[VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande?
From: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande? To: WALSH STUART s.wa...@ntlworld.com Date: Wednesday, 7 November, 2012, 8:51 Dear Stuart, I'm not suggesting that these Losy guitar pieces were originally composed for mandora rather than guitar (or for Dm lute): merely suggesting it as a practical possibility - at least for some pieces. Regarding strummed chords and the like: I would expect any competant arranger to transcribe a piece in a way which is idiomatically suited to the particular instrument. See, for example, the pieces extant for lute and theorbo with De Visee named as composer (whether he himself actually played the lute) - the versions are arranged idiomatically for both instruments. Re the sarabande: I'm not quite sure the point you're making - sorry Stuart. Surely not that sarabandes weren't composed well into the 18th century (look at JS Bach for one). The very slow mannered dance (as found in some JSB's works) seems to have been increasingly developed from the early 18th century onwards but I would have expected Losy to still be writing in the earlier not so laboured style (tho' not as fast at Matt. Locke who tells us they are the fastest of all dances..). regards Martyn --- On Tue, 6/11/12, WALSH STUART s.wa...@ntlworld.com wrote: From: WALSH STUART s.wa...@ntlworld.com Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande? To: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk, Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Tuesday, 6 November, 2012, 20:18 But how do you think the Tombeau, Sarabande and Minuet would work on a mandora? There are a lot of strummed chords in the Sarabande. Very untypical for a mandora? And the stringing arrangement is probably a high fifth course and octave on fourth - quite different from low basses of a mandora. Isn't the Sarabande looking back to the 17th century, rather than to galant style? Stuart On 6 November 2012 15:18, Martyn Hodgson [1][1]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Yes, I have the Supraphon edition - not at all bad considering the date. Alas, some of the transcriptions are incorrect: see, for example, No 1 Allemande. This is also the first piece in MsKk 77 but you'll see that the flags in the first full bar are incorrectly transcribed in the Supraphon edition: instead of three quavers (down, up, down) the editors have them as a quaver (d) and two semi-quavers (u d). The rest of the piece is similarly incorrectly transcribed. This is the worst of all but there are a fair number of such scattered errors throughout the publication. The one I like the best is No 33 'Aria' which they transcribe as being in 5/4 time and over which I tried many different stresses to make it work effectively (shades of William Shield's predeliction for 5/4) but, alas, when I saw a copy of the original I saw the scribe marks it simply as a 3 time and, although some flags are missing and barring is often nonsensical, it plays as a triple time piece - what a shame - I rather liked the idea of a 5/4 guitar work in the early 18th century. The page before has a 'Menuet' which is similarly poorly barred in the original but as a menuet can be easily rebarred (interestingly the Supraphon editors exclude it altogether, perhaps for such bamng reasons - so No 32 isn't in the publication...). But hats off to Supraphon for publishing such a work at that date - so the 'communist' state at the time was not all bad.. You'll see the editors also made a list of sources and include another one for mandora with works by Losy: Brno, Mopravian Museum A 3329 The Losy rondeau I mentioned as being probably for mandora is on page 31 of the Supraphon edition. In Brno Ms D189 it has 'Rondeau / C Loeschi' which the editors thought, I think correctly, is Losy. This particular piece does, in fact, appear as a Dm lute piece (can't find it off-hand but I have it somewhere) as well as in D189 for a 6 string instrument in a known mandora tuning. We've discussed D189 before - it contains instructions how to tune the gallichon/mandora ( f. 3 'Calledono accord') and the guitar (f.48 ' Fundementa Chytarra') and, interestingly, on f.48v has 'Accordo Chytarra et
[VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande?
Dear Chris and Stuart, I've only ever seen a very few places in mandora/gallichon tablatures where a strummed chord might possibly be expected - but even here it is more likely that just a plucked full chord was played. As said in my earlier note to Stuart, I'd expect any competant arranger to transcribe pieces idiomatically, so the absence or presence of strums in a particular source really tells us very little. Also bear in mind that most solo mandora/gallichon music was composed after the 5 course guitar largely went out of fashion and that by the 1740s onwards the prevailing style was 'pre-classical' with clean lines, arpeggios, and the like. Also by the 1770/80s more sources indicate a 7, 8 or 9 course mandora (eg the interesting trembula, mandora and strings concertos by Beethoven's teacher Albrechtsberger) and this also makes cross string band strumming trickier and unlikely. Much m/g music is very light weight (to put it kindly) and the bass note often just hints at the underlying harmony rather than being contrapuntal (a bit like early 19th century guitar music by such as Carulli). I suspect rythmic strumming would have been found disagreeable (outside the Spanish empire!) by people 'of taste' in this period - until the very end of the century when the 6 course/string guitar entered the fray.. regards Martyn --- On Tue, 6/11/12, WALSH STUART s.wa...@ntlworld.com wrote: From: WALSH STUART s.wa...@ntlworld.com Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande? To: Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com Cc: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk, Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk, Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Tuesday, 6 November, 2012, 21:20 No, not to be confused with a tiny mandore. Of course it's possible to strum a mandora (big lute!) but I don't think it was ever typically played liked that. So the Sarabande, as it exists, wouldn't work as a typical piece for mandora. Or so, I think, but Martyn knows much more about mandoras and mandora music. Is this a reasonable generalisation?... Baroque guitar music often has full chords and sometimes very rich chords. But Baroque lute and mandora music is typically bass and treble parts with hints of harmonies here and there. Stuart On 6 November 2012 20:40, Chris Despopoulos [1]despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com wrote: Out of curiosity, how is a mandora to be played such that strumming would not work? (Not to be confused with a mandore, right?) cud __ From: WALSH STUART [2]s.wa...@ntlworld.com To: Martyn Hodgson [3]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: Monica Hall [4]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk; Vihuelalist [5]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2012 3:18 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande? But how do you think the Tombeau, Sarabande and Minuet would work on a mandora? There are a lot of strummed chords in the Sarabande. Very untypical for a mandora? And the stringing arrangement is probably a high fifth course and octave on fourth - quite different from low basses of a mandora. Isn't the Sarabande looking back to the 17th century, rather than to galant style? Stuart On 6 November 2012 15:18, Martyn Hodgson [1][6]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Yes, I have the Supraphon edition - not at all bad considering the date. Alas, some of the transcriptions are incorrect: see, for example, No 1 Allemande. This is also the first piece in MsKk 77 but you'll see that the flags in the first full bar are incorrectly transcribed in the Supraphon edition: instead of three quavers (down, up, down) the editors have them as a quaver (d) and two semi-quavers (u d). The rest of the piece is similarly incorrectly transcribed. This is the worst of all but there are a fair number of such scattered errors throughout the publication. The one I like the best is No 33 'Aria' which they transcribe as being in 5/4 time and over which I tried many different stresses to make it work effectively (shades of William Shield's predeliction for 5/4) but, alas, when I saw a copy of the original I saw the scribe marks it simply as a 3 time and, although some flags are missing and barring is often nonsensical, it plays as a triple time piece - what a shame - I rather liked the idea of a 5/4 guitar work in the early 18th century. The page before has a 'Menuet' which is similarly poorly barred in the original but as a menuet can be easily rebarred
[VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande?
Ah no! The interval of the third lies between the third and second course on bot mandora/gallichon and guitar. This is precisely why I suggested earlier a possible degree of overlap between some of the tablatures - as most clearly seen in Brno D189 (eg on f.48v has 'Accordo Chytarra et Mandora' ) indicating either instrument is possible. regards Martyn --- On Tue, 6/11/12, Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: From: Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande? To: WALSH STUART s.wa...@ntlworld.com Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Tuesday, 6 November, 2012, 22:16 I assume that the mandora is tuned like the lute with the 3rd between the 3rd and 4th courses rather than the 2nd and 3rd. This would make it more difficult to play all the standard guitar chords. They would all have to be re-fingered. Also at least some of the dissonance is perhaps more practical on the guitar than the mandora. Just a thought. Monica - Original Message - From: WALSH STUART [1]s.wa...@ntlworld.com To: Chris Despopoulos [2]despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com Cc: Martyn Hodgson [3]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk; Monica Hall [4]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk; Vihuelalist [5]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 9:20 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande? No, not to be confused with a tiny mandore. Of course it's possible to strum a mandora (big lute!) but I don't think it was ever typically played liked that. So the Sarabande, as it exists, wouldn't work as a typical piece for mandora. Or so, I think, but Martyn knows much more about mandoras and mandora music. Is this a reasonable generalisation?... Baroque guitar music often has full chords and sometimes very rich chords. But Baroque lute and mandora music is typically bass and treble parts with hints of harmonies here and there. Stuart On 6 November 2012 20:40, Chris Despopoulos [1][6]despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com wrote: Out of curiosity, how is a mandora to be played such that strumming would not work? (Not to be confused with a mandore, right?) cud __ From: WALSH STUART [2][7]s.wa...@ntlworld.com To: Martyn Hodgson [3][8]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: Monica Hall [4][9]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk; Vihuelalist [5][10]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2012 3:18 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande? But how do you think the Tombeau, Sarabande and Minuet would work on a mandora? There are a lot of strummed chords in the Sarabande. Very untypical for a mandora? And the stringing arrangement is probably a high fifth course and octave on fourth - quite different from low basses of a mandora. Isn't the Sarabande looking back to the 17th century, rather than to galant style? Stuart On 6 November 2012 15:18, Martyn Hodgson [1][6][11]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Yes, I have the Supraphon edition - not at all bad considering the date. Alas, some of the transcriptions are incorrect: see, for example, No 1 Allemande. This is also the first piece in MsKk 77 but you'll see that the flags in the first full bar are incorrectly transcribed in the Supraphon edition: instead of three quavers (down, up, down) the editors have them as a quaver (d) and two semi-quavers (u d). The rest of the piece is similarly incorrectly transcribed. This is the worst of all but there are a fair number of such scattered errors throughout the publication. The one I like the best is No 33 'Aria' which they transcribe as being in 5/4 time and over which I tried many different stresses to make it work effectively (shades of William Shield's predeliction for 5/4) but, alas, when I saw a copy of the original I saw the scribe marks it simply as a 3 time and, although some flags are missing and barring is often nonsensical, it plays as a triple time piece - what a shame - I rather liked the idea of a 5/4 guitar work in the early 18th century. The page before has a 'Menuet' which is similarly poorly barred in the original but as a menuet can be easily rebarred (interestingly the Supraphon editors exclude it altogether, perhaps for such bamng
[VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande?
Well - I hadn't thought about the mandora or indeed what kind of lute the
music might originally have been for.
In fact there is a rather better edition of all of Losy's guitar music
originally edited by Jan Racek, revised by Jaroslav Pohanka and published by
Supraphon in 1979 in the series Musica Antiqua Bohemica.
It includes both the Tombeau and the Sarabande. They seem to me to be very
idiomatically conceived for the guitar. The chord shapes are typical
alfabeto.
Monica
- Original Message -
From: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
To: Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 9:18 AM
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande?
When you say 'arrangements of lute music' do you include mandora as a
lute or have you just the 11 course Dm instrument in mind (as most
people still do)? One of Losy's guitar pieces (rondeau in Brno
D189) is extant in a mandora tablature (usually mistaken for guitar
tablature!). Maybe this tombeau was conceived for mandora..
The Karl Scheidt publication was, I recall, aimed at beginners,
and contains mostly facile Losy works - some from the first Ms in the
Lobkowicz Ms volume (OLIM Prague II Ms Kk 77) in which Losy is
identified as the composer (' Pieces Composee/ Par le Comte/Losy'). It
also contains slightly more challenging works - tho' not as much so as
the second volume in the binding which looks to me to be in a different
hand and different (later?) style and shouldn't be linked to Losy.
M.
--- On Tue, 6/11/12, Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk wrote:
From: Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande?
To: WALSH STUART s.wa...@ntlworld.com
Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Date: Tuesday, 6 November, 2012, 8:56
I found it now. It is not actually attributed to Losi, Losi seems
to be
a bit of a mystery. These pieces are supposed to be arrangements of
lute
music but none of the pieces survive in versions for the lute.
Anyway - it is really nice to have a chance to hear you play it - not
easy.
I shall have a go myself later.
Monica
- Original Message -
From: WALSH STUART [1]s.wa...@ntlworld.com
To: vl [2]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 10:14 PM
Subject: [VIHUELA] Losy (Logi) sarabande?
I've also sent this to the Baroque lute list. It's an attempt at a
very
striking sarabande, possibly by J.A. Losy, but sounding nothing
like
the more familiar guitar pieces.
I incautiously included the music - to show what it looks like,
and, of
course, showing errors to boot. A fine piece though.
[1][3]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws44iAjdTco
Stuart
--
References
1. [4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws44iAjdTco
To get on or off this list see list information at
[5]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=s.wa...@ntlworld.com
2. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws44iAjdTco
4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws44iAjdTco
5. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande?
Yes, I have the Supraphon edition - not at all bad considering the date. Alas, some of the transcriptions are incorrect: see, for example, No 1 Allemande. This is also the first piece in MsKk 77 but you'll see that the flags in the first full bar are incorrectly transcribed in the Supraphon edition: instead of three quavers (down, up, down) the editors have them as a quaver (d) and two semi-quavers (u d). The rest of the piece is similarly incorrectly transcribed. This is the worst of all but there are a fair number of such scattered errors throughout the publication. The one I like the best is No 33 'Aria' which they transcribe as being in 5/4 time and over which I tried many different stresses to make it work effectively (shades of William Shield's predeliction for 5/4) but, alas, when I saw a copy of the original I saw the scribe marks it simply as a 3 time and, although some flags are missing and barring is often nonsensical, it plays as a triple time piece - what a shame - I rather liked the idea of a 5/4 guitar work in the early 18th century. The page before has a 'Menuet' which is similarly poorly barred in the original but as a menuet can be easily rebarred (interestingly the Supraphon editors exclude it altogether, perhaps for such bamng reasons - so No 32 isn't in the publication...). But hats off to Supraphon for publishing such a work at that date - so the 'communist' state at the time was not all bad.. You'll see the editors also made a list of sources and include another one for mandora with works by Losy: Brno, Mopravian Museum A 3329 The Losy rondeau I mentioned as being probably for mandora is on page 31 of the Supraphon edition. In Brno Ms D189 it has 'Rondeau / C Loeschi' which the editors thought, I think correctly, is Losy. This particular piece does, in fact, appear as a Dm lute piece (can't find it off-hand but I have it somewhere) as well as in D189 for a 6 string instrument in a known mandora tuning. We've discussed D189 before - it contains instructions how to tune the gallichon/mandora ( f. 3 'Calledono accord') and the guitar (f.48 ' Fundementa Chytarra') and, interestingly, on f.48v has 'Accordo Chytarra et Mandora indicating either instrument is possible. And from f. 48v it has pieces for an instrument with six courses in a known mandora tuning with the sixth course just a tone below the fifth - presumably a guitarist would simply play the open third course. On 51v is our rondeau showing quite clearly 6 courses - and in this piece putting the sixth course up an octave would spoil the melodic effect (see last system bars 3 through to 6). Odd that the editors make no mention of a sixth course being required. The piece also fits very easily on the mandora so perhaps, as suggested earlier, it was conceived for the mandora by Losy rather than guitar or Dm lute. And so, in an indirect way, perhaps Losy was able to play the guitar - but in mandora form. I also find Deisel works better on the mandora than guitar ( to do with having low basses and on the outside) as also discussed before. rgds Martyn --- On Tue, 6/11/12, Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: From: Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande? To: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Tuesday, 6 November, 2012, 13:19 Well - I hadn't thought about the mandora or indeed what kind of lute the music might originally have been for. In fact there is a rather better edition of all of Losy's guitar music originally edited by Jan Racek, revised by Jaroslav Pohanka and published by Supraphon in 1979 in the series Musica Antiqua Bohemica. It includes both the Tombeau and the Sarabande. They seem to me to be very idiomatically conceived for the guitar. The chord shapes are typical alfabeto. Monica - Original Message - From: Martyn Hodgson [1]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk To: Monica Hall [2]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk Cc: Vihuelalist [3]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 9:18 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande? When you say 'arrangements of lute music' do you include mandora as a lute or have you just the 11 course Dm instrument in mind (as most people still do)? One of Losy's guitar pieces (rondeau in Brno D189) is extant in a mandora tablature (usually mistaken for guitar tablature!). Maybe this tombeau was conceived for mandora.. The Karl Scheidt publication was, I recall, aimed at beginners, and contains mostly facile Losy works - some from the first Ms in the Lobkowicz Ms volume (OLIM Prague II Ms Kk 77) in which Losy is identified as the composer
[VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande?
That's very helpful and interesting. I just borrowed it from the library for various reaons but haven't had a lot of time to look at it. The problem with so many of these early ediitions or even later ones is that you can't be sure they are reliable. Only the original is reliable - sort of! Regards Monica
[VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande?
Out of curiosity, how is a mandora to be played such that strumming would not work? (Not to be confused with a mandore, right?) cud __ From: WALSH STUART s.wa...@ntlworld.com To: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk; Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2012 3:18 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande? But how do you think the Tombeau, Sarabande and Minuet would work on a mandora? There are a lot of strummed chords in the Sarabande. Very untypical for a mandora? And the stringing arrangement is probably a high fifth course and octave on fourth - quite different from low basses of a mandora. Isn't the Sarabande looking back to the 17th century, rather than to galant style? Stuart On 6 November 2012 15:18, Martyn Hodgson [1][1]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Yes, I have the Supraphon edition - not at all bad considering the date. Alas, some of the transcriptions are incorrect: see, for example, No 1 Allemande. This is also the first piece in MsKk 77 but you'll see that the flags in the first full bar are incorrectly transcribed in the Supraphon edition: instead of three quavers (down, up, down) the editors have them as a quaver (d) and two semi-quavers (u d). The rest of the piece is similarly incorrectly transcribed. This is the worst of all but there are a fair number of such scattered errors throughout the publication. The one I like the best is No 33 'Aria' which they transcribe as being in 5/4 time and over which I tried many different stresses to make it work effectively (shades of William Shield's predeliction for 5/4) but, alas, when I saw a copy of the original I saw the scribe marks it simply as a 3 time and, although some flags are missing and barring is often nonsensical, it plays as a triple time piece - what a shame - I rather liked the idea of a 5/4 guitar work in the early 18th century. The page before has a 'Menuet' which is similarly poorly barred in the original but as a menuet can be easily rebarred (interestingly the Supraphon editors exclude it altogether, perhaps for such bamng reasons - so No 32 isn't in the publication...). But hats off to Supraphon for publishing such a work at that date - so the 'communist' state at the time was not all bad.. You'll see the editors also made a list of sources and include another one for mandora with works by Losy: Brno, Mopravian Museum A 3329 The Losy rondeau I mentioned as being probably for mandora is on page 31 of the Supraphon edition. In Brno Ms D189 it has 'Rondeau / C Loeschi' which the editors thought, I think correctly, is Losy. This particular piece does, in fact, appear as a Dm lute piece (can't find it off-hand but I have it somewhere) as well as in D189 for a 6 string instrument in a known mandora tuning. We've discussed D189 before - it contains instructions how to tune the gallichon/mandora ( f. 3 'Calledono accord') and the guitar (f.48 ' Fundementa Chytarra') and, interestingly, on f.48v has 'Accordo Chytarra et Mandora indicating either instrument is possible. And from f. 48v it has pieces for an instrument with six courses in a known mandora tuning with the sixth course just a tone below the fifth - presumably a guitarist would simply play the open third course. On 51v is our rondeau showing quite clearly 6 courses - and in this piece putting the sixth course up an octave would spoil the melodic effect (see last system bars 3 through to 6). Odd that the editors make no mention of a sixth course being required. The piece also fits very easily on the mandora so perhaps, as suggested earlier, it was conceived for the mandora by Losy rather than guitar or Dm lute. And so, in an indirect way, perhaps Losy was able to play the guitar - but in mandora form. I also find Deisel works better on the mandora than guitar ( to do with having low basses and on the outside) as also discussed before. rgds Martyn --- On Tue, 6/11/12, Monica Hall [2][2]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
[VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande?
No, not to be confused with a tiny mandore. Of course it's possible to strum a mandora (big lute!) but I don't think it was ever typically played liked that. So the Sarabande, as it exists, wouldn't work as a typical piece for mandora. Or so, I think, but Martyn knows much more about mandoras and mandora music. Is this a reasonable generalisation?... Baroque guitar music often has full chords and sometimes very rich chords. But Baroque lute and mandora music is typically bass and treble parts with hints of harmonies here and there. Stuart On 6 November 2012 20:40, Chris Despopoulos [1]despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com wrote: Out of curiosity, how is a mandora to be played such that strumming would not work? (Not to be confused with a mandore, right?) cud __ From: WALSH STUART [2]s.wa...@ntlworld.com To: Martyn Hodgson [3]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: Monica Hall [4]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk; Vihuelalist [5]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2012 3:18 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande? But how do you think the Tombeau, Sarabande and Minuet would work on a mandora? There are a lot of strummed chords in the Sarabande. Very untypical for a mandora? And the stringing arrangement is probably a high fifth course and octave on fourth - quite different from low basses of a mandora. Isn't the Sarabande looking back to the 17th century, rather than to galant style? Stuart On 6 November 2012 15:18, Martyn Hodgson [1][6]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Yes, I have the Supraphon edition - not at all bad considering the date. Alas, some of the transcriptions are incorrect: see, for example, No 1 Allemande. This is also the first piece in MsKk 77 but you'll see that the flags in the first full bar are incorrectly transcribed in the Supraphon edition: instead of three quavers (down, up, down) the editors have them as a quaver (d) and two semi-quavers (u d). The rest of the piece is similarly incorrectly transcribed. This is the worst of all but there are a fair number of such scattered errors throughout the publication. The one I like the best is No 33 'Aria' which they transcribe as being in 5/4 time and over which I tried many different stresses to make it work effectively (shades of William Shield's predeliction for 5/4) but, alas, when I saw a copy of the original I saw the scribe marks it simply as a 3 time and, although some flags are missing and barring is often nonsensical, it plays as a triple time piece - what a shame - I rather liked the idea of a 5/4 guitar work in the early 18th century. The page before has a 'Menuet' which is similarly poorly barred in the original but as a menuet can be easily rebarred (interestingly the Supraphon editors exclude it altogether, perhaps for such bamng reasons - so No 32 isn't in the publication...). But hats off to Supraphon for publishing such a work at that date - so the 'communist' state at the time was not all bad.. You'll see the editors also made a list of sources and include another one for mandora with works by Losy: Brno, Mopravian Museum A 3329 The Losy rondeau I mentioned as being probably for mandora is on page 31 of the Supraphon edition. In Brno Ms D189 it has 'Rondeau / C Loeschi' which the editors thought, I think correctly, is Losy. This particular piece does, in fact, appear as a Dm lute piece (can't find it off-hand but I have it somewhere) as well as in D189 for a 6 string instrument in a known mandora tuning. We've discussed D189 before - it contains instructions how to tune the gallichon/mandora ( f. 3 'Calledono accord') and the guitar (f.48 ' Fundementa Chytarra') and, interestingly, on f.48v has 'Accordo Chytarra et Mandora indicating either instrument is possible. And from f. 48v it has pieces for an instrument with six courses in a known mandora tuning with the sixth course just a tone below the fifth - presumably a guitarist would simply play the open third course. On 51v is our rondeau showing quite clearly 6 courses - and in this piece putting the sixth course up an octave would spoil the melodic effect (see last system bars 3 through to 6
[VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande?
I assume that the mandora is tuned like the lute with the 3rd between the 3rd and 4th courses rather than the 2nd and 3rd. This would make it more difficult to play all the standard guitar chords. They would all have to be re-fingered. Also at least some of the dissonance is perhaps more practical on the guitar than the mandora. Just a thought. Monica - Original Message - From: WALSH STUART s.wa...@ntlworld.com To: Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com Cc: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk; Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk; Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 9:20 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande? No, not to be confused with a tiny mandore. Of course it's possible to strum a mandora (big lute!) but I don't think it was ever typically played liked that. So the Sarabande, as it exists, wouldn't work as a typical piece for mandora. Or so, I think, but Martyn knows much more about mandoras and mandora music. Is this a reasonable generalisation?... Baroque guitar music often has full chords and sometimes very rich chords. But Baroque lute and mandora music is typically bass and treble parts with hints of harmonies here and there. Stuart On 6 November 2012 20:40, Chris Despopoulos [1]despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com wrote: Out of curiosity, how is a mandora to be played such that strumming would not work? (Not to be confused with a mandore, right?) cud __ From: WALSH STUART [2]s.wa...@ntlworld.com To: Martyn Hodgson [3]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: Monica Hall [4]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk; Vihuelalist [5]vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2012 3:18 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande? But how do you think the Tombeau, Sarabande and Minuet would work on a mandora? There are a lot of strummed chords in the Sarabande. Very untypical for a mandora? And the stringing arrangement is probably a high fifth course and octave on fourth - quite different from low basses of a mandora. Isn't the Sarabande looking back to the 17th century, rather than to galant style? Stuart On 6 November 2012 15:18, Martyn Hodgson [1][6]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Yes, I have the Supraphon edition - not at all bad considering the date. Alas, some of the transcriptions are incorrect: see, for example, No 1 Allemande. This is also the first piece in MsKk 77 but you'll see that the flags in the first full bar are incorrectly transcribed in the Supraphon edition: instead of three quavers (down, up, down) the editors have them as a quaver (d) and two semi-quavers (u d). The rest of the piece is similarly incorrectly transcribed. This is the worst of all but there are a fair number of such scattered errors throughout the publication. The one I like the best is No 33 'Aria' which they transcribe as being in 5/4 time and over which I tried many different stresses to make it work effectively (shades of William Shield's predeliction for 5/4) but, alas, when I saw a copy of the original I saw the scribe marks it simply as a 3 time and, although some flags are missing and barring is often nonsensical, it plays as a triple time piece - what a shame - I rather liked the idea of a 5/4 guitar work in the early 18th century. The page before has a 'Menuet' which is similarly poorly barred in the original but as a menuet can be easily rebarred (interestingly the Supraphon editors exclude it altogether, perhaps for such bamng reasons - so No 32 isn't in the publication...). But hats off to Supraphon for publishing such a work at that date - so the 'communist' state at the time was not all bad.. You'll see the editors also made a list of sources and include another one for mandora with works by Losy: Brno, Mopravian Museum A 3329 The Losy rondeau I mentioned as being probably for mandora is on page 31 of the Supraphon edition. In Brno Ms D189 it has 'Rondeau / C Loeschi' which the editors thought, I think correctly, is Losy. This particular piece does, in fact, appear as a Dm lute piece (can't find it off-hand but I have it somewhere) as well as in D189 for a 6 string instrument in a known mandora tuning. We've discussed D189 before - it contains instructions how to tune the gallichon/mandora ( f. 3 'Calledono accord') and the guitar (f.48 ' Fundementa Chytarra') and, interestingly, on f
[VIHUELA] Re: Losy (Logi) sarabande?
How interesting! Thanks for your continued contributions. -- R On Nov 5, 2012, at 4:14 PM, WALSH STUART wrote: I've also sent this to the Baroque lute list. It's an attempt at a very striking sarabande, possibly by J.A. Losy, but sounding nothing like the more familiar guitar pieces. I incautiously included the music - to show what it looks like, and, of course, showing errors to boot. A fine piece though. [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws44iAjdTco Stuart -- References 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws44iAjdTco To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
