Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
>Am Donnerstag, 3. M§rz 2005 17:58 schrieb David Cameron: >> I probably don't fully understand the problem, but it seems to me that >> smaller note symbols to indicate the pitch of the octave strings would do >> much of what is required. >> >.. which would help but the problem of voice leadings which are only >understandable if you consider the double function of the octave-strung >strings (???) will remain the same. Surely the little notes help. For example, if you have e(1) Dd(4) c(2) , the little d is right there between the other two melodic notes and can hardly be missed. Whereas it might be missed with bourdons-only notation or even in tablature. -- Ed Durbrow Saitama, Japan http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
Regarding my last posting: It's David Grimes' books I was praising, not David Russell's. :) James -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
In a message dated 3/3/2005 8:03:00 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: How do we feel about the methods of modern-notation transcription employed by, for example, Strizich, Pinnell, Russell, Pennington (I realize these are all Americans - sorry!). And just to clarify, I'm interested in a style of standard notation transcription that can be readily understood by a) non-guitarists b) modern guitarists (in so far as the transcription indicates how the original was played, as well as how it sounds). Plus indeterminate tuning/stringing issue. Surely there is a better solution than simply writing everything as if played on bordons with the disclaimer about where anything below a written G might actually sound. Hi Stanley, My idea of a notation system for the baroque guitarist is pretty much what Pennnington (or Pinnel?) does in his transcription of DeMurcia. I don't have a problem with leaving the stringing and pitch issue up to each guitarist, but that's just me... I find Strizich's book of DeVisee useful, but not easy to sight read. I haven't seen Craig Russell's book of DeMurcia lately so I can't remember how he treats the stringing problem in notation. I work with Craig at Cal Poly; I'll ask him what he thinks about this issue now. I think David Russell's books with Mel Bay (they may be out of print) of baroque guitar and lute works transcribed for the classical guitar are very well done. I think if you combined what he did for the modern guitarist and included a legible tablature (separate folio?) for the baroque guitarist into the same book, that would be a winner; I'd buy it. :) Something similar to McFarlane's books of Scottish lute music. Sincerely, James -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
RE: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
Stanley, I await your examples, which may well show me I am way off base. But I had in mind that the small note symbols would be used sparingly, in accordance with what seems to me to be a rather obvious convention: a) Show only bourdon note.Indicates both strings of the course plucked, and the octave is not essential, that is, the octave rides along only to add overtones to the bourdon note for a brighter sound. Aside from works with campanella, this would probably apply to the majority of notes on the lower courses. b)Show bourdon note and small note symbol for octave. Both strings plucked, and the octave note is essential to the music. c)Show small note only. Obviously, only octave is plucked. d)Show bourdon and small note X'ed out.Obviously, only bourdon is plucked. David Cameron >David, > >What you say is true. But the mess it creates is can be a problem. I'll post few examples this weekend. > >Stanley > >Dr. Stanley Yates >Professor of Music >Austin Peay State University >Department of Music >PO Box 4625 >Clarksville TN 37043 >(001) 931 221-7351 >(001) 931 221-7529 (fax) > >> -- >> From:David Cameron >> Sent:Thursday, March 3, 2005 10:58 AM >> To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu >> Subject: Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit. >> >> StanleyYates wrote: >> >> "Surely there is a better solution than simply writing everything as if >> played on bordons with the disclaimer about where anything below a written G >> might actually sound..." >> >> I probably don't fully understand the problem, but it seems to me that >> smaller note symbols to indicate the pitch of the octave strings would do >> much of what is required. >> >> David Cameron >> >> >> >> >> >> To get on or off this list see list information at >> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >> >> > > >
RE: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
David, What you say is true. But the mess it creates is can be a problem. I'll post few examples this weekend. Stanley Dr. Stanley Yates Professor of Music Austin Peay State University Department of Music PO Box 4625 Clarksville TN 37043 (001) 931 221-7351 (001) 931 221-7529 (fax) > -- > From: David Cameron > Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2005 10:58 AM > To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu > Subject: Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit. > > StanleyYates wrote: > > "Surely there is a better solution than simply writing everything as if > played on bordons with the disclaimer about where anything below a written G > might actually sound..." > > I probably don't fully understand the problem, but it seems to me that > smaller note symbols to indicate the pitch of the octave strings would do > much of what is required. > > David Cameron > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > >
RE: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
Hello Thomas, "Grand staff' is the correct term, though I do feel that this type of scholarly transcritpion can easily (and often does) "overstate" the case - I don't think that much five-course polyphony is up to such a rigorous notation. Still, you're probably right in the sense that this is probably the kind of notation a non-guitarist scholar would be most comfortable with. Still, how does one clarify the "lower" voice in case of indeterminate tuning? Ideally, mulitple staffs could, between them, convey the whole thing. But in practical terms... Stanley Yates www.StanleyYates.com > -- > From: Thomas Schall > Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2005 10:44 AM > To: Yates, Stanley > Subject: Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit. > > Am Donnerstag, 3. März 2005 17:00 schrieben Sie: > > to clarify, I'm interested in a style of standard notation transcription > > that can be readily understood by a) non-guitarists > which would be a sort of piano-notation (I don't know the correct term, > sorry!) > > b) modern guitarists > which would be the usual guitar notation in a single system one octave below > the sound. > > (in so far as the transcription indicates how the original was played, > which would be with extensive fingering > > as > > well as how it sounds). Plus indeterminate tuning/stringing issue. > which again would suggest a piano-like notation where double strings could be > handled as seperate notes when necessary. > > I would suggest a way of notation similar to that many lute editions were > made. A grand staff (is this the term?) (with tuning and other things as > "accord" and - for the purpose of clearity - cmplete fingerings) and parallel > a practical notation in tabulature or the usual guitar notation. > > Is this off the path? > > Best wishes > Thomas > -- > Thomas Schall > Niederhofheimer Weg 3 > D-65843 Sulzbach > 06196/74519 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
Am Donnerstag, 3. März 2005 17:58 schrieb David Cameron: > I probably don't fully understand the problem, but it seems to me that > smaller note symbols to indicate the pitch of the octave strings would do > much of what is required. > .. which would help but the problem of voice leadings which are only understandable if you consider the double function of the octave-strung strings (???) will remain the same. From a "piano point of view" it won't be logical to compose pieces in such a way and musicologists are trained to read and understand grand staff (BTW I think this is one reason why the music for plucked instruments was - and partly is - regarded inferior to contemporary pieces for keyboard - one won't even get an idea of the often ingenious compositions if looking at them in what musicologists may call "absolute" point of view. Actually I think this point of view is based on a romantic ideal and doesn't apply to pre-romantic music). Best wishes Thomas -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
StanleyYates wrote: "Surely there is a better solution than simply writing everything as if played on bordons with the disclaimer about where anything below a written G might actually sound..." I probably don't fully understand the problem, but it seems to me that smaller note symbols to indicate the pitch of the octave strings would do much of what is required. David Cameron To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
Hi Thomas, Thanks for your input. I think we agree on all points, but perhaps I could re-word my original question. How do we feel about the methods of modern-notation transcription employed by, for example, Strizich, Pinnell, Russell, Pennington (I realize these are all Americans - sorry!). And just to clarify, I'm interested in a style of standard notation transcription that can be readily understood by a) non-guitarists b) modern guitarists (in so far as the transcription indicates how the original was played, as well as how it sounds). Plus indeterminate tuning/stringing issue. Surely there is a better solution than simply writing everything as if played on bordons with the disclaimer about where anything below a written G might actually sound. Thanks, Stanley www.StanleyYates.com - Original Message - From: "Thomas Schall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "VihuelaList" Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 6:11 AM Subject: Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit. Hi Stanley and all, Although surely well meant, the earlier editions by Karl Scheidt and Hans Teuchert now seem inacceptable. I do well remember the answer when I asked why he omited the rasguados: "They didn't do such things then". Also I only know one nearly good edition of Sanz (from Rafael Balaguer) and one really good by Wolf Moser. These are of course personal opinions which surely are not shared by everybody. A serie of historical informed editions would be most welcome but there are problems with the conversion of tabulature to standard notation. Just to name one: the role of improvisation inherent in baroque music. Ornaments and rasguados could mean very different execution and often one sign could have different meanings. The modern notation would fix one way of execution, aren't it? Another problem would be voice leading which, as already mentioned, could sound completly unnatural and unlogical on a modern instrument while it's well plausible on the instrument the music was intended for. How should an editor solve such a problem? Changing the voices would change the given text (and would be an interpretation) but leaving the text as it is would probably lead to unsatisfying results. The more I think about it the more I am convinced we have different instruments (different even more like the grand piano to the harpsichord) and rather should avoid transporting music of one to another. It rather should be goal to inform modern players about the historical context and execution on a baroque guitar which could help players of modern instruments using the original notation. I am convinced the sound of an inspired performance or demonstration on a baroque guitar is better publicity for the music than presenting editions which cannot show the complete richness of the baroque music. Just a thought ... Best wishes Thomas To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
Hi Stanley and all, Although surely well meant, the earlier editions by Karl Scheidt and Hans Teuchert now seem inacceptable. I do well remember the answer when I asked why he omited the rasguados: "They didn't do such things then". Also I only know one nearly good edition of Sanz (from Rafael Balaguer) and one really good by Wolf Moser. These are of course personal opinions which surely are not shared by everybody. A serie of historical informed editions would be most welcome but there are problems with the conversion of tabulature to standard notation. Just to name one: the role of improvisation inherent in baroque music. Ornaments and rasguados could mean very different execution and often one sign could have different meanings. The modern notation would fix one way of execution, aren't it? Another problem would be voice leading which, as already mentioned, could sound completly unnatural and unlogical on a modern instrument while it's well plausible on the instrument the music was intended for. How should an editor solve such a problem? Changing the voices would change the given text (and would be an interpretation) but leaving the text as it is would probably lead to unsatisfying results. The more I think about it the more I am convinced we have different instruments (different even more like the grand piano to the harpsichord) and rather should avoid transporting music of one to another. It rather should be goal to inform modern players about the historical context and execution on a baroque guitar which could help players of modern instruments using the original notation. I am convinced the sound of an inspired performance or demonstration on a baroque guitar is better publicity for the music than presenting editions which cannot show the complete richness of the baroque music. Just a thought ... Best wishes Thomas Am Mittwoch, 2. März 2005 22:22 schrieb Yates, Stanley: > Rob, > > I wouldn't be thinking of a performance transcription for modern guitar. > Like you, I don't think most of this music works very well at on a modern > guitar (although a thin stringing, alla Strizich, isn't a bad compromise). > My thoughts are more along the lines of the usefulness of an edition in > terms of the propagation and appreciation of the music. If a modern > guitarist is to take the trouble to explore the 5-course instrument I think > they would perhaps be most likely to do so through having gotten a decent > sense of the music through trying it on their modern instruments first. Re. > alfabeto, again I agree with you that this requires an appropriate > instrument to sound good, though battente performance practice issues are > the same no matter what type of notation one is playing from (or, for that > matter, what instrument one is playing). > > I'll try and put some examples up when I get a few minutes. > > Stanley > > Stanley Yates > www.StanleyYates.com > > > -- > > From: Rob MacKillop > > Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2005 1:55 AM > > To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu > > Subject:RE: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit. > > > > Stanley, > > > > I can see the attraction of, say, a Mel Bay edition (Stanley Yates > > Series, of course!) of important works such as the Bartolotti - setting > > aside my reservations about playing this stuff on a modern classical > > guitar (better on a 12-string guitar...). So I'll try to clarify my > > thoughts. > > > > We agree that different sets of people require different things. I don't > > think parallel staves of tab and notation will help much - not only, as > > you say, would it double the size of the volume, but most guitarists > > don't read French or Italian tablature. For the majority of players it > > would just get in the way. I think you would have to wear a rather > > prominent Editor's hat, make some decisions (detailed in a scholarly > > intro - the kind you are so good at) and make one workable solution. I > > don't think you can please all the people all the time. Maybe have the > > facsimiles in reduced print in an appendix? > > > > Can you upload an example page of your small noteheads idea, for > > comments? > > > > Regarding alfabeto: it is OK if you give guitarists an interpretative > > guide, encouraging them to experiment with different strumming patterns. > > I fear most will just play exactly what you transcribe, and the essence > > of a certain degree of improv will be lost. Sorry, Stanley, I am > > struggling here because I just can't 'hear' this stuff on a modern > > classical guitar. Prove me wrong! ;-) > > > > Rob > > > > > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
Rob, I wouldn't be thinking of a performance transcription for modern guitar. Like you, I don't think most of this music works very well at on a modern guitar (although a thin stringing, alla Strizich, isn't a bad compromise). My thoughts are more along the lines of the usefulness of an edition in terms of the propagation and appreciation of the music. If a modern guitarist is to take the trouble to explore the 5-course instrument I think they would perhaps be most likely to do so through having gotten a decent sense of the music through trying it on their modern instruments first. Re. alfabeto, again I agree with you that this requires an appropriate instrument to sound good, though battente performance practice issues are the same no matter what type of notation one is playing from (or, for that matter, what instrument one is playing). I'll try and put some examples up when I get a few minutes. Stanley Stanley Yates www.StanleyYates.com > -- > From: Rob MacKillop > Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2005 1:55 AM > To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu > Subject: RE: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit. > > Stanley, > > I can see the attraction of, say, a Mel Bay edition (Stanley Yates Series, > of course!) of important works such as the Bartolotti - setting aside my > reservations about playing this stuff on a modern classical guitar (better > on a 12-string guitar...). So I'll try to clarify my thoughts. > > We agree that different sets of people require different things. I don't > think parallel staves of tab and notation will help much - not only, as you > say, would it double the size of the volume, but most guitarists don't read > French or Italian tablature. For the majority of players it would just get > in the way. I think you would have to wear a rather prominent Editor's hat, > make some decisions (detailed in a scholarly intro - the kind you are so > good at) and make one workable solution. I don't think you can please all > the people all the time. Maybe have the facsimiles in reduced print in an > appendix? > > Can you upload an example page of your small noteheads idea, for comments? > > Regarding alfabeto: it is OK if you give guitarists an interpretative guide, > encouraging them to experiment with different strumming patterns. I fear > most will just play exactly what you transcribe, and the essence of a > certain degree of improv will be lost. Sorry, Stanley, I am struggling here > because I just can't 'hear' this stuff on a modern classical guitar. Prove > me wrong! ;-) > > Rob > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > >
RE: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
Stanley, I can see the attraction of, say, a Mel Bay edition (Stanley Yates Series, of course!) of important works such as the Bartolotti - setting aside my reservations about playing this stuff on a modern classical guitar (better on a 12-string guitar...). So I'll try to clarify my thoughts. We agree that different sets of people require different things. I don't think parallel staves of tab and notation will help much - not only, as you say, would it double the size of the volume, but most guitarists don't read French or Italian tablature. For the majority of players it would just get in the way. I think you would have to wear a rather prominent Editor's hat, make some decisions (detailed in a scholarly intro - the kind you are so good at) and make one workable solution. I don't think you can please all the people all the time. Maybe have the facsimiles in reduced print in an appendix? Can you upload an example page of your small noteheads idea, for comments? Regarding alfabeto: it is OK if you give guitarists an interpretative guide, encouraging them to experiment with different strumming patterns. I fear most will just play exactly what you transcribe, and the essence of a certain degree of improv will be lost. Sorry, Stanley, I am struggling here because I just can't 'hear' this stuff on a modern classical guitar. Prove me wrong! ;-) Rob To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
- Original Message - From: Sal Salvaggio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Monday, February 28, 2005 8:31 pm Subject: Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit. > Robert Strizitch (sp) did a book of transcribed > DeVisee back in the 1970's. My recollection- been > about 5 years since I've seen the book- is that he > used a lot of circled numbers for the strings. > Difficult to look at and play on the baroque guitar > though. ..Difficult to look at and play on any guitar. He recommended removing the A and restringing with an a. He notated the a at 5 in its true pitch, but often provided no indication of what notes were to be played along 5 and what were to be played on more treble-ward strings. Fingering on the fly from this edition was not easy. It required a good bit of contemplation to interpret chords. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
Robert Strizitch (sp) did a book of transcribed DeVisee back in the 1970's. My recollection- been about 5 years since I've seen the book- is that he used a lot of circled numbers for the strings. Difficult to look at and play on the baroque guitar though. Sal Salvaggio __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
James and Rob, Thanks for responding. For me, the main problem is that if one is going to take the considerable trouble of transcribing a tablature collection the result should be as multi-functional as possible. But how multi-functional can that be? Obviously, as Ron pointed out, five-course guitarists can read from the tablature (re-typeset if necessary). Modern guitarists, who in general appear to have an unjustly low opinion of this repertoire, have different needs: they need to see the music both as it sounds and also as it was played (in order to make sense of campanela, for example). Non-guitarists, obviously, need to see the music as it sounds. I feel that some collections (Bartolotti, for example) are of considerable historical significance (and in the case of Bartolotti, very good music) and should certainly be easily accessible to non-guitarist scholars. As James pointed out, few modern guitarists will be inclined to invest in a five-course instrument if their initial experience with the music (which is most likely to be from standard notation, no matter which instrument they use) is unsatisfactory. The notation described by James (bordons only) is very objective but also, as he says, a pseudo tablature. A five-course guitarist could play from it; a modern guitarist could emulate the mechanics of the original but not the pitch content (at least probably not at sight); the non-guitarist scholar would have to work hard to decipher it. The problem can become thornier if we try to elaborate on this Shrade-style objective notation by attempting to notate independent voices with different direction stems: octave-strung courses will often be written in the "wrong" octave, making for ugly, inconsistent counterpoint, hidden imitation points, etc. It seems to me that, in order to be multi-functional (and especially in cases were the intended tuning isn't known), that both octaves should be indicated. But how to do that elegantly? I've tried several methods, including the use of small notes to show: a) where the string is played; or, conversely b) sounding pitch (which is a matter of interpretation, of course). But none of these appear particularly elegant solutions to me. Maybe a parallel tablature-standard notation staff - double the number of pages (ouch!). So, I'm wondering if there's a solution to this that would justify the trouble of publishing a moden notation transcription of something like the Bartolotti collections. Rob, what did you mean about the problems of transcribing alphabeto (alphabeto only, or mixed style?) Stanley -- Stanley Yates http://www.StanleyYates.com APSU Guitar Program: http://www.apsu.edu/yatess/academic/apsuguitar/index.html To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
RE: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
No attachments, James. If you can't put it on a website, email it to me and I will find space on my website. Rob -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 28 February 2005 18:58 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit. I can't remember if we can send attachments; but I'll try to attach a piece that I've done on Finale. James To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
Well, any notation which doesn't represent exact pitch is in essence tabulature. Yes, as I mentioned in my e-mail; it would be "tablature disguised as modern notation". The tablature manuscripts themselves don't always give you a clear idea of the stringing intended, which determines actual pitch. What I'm proposing is a system that's simply easier to read than the facsimiles, and leaves it up to the individual what stringing they prefer. I'm all for someone doing an easy to read tablature in Django or Fronimo and making it available. I thought the tab on Paulo Galvao's site was very legible, for instance. Personally, I still find notation a little easier to read, especially in the higher registers. I'll try to put up a sample or two on the web for people to check out. James -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Which in itself is scordatura, i.e. another form of tabulature. > Sorry, I don't get your point here. > James Well, any notation which doesn't represent exact pitch is in essence tabulature. RT To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
In a message dated 2/28/2005 11:03:38 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Which in itself is scordatura, i.e. another form of tabulature. Sorry, I don't get your point here. James -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
> In my many years teaching and arranging experience, I have to say that the > most difficult instrument to transform into a classical guitar, is the > baroque guitar. Piano music, lute music, even orchestral music can sound > fine on the classical guitar, but Baroque guitar music NEVER sounds good > (again, IMHO). Don't by shy like a Brit. You are a Scotsman after all. RT To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
RE: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
Hi Stanley, Thanks for your contributions to this site... IMHO it all depends on who the transcription is aimed at. Players of baroque guitars don't need a transcription - obvious. Players of classical guitars would need a different transcription from those who maybe don't play a guitar of any sort but who wish to study the music. Supplying a transcription with notated octaves on anything that lies on the fourth and fifth courses would certainly overcomplicate things for classical guitarists, and frankly would sound ridiculous. Thankfully we have a precedent: Robert de Visee. Or do we? His setting in parts of the famous Dm suite, for instance, cannot truly be called a transcription - if anything it is an arrangement. In my many years teaching and arranging experience, I have to say that the most difficult instrument to transform into a classical guitar, is the baroque guitar. Piano music, lute music, even orchestral music can sound fine on the classical guitar, but Baroque guitar music NEVER sounds good (again, IMHO). So it has little to do with finding out exactly what notes were intended by a Sanz or a Corbetta, and more to do with the SOUNDS that were sought out by these composers. Therefore standard modern notation cannot completely encapsulate the music of the baroque guitar. Maybe that is too simplistic and obvious, and maybe the same is true of all the notation of all music. So I would say that the non-guitar-player who wishes to study the music should expect notated octaves, and guitarists should settle for an arrangement. The problem you are getting at though is, what do we do if we don't know what the pitches were for any given piece? The 5th and 4th courses could be unisons at the higher ocatve, or octaves, or even unisons at the lower octave. Maybe these notes could appear in colour, or asterixed - something to show that there is ambiguity. If the editor is convinced these two courses were in octaves, (s)he then has to decide when only one course was plucked. It could get really messy on the page. And what about alfabeto...? I'm looking forward to other replies. But Stanley, what do YOU think? Rob To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
> In a message dated 2/28/2005 7:57:42 AM Pacific Standard Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Following on from the tuning / stringing discussion, I'm curious to know > what folks think about standard notation transcription of five-course > tablatures - how to deal with unknown tunings, octave stringing, > imperfect/suggested counterpoint, etc. > > Hi Stanley, > > I've done transcriptions from facsimiles into modern notation for baroque > guitar, and I actually prefer reading the music in that form. I don't address > the issue of suggested counterpoint (neither does tablature), simply leaving > it up to the player to determine how long a bass note or inner voice, etc. > should ring. The other issue of " to bourdon or not to bourdon" is easy to > deal > with; simply notate the 4th and 5th courses as they would sound with bourdons; > the actual sounding pitch will be determined by the way you have your guitar > strung. Which in itself is scordatura, i.e. another form of tabulature. RT -- http://polyhymnion.org/torban To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
In a message dated 2/28/2005 7:57:42 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Following on from the tuning / stringing discussion, I'm curious to know what folks think about standard notation transcription of five-course tablatures - how to deal with unknown tunings, octave stringing, imperfect/suggested counterpoint, etc. Hi Stanley, I've done transcriptions from facsimiles into modern notation for baroque guitar, and I actually prefer reading the music in that form. I don't address the issue of suggested counterpoint (neither does tablature), simply leaving it up to the player to determine how long a bass note or inner voice, etc. should ring. The other issue of " to bourdon or not to bourdon" is easy to deal with; simply notate the 4th and 5th courses as they would sound with bourdons; the actual sounding pitch will be determined by the way you have your guitar strung. The stringing question seems to be an endless source of speculation and should be left up to the individual guitarist. In some instances however, you will have to place a circled number (to indicate which course) by a note when it's not obvious where it should be played: for instance, a on the fourth string -7th fret, as opposed to its normal position at 3rd string- 2nd fret. Basically what you end up with is tablature disguised as modern notation, but a lot easier to read; which is my goal anyway. This simplified notation requires a little common sense and musical knowledge, just as tablature does. One advantage to using this is it would be easy to set up pdf. files for sharing, most people have Finale or Sibelius, etc. for writing classical guitar music and those programs seem fine for this purpose as well. The only objections to this I can think of is from people who feel it's more HIP to read from the tab, or those who aren't able to read notation. As a musician who's looking for a practical score to work from, this is my suggestion. Even trying to read Sanz' tiny handwritten engraving gives me a headache. Another advantage to using notation is it may encourage more classical guitarists to try their hand at baroque guitar. I'm sure I haven't explained this thoroughly, but it's a start, I'm curious to know what everyone thinks. I can't remember if we can send attachments; but I'll try to attach a piece that I've done on Finale. James -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Modern Notation of Five-Course Lit.
Following on from the tuning / stringing discussion, I'm curious to know what folks think about standard notation transcription of five-course tablatures - how to deal with unknown tunings, octave stringing, imperfect/suggested counterpoint, etc. Stanley -- Stanley Yates http://www.StanleyYates.com APSU Guitar Program: http://www.apsu.edu/yatess/academic/apsuguitar/index.html To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
