On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 5:53 AM, David Tayler wrote:
> You know David, you are right to hone in on the 7-6. It is, in a way,
For me, Dowland is all about minor-6 to 5 suspensions. I add many were
there are none. ;-)
> skip it and have another beer.
By all means, I hope you can get some good Bel
You know David, you are right to hone in on the 7-6. It is, in a way,
part of the signature of the piece: English on the outside, Italian
in the middle. I should have given it more weight in the analysis.
I'll have to play through the A and G versions a couple of times to
see if there is an adva
All,
I just answered my own question. North's version is from the
Folger-Dowland Lute Book. So much for that question. I'm still
searching for a notated version of the A minor from Dd.2.11, so I'd
still be grateful for anyone's assistance.
Best,
Graham Freeman
On Thu, Feb 2
All,
What a wonderful discussion my questions has provoked! I'm always
impressed by the amount of knowledge and experience among the users of
this group.
Without wishing to hijack the discussion and the direction in which
it's gone, some of my questions still remain. It would seem
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 8:27 PM, David Tayler wrote:
> However, if you realize the alto voice up, there is a big problem,
> this then completely removes the 7-6 suspension
Point taken. Indeed, 7-6 was sorely missed (although that one is my
ears, even when playing the Poulton version. Striking h
- Original Message - From: "David van Ooijen"
<[2]davidvanooi...@gmail.com>
To: "[3]lute-cs.dartmouth.edu" <[4]l...@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 12:20 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Dowland's "Lach
Yes, you can hear it not as a parallel fifth, but then you have to
hear it as a direct octave approached by step above and skip below,
if there is a third in the chord. However, since there is no third in
the chord, there is still the fifth. So in this case, there is a type
of parallel fifth th
.dartmouth.edu" <[4]l...@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 12:20 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Dowland's "Lachrimae"
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:09 AM, David Tayler
<[5]vidan...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
As printed in the Poulton edit
From: "David van Ooijen"
To: "lute-cs.dartmouth.edu"
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 12:20 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Dowland's "Lachrimae"
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:09 AM, David Tayler
wrote:
As printed in the Poulton edition, The fifths and dir
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:09 AM, David Tayler wrote:
> As printed in the Poulton edition, The fifths and direct octaves
> cross the bar, from G to D in the lowest sounding voices to E flat to
> B flat in the lowest sounding voices.
I see, consecutive fifths between what I regard as bass and midd
As printed in the Poulton edition, The fifths and direct octaves
cross the bar, from G to D in the lowest sounding voices to E flat to
B flat in the lowest sounding voices.
Of course, since you can realize the polyphony in so many ways, there
are just as many ways to look at it.
In that case, y
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Daniel Winheld wrote:
>
> "but I await word from the experts..."
You can safely exclude me, I'm just trying to understand what's going
on here. There are no parallel fifths, as far as I understand it
anyway, but you and dt seem unhappy with the first chord on the
"but I await word from the experts..."
And the experts have spoken! When the rubber of canon meets the road
of practice, things seem to get a little muddy. DvO "I hear the
third on the 4th quarter being held into the fifth." and Stewart
"but the treble moves to b flat (d1)before moving to the
I agree with David van Ooijen, If the b-flat is not held over there is a fifth
indeed. However I cannot make coffee out of what David Taylor writes. Surely
the b-flat has to be kept sounding untill the high c in the second measure. It
needs a bit of practice but it can be done easily.
Lex van
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 1:04 AM, Daniel Winheld/dt wrote:
>>somehow I have a blind spot: I still dont see the fifths!).
>
> I think going from the last chord in the first measure (low open G,
> still providing bass note from 3rd beat with open 2nd course d)
> -moving to first chor
Thank you for you kind words, but I just put it online and at the
time it seemed the easiest thing. I couldn't get it off these huge
non standard floppies so I fed it into a scanner.
I had to decide whether to pursue musicology or performance, and I
thought, well, I'll just try performing full t
That's the one, G to E Flat. Classic.
There is a really juicy one in the Bach D minor Double as well in the NBA.
dt
I have a note on my copy of Dd.2.11 from one I looked at the original
in Cambridge that is just a question mark, whether that version might
be connected to Dowland. Have to look at
All,
Thank you to everyone who answered my question and provided some great
sources for me to look at. I very much appreciate it.
For Dr. Tayler: I've read your dissertation and liked it very much. I
wonder whether you've ever considered publishing it. While style
analysis did pas
>somehow I have a blind spot: I still dont see the fifths!).
I think going from the last chord in the first measure (low open G,
still providing bass note from 3rd beat with open 2nd course d)
-moving to first chord of 2nd measure, E-flat b-flat e chord. G-d to
E-flat-b-flat are parallel fif
Ron-
Thank you again for another great gift to the lute list community!
Dan
> Hello Graham:
>You'll find the version you seek posted on our website in pdf form.
>http://editions.mignarda.com/downloads.html
>The divisions probably are by Dowland - I don't especially care whose
>ve
"First part of the answer: I'm not Nigel North ;-)"
Nigel is playing thumb out, which does enable the middle-index finger
runs at high speed a bit easier. I can play middle index runs fairly
well thumb in, but not as fast, easily- or naturally- as thumb out.
The eternal conundrum of which way to
Hello Graham:
You'll find the version you seek posted on our website in pdf form.
http://editions.mignarda.com/downloads.html
The divisions probably are by Dowland - I don't especially care whose
version it is but I like the triplets at the end.
Best wishes,
Ron Andrico
www.
Thank you for that answer, David. Thinking about what you said, I see
now that I was not thinking clearly about how one tunes a 10-course
lute. I was thinking that one could tune the 7th course as D, and then
just add the bass tunings for courses 8, 9, and 10 however they're
common
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 9:33 PM, wrote:
> Today's my day for quesions. This statement by David v O brings one up:
> "It really is a 7-course piece, and on the 10-course I used it was beyond
> me."
>
> Assuming the same tuning (other than the added bass courses) on a 7 course
> and 10 course lute
Thank you, David. I've downloaded your thesis and am printing it. I
look forward to reading it.
Ned
--
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Graham Freeman
wrote:
> divisions. Does anybody record the G minor version from Dd.2.11 as it
> appears in Poulton/Lam?
I did, as a matter of fact, parallel fifths and all (though I must
confess my ignorance here, I'm sure dt is correct, but somehow I have
a b
Much of the material is in my disseration on Dowland, but of course
this research is now 24 years old
http://www.voicesofmusic.org/tayler/dowland.html
However, even though it is out of date, some of the more
controversial ideas which were thought to be far fetched at the time
are now now gainin
"Since Dowland hated Divisions. . ." This statement piques my
curiosity. Is there a readily available text that discusses Dowland's
life and his musical styles? There seems to be a book by O'Dette (as
co-author); would this be a recommended place to begin?
Thanks,
Ned
Hi Graham,
There is one version in a in Hirsch without divisions.
Hope this helps.
Lex
Op 22 feb 2010, om 18:56 heeft Graham Freeman het volgende geschreven:
> All,
> I'd be very grateful for some assistance. Does anyone know where I
> might be able to find a score for the A minor version
All the versions which have the mistake in the first bar are
secondary sources, they have parallel version fifths between the
first two chords. The sources related to either LoST from 1603 or are
absent the mistake (yet have full harmony) are either Dowland or
based on Dowland.
Most of the reco
There is a version in Am for solo lute in Dd.2.11, soon to be published
in facsimile by the Lute Society. I have a feeling it may be on a Paul
O'Dette recording, too.
Martin
Edward Martin wrote:
The version in a minor is from the book Lachrimae, written for 5 viol
or violins, + the lute part
Thank you. Matthew Spring writes of three versions in Dd.2.11: one for
lute in G minor; one for lute in A minor; and one for bandora. The two
versions apparently have very different divisions. Poulton lists the A
minor version as Dd.2.11, ff.. 75v/76, from which she provides a brief
The version in a minor is from the book Lachrimae, written for 5 viol
or violins, + the lute part.
ed
At 11:56 AM 2/22/2010, Graham Freeman wrote:
>All,
>I'd be very grateful for some assistance. Does anyone know where I
>might be able to find a score for the A minor version of "Lach
33 matches
Mail list logo
