On Wed, 17 Aug 2011 10:26:53 +, Ron Andrico wrote
> Hello Ralf:
>Besard's 1617 print is the result of engraving - the medium of
> wood or copper or whatever matters less than the distinction of
> typeset with moveable type versus engraved plates.
No, sorry. Please let's be a little
otmail.com; mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk;
davidvanooi...@gmail.com
> CC: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
> Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Besard duets once more
> Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 10:49:54 +0200
>
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 15:53:30 +, Ron Andrico wrote
> > Hello Monica:
> >
0 +0100
>> To: davidvanooi...@gmail.com
>> CC: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
> > From: mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
>> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Besard duets once more
>>
>> I know how to fix it:
>> > rewrite it, and some of you send me their fixes when I la
On 16 Aug 2011, at 11:42 PM, Monica Hall wrote:
Have you ever looked at Pesori?. And then there is Dalza.
Have you read Martin shepherd's article "Was Dalza really weird?"
I'd love to read that article, it sounds like fun!
Edward C. Yong
ky...@pacific.net.sg
To get on or off this list s
On Aug 16, 2011, at 8:37 AM, Ron Andrico wrote:
> I share your puzzlement at how Besard could have been so careless,
> especially in his ensemble writing.
It's puzzling only if you assume he had control of the finished product. He
may never have seen a proof.
In any case, the early days
ources...
Monica
Monica
- Original Message -
From: "David van Ooijen"
To: "Lutelist"
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 4:49 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Besard duets once more
there might be a large number
of
printing errors.
That's a huge understatement.
It's t
more like spider. Need my glasses for this one.
David
>
> Ron Andrico
>
>> Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 16:42:40 +0100
>> To: davidvanooi...@gmail.com
>> CC: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
>> From: mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
>> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Besard duets once more
>>
> From: mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Besard duets once more
>
> I know how to fix it:
> > rewrite it, and some of you send me their fixes when I last asked
> > about Besard last year (was it?). But looking at the music, it begs
> > the q
> there might be a large number
> of
> printing errors.
That's a huge understatement.
It's typeset.
I've send you a page off-list to see, if you're curious. The larger
lute part is a copy from Ballard 1614, by the way, so we might assume
Besard is responsible for the fourth higher part.
David
I know how to fix it:
rewrite it, and some of you send me their fixes when I last asked
about Besard last year (was it?). But looking at the music, it begs
the question: why? Why so many errors and/or poor writing, why bother
to publish it? Is there a theory out there, someone?
I am not very fa
Hello David:
I share your puzzlement at how Besard could have been so careless,
especially in his ensemble writing. I think he may have had a
different idea of what it means to print lute music in tablature, sort
of an extension of my theory that music in tablature is not meant to b
Ouch, Mellii, yes!, another one.
David - rewriting Besard |-(
On 16 August 2011 17:28, Martin Shepherd wrote:
> It reminds me of the lute duets by P.P. Melii. In spite of the fact that
> Melii was a well-regarded professional musician, the duets seem completely
> garbled. One could recompose t
It reminds me of the lute duets by P.P. Melii. In spite of the fact
that Melii was a well-regarded professional musician, the duets seem
completely garbled. One could recompose them, but it would be easier to
start from scratch.
Martin
On 16/08/2011 16:14, David van Ooijen wrote:
Once more
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Ron Andrico wrote:
> I've posted my arrangement of the Besard, 1617 Branles de village duet for
> unison lutes on our web site. It was originally for fourth-apart lutes,
A great many thanks to you, Ron! I had just decided to use the
Bransles as our piece for the u
966), pp. 182-204.
Ron Andrico
www.mignarda.com
> Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 19:00:19 +0200
> To: praelu...@hotmail.com
> CC: davidvanooi...@gmail.com; lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
> From: lute.cor...@sunrise.ch
> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Besard 1617 available?
>
> I have
w.mignarda.com
>> Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 07:54:52 +0200
>> To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
>> From: davidvanooi...@gmail.com
>> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Besard 1617 available?
>>
>> Oh dear, that sounds like project waiting to be done ...
>>
>> David
>>
>&
html
Ron Andrico
www.mignarda.com
> Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 07:54:52 +0200
> To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
> From: davidvanooi...@gmail.com
> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Besard 1617 available?
>
> Oh dear, that sounds like project waiting to be done ...
>
> David
Dear David,
While you're at it, do the trios as well!
It's a back-burner project, mostly because with so many errors it's
difficult to know where to start, and you wonder why not just compose it
yourself. If I remember correctly Besard has trouble remembering which
tuning he is writing in, e
Oh dear, that sounds like project waiting to be done ...
David
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:01 AM, Ron Andrico wrote:
> Hello David:
>
> In fact, the duets are not available to my knowledge other than the pieces
> transcribed in Chilesotti's _Lautenspieler des XVI. Jahrhunderts_ collection
> publis
Hello David:
In fact, the duets are not available to my knowledge other than the
pieces transcribed in Chilesotti's _Lautenspieler des XVI.
Jahrhunderts_ collection published by Forni. You'll find
transcriptions of the wonderful 'Branles de village' and ensemble
transcriptions of
Yes, as David remarked, there's a Minkoff facsimile of
the entire volume
("avec index" and an earlier edition without index).
CNRS has an edition with transcription of the solo
pieces in Corpus des luthistes francais. It has
tabkature and parallel transcription. Lately CNRS has
been publishing th
ignarda.com/editions
Ron Andrico & Donna Stewart
__
From: LGS-Europe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "G. Crona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Besard
Date
22 matches
Mail list logo
