Dear lutenists,
many thanks to all, who commented very interestingly - in public and in
private - the Capirola Padoana!
I have been checking also some other pieces by "mesez Vicenzo capirola",
as the SPES facsimile names the composer on the cover. It seems to be
obvious that the 4th course n
012 00:14:21 -0700
> To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
> From: blueh...@hotmail.com
> Subject: [LUTE] Re: An old Capirola edition?
>
> It sounds like the version that was in the Rooley Lute Tutor. I can't
> remember the name of the book and it is in storage so I ca
It sounds like the version that was in the Rooley Lute Tutor. I can't
remember the name of the book and it is in storage so I can't put my
hands on it.
I would hazard a guess that it was edited that way to be "friendlier"
to a novice lutenist.
Steve
> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21
l Message-
From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf
Of Daniel Winheld
Sent: 15 June 2012 22:28
To: Denys Stephens
Cc: 'lute net'
Subject: [LUTE] Re: An old Capirola edition?
Understanding now that this is a version for beginners, I apologize for
tellin
I wonder if Anthony Rooley's modern edition is not taken from the "The
duke of Sommersettes dompe" found in an English MS -- for more detail
and the intabulation see Matthew Spring's History of the lute in Britain:
http://books.google.com/books?id=OQPLgjs2n7IC&lpg=PA71&ots=C414PQG6YF&dq=osborn%2
Understanding now that this is a version for beginners, I apologize for
telling Arto to throw away anything pedagogical from Anthony Rooley's hand. But
Arto is ready to move beyond the beginner's version!
Dan
Dan
On Jun 15, 2012, at 1:29 PM, Denys Stephens wrote:
> Dear Arto,
> I think you mu
Dear Arto,
I think you must have a photocopy of the version from pages 29-30
of Anthony Rooley's 'A new varietie of lute lessons' which was
published in 1975 together with an LP of all the pieces in the
book. It was rather an exciting idea at the time. It formed part
of a series of publications of
Arto- I don't know where that version comes from. Throw it away and play the
original- it's much better. In the original, it's the 3rd course that's split,
not the 4th (wouldn't work very well, 8ve string). Splitting the 3rd course is
90% of the FUN part of this piece! It's set up to be very eas
