted bass line or entirely accurate voice leading in the counterpoint. As far as the method of stringing suitable for Corbetta's music is concerned - in his doctoral dissertation on Corbetta written in 1976, Richard Pinnell suggested that Corbetta used octave stringing on the 4th & 5th courses for his earlier books of 1639, 1643 and 1648, but switched to
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini/Corbetta - low basses
Monica, Grateful if you cld explain on what historic basis you restrict yourself to just including open courses when playing the triad: harmony of this period had become much richer with chords of the 7th and 9th and various inversions with added notes eg simultaneous 5 and 6 on, say, a Gm chord to give a chord G Bflat D E to cadence onto an A chord. On the guitar 1 (0) (0) 3 (0) [where (0) indicates open courses not marked in the tablature] cadencing onto (0) 2 2 2 (0). This is hardly a radical chord for the period (indeed was around in the early 17thC) and, certainly, I'd play it on the theorbo at an appropriate strong cadence on a Basso Bflat. Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But the open courses with Foscarini were serious, and I said it's certainly > on the edge. If you allow me, I have another example, that is a bit similar. > It's from La Guitarre Royalle (1671) on p. 94, last line bars 1-4. Should we > include the 1st course in all the chords?(e.g. second beat of bar 2?) No > dots around. What are the rules here? My working rule of thumb is that you include open course if they belong to the triad. I would include it for the standard chords which equal chord I in alfabeto, including the second chord of the 3rd bar which is a suspension, but the rest I would play as Corbetta has written it i.e. only the notes in the tablature. Monica To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail --
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini/Corbetta - low basses
Monica, Further to the below, grtfl if you cld respond to my earlier message on precisely this matter: I'm not always convinced by yr procrustean analysis. rgds Martyn Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Then Corbetta is to blame, he does that sort of thing all the time. Not Corbetta - You! Alfabeto chords do not have a functional bass note - or rather they are all in root position. This is simply an F minor chord. > > Indeed unsatisfactory. But where is the d from the fourth course going? No > proper part writing. With the re-entrant tuning the whole lot resolves on a single C sounding in the upper octave. Violinists have a nasty habit of resolving a whole lot of harmony onto a single note in the wrong register. It comes with the territory. We're talking about the battuto-pizzicato style, full > of inconsistencies. Wasn't it the supposed charm of the five course guitar > that we do not always get what we expect? That is exactly why you can't prove that one method of stringing rather than another is intended. You should bear in mind that with octave stringing the notes on the 4th course in bar 3, and the last 4 bars will sound and be heard clearly an octave higher - producing a completely different treble part from what you would imagine just looking at the tablature - or at Richard Pinnell's transcription. > Who is asking for a 'correct' bass line? I thought you didn't believe that > such a phenomenon is part of the style of the baroque guitar? I said it could be in the tenor register and doesn't have to be continuous. A kind of Ghost in the Machine. Or Deus ex machina. Monica To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail --
[VIHUELA] Re: proposed name change
I agree with Eugene (see blw), there are no lists as far as I can see on which one would find, say, a discussion of Scheidler's and Molitor's guitar sonates and their relation to the Gallichon?Mandora and from thence the impact of Guiliani in Vienna (it seems that the earlier composers were overwhelmed by what, amazingly enough to us now, was a new guitar style) An 'early guitar' list will probably not attract the 'mainstream' modern guitar players and allow us to develop areas of overlap. Why not give it a probationery period? Martyn "Eugene C. Braig IV" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 11:47:29 -0400 To: "Fossum, Arthur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu From: "Eugene C. Braig IV" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: proposed name change At 11:40 AM 9/6/2005, Fossum, Arthur wrote: >As far as lists for CG there are two yahoo lists, there is the cg-hist >list, the Eskimo list. All of these could cover 19th century performing >practice etc. All these could...but don't. I am on several guitar forums and serve as a moderator of one. I don't like flame wars and I do like guitars, 4-course to early six stringers and beyond. Posting questions specifically on gut-strung instruments at places like those you list, Arthur, almost never yields any meaningful responses whatsoever; they are flooded with kids who want to emulate the LAGQ, Russell, etc. I think the numbers of people who are interested in actually playing 19th-c. music on 19th-c. instruments are almost as rare as lutenists. It would be nice to have a corner somewhere/anywhere for them/us. Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail --
[VIHUELA] Re: proposed name change
'Early Guitar' please Wayne, otherwise we might find people reluctant to put anything on except baroque guitar. Martyn Wayne Cripps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi folks - There is currently a discussion on the lute list concerning Beethoven and Giuliani which really has nothing to do with lutes. I would like to move the discussion to this list, the VIHUELA list, but I would also like to change the name to something that would be more in keeping with the discussions on this list. EARLY-GUITAR is the best proposal so far. Since you folks are all charter members, I would like to put this before you. Do you think EARLY-GUITAR is appropriate, or would you rather limit it to maybe BAROQUE-GUITAR and let the early-romantic types find their own outlet? For my part, I am near to the limit of mail lists that I can manage. I have this fear that if I start an EARLY-GUITAR list that it will soon get many subscribers and take too much time and energy to manage. But I don't really know how many people are into EARLY-GUITAR compared to the mainstream of classical guitar. So I would like some help there. I am also concerned about whether early-guitar folk are more inclined to flame wars and that sort of behavior. Wayne Mail list manager To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. --
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini/Corbetta - low basses
I agree!, which is why I'm almost persuaded to use low basses on the 4th and 5th for pre-1671 Italian stuff Martyn Lex Eisenhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In the third bar it goes onto the 2nd course - it doesn't matter that there's no strict voice leading throughout. As said many emls earlier, the style is melody and flourishes with interspersed chords and odd accompanying notes when he best considers. It is, in my view, the real genius of Corbetta (and a few others) that he can do this so v well > When there's no strict voice leading and there are odd accompanying notes it is difficult to find arguments in the music itself for any tuning. L. - Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini/Corbetta - low basses
In the third bar it goes onto the 2nd course - it doesn't matter that there's no strict voice leading throughout. As said many emls earlier, the style is melody and flourishes with interspersed chords and odd accompanying notes when he best considers. It is, in my view, the real genius of Corbetta (and a few others) that he can do this so v well MH Lex Eisenhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: How about the context? If we would suppose the tuning with 2 bourdons, the P chord in the bar before would be 6-4, the bass connecting to the c in the 2nd bar of the line. That chord would be c minor (root) and the next G major in 6-3. The top melody is likely to be on the 4th c. How about the third bar? Is the top line on the 4th course or on the 2nd? If it is on the 2nd course, we would need (at least) one bourdon, to keep 'the other note' under. Or would that be irrelevant? L > > You are correct - but the notes on the 5th course are also supposed to sound in the upper octave. This is a simple 6-4/5-3 cadence on G on the 3rd course. > > Monica > > Yes - I did, of course, discount examples where the melody is clearly on the 5th course. > Naturally with these tunings and the style of play it's difficult to be certain but page 72 is 'normal' interval tuning and, as I mentioned earlier, the melody here is on the fourth course. > > M - How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos. Get Yahoo! Photos -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini/Corbetta - low basses
What makes you so sure that the notes (ie both strings) of the 5th course are 'also supposed to sound at the upper octave'; doesn't this rather beg the whole question? Like you, my overall position remains that re-entrant tuning was in general use but I'd also like to reserve judgement on much of this earlier 17th Italian stuff: a few passages (such as that on p 72) could be taken either way. Note that the chord is plucked not strummed and, if the 5th course was at unison at the upper octave, he could as well have placed the 5th course note on the 2nd thus allowing the graced melody to be the predominant line (hardly an unusual fingering - see similar 3 bars later). Of course, much of the the charm of the instrument is precisely such ambiguities. M Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You are correct - but the notes on the 5th course are also supposed to sound in the upper octave. This is a simple 6-4/5-3 cadence on G on the 3rd course. Monica Yes - I did, of course, discount examples where the melody is clearly on the 5th course. Naturally with these tunings and the style of play it's difficult to be certain but page 72 is 'normal' interval tuning and, as I mentioned earlier, the melody here is on the fourth course. M Monica Hall wrote: I don't know whether Lex is referring to the scordatura pieces (I can't spot any three part chords on the lower courses eslewhere - but I haven't got much time to look at present). But the notes which fall on the 5th course and which appear to belong to the bass part in all these passages actually belong to the treble part. This is fairly clear if you transcribe the music with careful attention to the voice leading. For example, the first two bars at the top of p.59 - all the notes on the 5th course should be in the upper octave. Otherwise you have this awkward leap downwards of a 9th and an awkward bass line. This is where Pinnell's method of trancscribing guitar music is very unhelpful. It gives completely the wrong impression because it encourages one to regard it as a bass string when really it is not. You should always consider the possibility that notes on the 5th course belong in the upper octave first. I haven't got time to respond to the rest of the message, which doesn't seem to be complete. Perhaps Lex would send it again. Monica - Original Message - From: Martyn Hodgson To: Lex Eisenhardt ; Vihuela Net Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2005 9:36 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini/Corbetta - low basses > Thank you for this summary of your views Lex. > > After reading it I went to Corbetta 1648 and, indeed, the style of writing (especially the use of chords on the three 'lowest' courses) does seem rather different to his post 1671 stuff. I had previously thought this was a just a stylistic (ie early Italian as against later French) trait but I can certainly see yr point about bourdons on the 4th and 5th in the earlier repertoire and am almost persuaded. > > Just for clarification: when recommending the re-entrant tuning doesn't Sanz (1674) remark that earlier guitarists (esp in Italy) used it? Presumably this from his earlier time in Rome where he met Colista, Corbetta, Granata and thus, one supposes, based his observation on a direct recollection of the practice at that time. How does his observation fit with your view of use of low basses pre-1671? > > regards > > Martym > > Lex Eisenhardt wrote: > > However, it > > may simply turn out that these "theorbo" books are have no bearing on the > > guitar. They were intended for amateurs who were ambitious - and perhaps > > wealthy - enough to invest in a leuto tiorbato. The guitar books were > not. > > How should we decide if secondary evidence is irrelevant or not? Bartolotti > and Grenerin wrote for both instruments. It's obvious that if they would > have taken great liberties with the rules on the theorbo we could expect the > same, or worse, in their guitar music. > > > > > I avoid to speak about Corbetta's exercises because I think that they > are > > a > > > complete mess. > > > >> > > This style of accompaniment is characteristic of the guitar. Even Matteis > > freely uses standard chords in most of his exercises - including ones > which > > will be 6-4s. > > What is 'characteristic of the guitar'? Different composers, different > styles. Grenerin or Sanz are different from Corbetta or Matteis. > > > > > > Your whole argument does (I have some reason to believe) rests on a > premise > > (which you haven't actually mentioned yet) - that many of the notes > clearly > > notated in the tablature are only there for decorative purposes and are
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini/Corbetta - low basses - posn of low octave string
Thank you Lex, Regarding posn of low octave on 4th and 5th courses: I do, of course, well understand that modern general practice is for low basses to be 'closest to the floor' (hence my continuation dots..), my reason in raising this matter with you was that if strict part writing in BC was expected on the 17thC gtr (as, I understand, is yr view - I'm not persauaded incidentally) then presumably the low octave wld be expected to predominate - in short struck first (ie furthest away from the floor). Any views on this? Martyn Lex Eisenhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I take yr points and, in particular, that Sanz was only recording his > recollection of Roman practice. Nevertheless, does it not > represent a compelling piece of contemporary (allbeit reported > some 20 yrs after his visit) evidence for re-entrant stringing > rather than octave low basses? It does. For 'aquellos Maestros'. Sanz also mentioned the other tuning, and even one without high octaves on the 4th an 5th courses. > The fundemental problem, it seems to me, is that because of the > peculiarity of the instrument, either solution sounds reasonably > acceptable. My doubts rest on different grounds. There are many books, also ones by Corbetta, of battuto-pizzicato music that include tuning charts. It is reasonal to take those as an instruction for the act of tuning. To some of those there is also a tuning check, that I consider to be in octaves, as a few (Foscarini and Pesori 1648) explicitly indicate. Imagine what would happen when a student tries to tune his guitar with re entrant stringing, starting from the 5th course, with a tuning chart like this. Another point is basso continuo, as was discussed on this list. To me it doesn't make much sense to realize an accompaniment with the bass line above the other voices. What the music from Corbetta 1639, 1643 and 1648 tells us is debatable. But I don't think the style can be characterized as 'treble dominated'. I found one spot that indicates that Corbetta used an octave b' on the second course (1643 p. 47 line 3, b 4). Within few years someone will prove that they used an octave e'' to the first course. > Incidentally, I presume that with low basses the lower string > of the octave pair would be struck first by the thumb It is supposed today that the low octave would be closest to the floor. Lex To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. --
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini/Corbetta - low basses
Thank you fr ths Lex, I take yr points and, in particular, that Sanz was only recording his recollection of Roman practice. Nevertheless, does it not represent a compelling piece of contemporary (allbeit reported some 20 yrs after his visit) evidence for re-entrant stringing rather than octave low basses? As I said earlier, I'm almost persuaded to yr view but mostly on internal evidence eg Corebetta 1648. The fundemental problem, it seems to me, is that because of the peculiarity of the instrument, either solution sounds reasonably acceptable. Incidentally, I presume that with low basses the lower string of the octave pair would be struck first by the thumb Martyn Lex Eisenhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Just for clarification: when recommending the re-entrant tuning doesn't Sanz (1674) remark that earlier guitarists (esp in Italy) used it? Presumably this from his earlier time in Rome where he met Colista, Corbetta, Granata and thus, one supposes, based his observation on a direct recollection of the practice at that time. How does his observation fit with your view of use of low basses pre-1671? I don't think we can say that he met Corbetta or Granata in Rome. Sanz thought very high of Corbetta and he may even have heared him somewhere. (Interesting thought) I think both the re-entrant tuning and the tuning with bourdons were in use in Italy. The re-entrant tuning was used by certain Maestros: '...en Roma aquellos Maestros solo encordan la guitarra con cuerdas delgadas, sin poner ningun bordon, ni en quarta , ni en quinta.' It's a pity that Sanz didn't tell anything about the rest of Italy. Sanz' book is published long after people like Bartolotti and Corbetta had left for France (and Britain). We should bear in mind that much of the guitar world in Italy was really amateuristic at the time. One of the Maestros he met was Lelio Colista. The few pieces that we have of him are not at all of the standard of the music of Foscarini, Bartolotti or Corbetta. I would not speak of just one practice, we are looking at almost a century of Italian guitar music, composed and played in a large country, devided in different states. L. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail --
[VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini/Corbetta - low basses
Yes - I did, of course, discount examples where the melody is clearly on the 5th course. Naturally with these tunings and the style of play it's difficult to be certain but page 72 is 'normal' interval tuning and, as I mentioned earlier, the melody here is on the fourth course. M Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't know whether Lex is referring to the scordatura pieces (I can't spot any three part chords on the lower courses eslewhere - but I haven't got much time to look at present). But the notes which fall on the 5th course and which appear to belong to the bass part in all these passages actually belong to the treble part. This is fairly clear if you transcribe the music with careful attention to the voice leading. For example, the first two bars at the top of p.59 - all the notes on the 5th course should be in the upper octave. Otherwise you have this awkward leap downwards of a 9th and an awkward bass line. This is where Pinnell's method of trancscribing guitar music is very unhelpful. It gives completely the wrong impression because it encourages one to regard it as a bass string when really it is not. You should always consider the possibility that notes on the 5th course belong in the upper octave first. I haven't got time to respond to the rest of the message, which doesn't seem to be complete. Perhaps Lex would send it again. Monica - Original Message - From: Martyn Hodgson To: Lex Eisenhardt ; Vihuela Net Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2005 9:36 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini/Corbetta - low basses > Thank you for this summary of your views Lex. > > After reading it I went to Corbetta 1648 and, indeed, the style of writing (especially the use of chords on the three 'lowest' courses) does seem rather different to his post 1671 stuff. I had previously thought this was a just a stylistic (ie early Italian as against later French) trait but I can certainly see yr point about bourdons on the 4th and 5th in the earlier repertoire and am almost persuaded. > > Just for clarification: when recommending the re-entrant tuning doesn't Sanz (1674) remark that earlier guitarists (esp in Italy) used it? Presumably this from his earlier time in Rome where he met Colista, Corbetta, Granata and thus, one supposes, based his observation on a direct recollection of the practice at that time. How does his observation fit with your view of use of low basses pre-1671? > > regards > > Martym > > Lex Eisenhardt wrote: > > However, it > > may simply turn out that these "theorbo" books are have no bearing on the > > guitar. They were intended for amateurs who were ambitious - and perhaps > > wealthy - enough to invest in a leuto tiorbato. The guitar books were > not. > > How should we decide if secondary evidence is irrelevant or not? Bartolotti > and Grenerin wrote for both instruments. It's obvious that if they would > have taken great liberties with the rules on the theorbo we could expect the > same, or worse, in their guitar music. > > > > > I avoid to speak about Corbetta's exercises because I think that they > are > > a > > > complete mess. > > > >> > > This style of accompaniment is characteristic of the guitar. Even Matteis > > freely uses standard chords in most of his exercises - including ones > which > > will be 6-4s. > > What is 'characteristic of the guitar'? Different composers, different > styles. Grenerin or Sanz are different from Corbetta or Matteis. > > > > > > Your whole argument does (I have some reason to believe) rests on a > premise > > (which you haven't actually mentioned yet) - that many of the notes > clearly > > notated in the tablature are only there for decorative purposes and are > > meant to be omitted. There is no physical evidence for this. > > As Richard Pinnell supposed in his thesis on Corbetta, there probably are > tablature letters in barred chords, only notated 'for convenience', to > indicate that a barre is needed. Pinnell's proposed solution is to leave out > one (or more) course(s) in the strum. A good example of the necessity to do > that is to be found in the first line of the Passacalle on p.56 from La > Guitarre Royalle (1671). There are many more of such examples in this book. > 'Decorative purposes' is not how I would describe this, it rather is a > fingering device that Corbetta had mixed in his tablatures, unjustly. It is > a misinterpretation of my words to say that 'my whole argument does rest' on > this premise. I don't have the impression that Bartolotti or Grenerin used > this type of notation. In fact it probably was used by Carbonchi (1640
