Dear Chris,
there is no argument about that there was strumming in lute music.
Neusidler and Judenkunig called it mit Durchstreichen, i. e. with
strumming. Even 17th century French lute music has it.
Yet what Howard meant to conclude, if I got it right, was that as modern
rhythm guitarists avoid
I think if we don't have any real historical evidence we are just
retouching the color of the past. There are plenty of paintings
showing lutes and shawms, trumpets, drums and so on. A motley crew.
And what sounds louder close up does not necessarily carry, so room
size becomes a factor, and
Gentlemen,
I kindly advise you to read the following book :
Musiques savantes, musiques populaires : les symboliques du sonore en FRance ,
1200 - 1750 by an excellent ethnolmusicologist Luc Charles-Dominique. It
published by the CNRS Editions (available there :
Mathias,
--- Mathias Rösel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
No such thing like rhythm lutes in medieval
ensemble music,
How do you know? Have you been listening to those
non-existent
recordings? You don't think any 14th-century
lutenist in a dance
band ever strummed a bunch of
AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Lute sound / split sound
I thought Spaetklang was when you can't keep the tempo.
d
At 02:08 AM 9/30/2008, you wrote:
And Splatklang is when you don't quite manage to play that difficult
chord
P
To get on or off this list see list information at
http
And spit-clang is when you got too much oomph to it, no?
M.
David Tayler [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
I thought Spaetklang was when you can't keep the tempo.
d
At 02:08 AM 9/30/2008, you wrote:
And Splatklang is when you don't quite manage to play that difficult
chord
] Re: Lute sound / split sound
I thought Spaetklang was when you can't keep the tempo.
d
At 02:08 AM 9/30/2008, you wrote:
And Splatklang is when you don't quite manage to play that difficult
chord
P
To get on or off this list see list information at
http
Thanks Mathias,
This subject is very interesting and you explained it very well.
2008/10/2 Mathias Roesel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lemme try to clarify this. Split sound is when the sounds of
different
ensemble members do not blend, that's all. I think we can all agree
by
howard posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
The medieval hofkapelle at the Burgundian court consisted of single
musicians who would do their best to get heard distinctly (the lute
being played with quills therefore). That's split sound (spaltklang).
But there's no evidence of such a sound
Maybe we're talking nonsense because we haven't defined our terms.
Or maybe you assume a clear dichotomy between blending and not
blending; the world is a more complicated place than that.
Indeed, I think the whole notion of a single sound ideal for all of
Europe for a century or more is
Which would explain why renaissance lutenists' propensity of playing
near the rose, and the shift from 1600 onward to the bridge.
Was there really a shift? I seem to recall instructions on where to
plant you little finger, rather than where to actually play the strings,
so perhaps it
howard posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Maybe we're talking nonsense because we haven't defined our terms.
Or maybe you assume a clear dichotomy between blending and not
blending; the world is a more complicated place than that.
I'm too simple a listener, probably. IMHO it's a dichotomy,
I thought Spaetklang was when you can't keep the tempo.
d
At 02:08 AM 9/30/2008, you wrote:
And Splatklang is when you don't quite manage to play that difficult
chord
P
2008/9/30 Mathias Roesel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
So, is Spaltklang
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
So, is Spaltklang the equivalent of other 20th
century ideas about older music, such as terraced
dynamics?
Trying to strictly answer your question: No.
The term is not an equivalent of ideas, not of other ideas, not of other
20th century ideas. Let alone
And Splatklang is when you don't quite manage to play that difficult
chord
P
2008/9/30 Mathias Roesel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
So, is Spaltklang the equivalent of other 20th
century ideas about older music, such as terraced
dynamics?
howard posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
might argue that there _was_ kinda ideal sound. On my way through
the
museum of musical instruments in Vienna, I learned that in the 16th
century it was Spaltklang.
The obvious question would be who said that?
MGG 1st edition, that is,
howard posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
might argue that there _was_ kinda ideal sound. On my way through
the
museum of musical instruments in Vienna, I learned that in the 16th
century it was Spaltklang.
The obvious question would be who said that?
1.) Die Verwendung der Instrumente war im
howard posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
might argue that there _was_ kinda ideal sound. On my way through
the
museum of musical instruments in Vienna, I learned that in the 16th
century it was Spaltklang.
The obvious question would be who said that?
1.) Die Verwendung der Instrumente war im
On Sep 29, 2008, at 4:22 AM, Mathias Rösel wrote:
Hope that helps so far, as for chapters and verses.
So if I understand correctly, the answer to my question about who
mentioned Spaltklang is that it was 20th-century German
musicologists interpreting the intent of earlier musicians without
Maria Gerasimenko-Golota, a friend of mine.
RT
- Original Message -
From: Jean-Marie Poirier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: lute lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 10:30 AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Lute sound / split sound
BTW, what does MGG stand for?
Die Musik in Geschichte
Mathias,
So, is Spaltklang the equivalent of other 20th
century ideas about older music, such as terraced
dynamics?
Chris
--- Mathias Rösel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
howard posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
So if I understand correctly, the answer to my
question about who
howard posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
might argue that there _was_ kinda ideal sound. On my way through the
museum of musical instruments in Vienna, I learned that in the 16th
century it was Spaltklang.
The obvious question would be who said that?
The museum's iPod 8)
I was under the
On Sep 28, 2008, at 5:57 AM, Mathias Rösel wrote:
might argue that there _was_ kinda ideal sound. On my way through
the
museum of musical instruments in Vienna, I learned that in the 16th
century it was Spaltklang.
The obvious question would be who said that?
The museum's iPod 8)
And
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: lute-cs.dartmouth.edu List lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2008 10:52 AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Lute sound
On Sep 28, 2008, at 5:57 AM, Mathias Rösel wrote:
might argue that there _was_ kinda ideal sound. On my way through
the
museum of musical instruments
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2008 10:52 AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Lute sound
On Sep 28, 2008, at 5:57 AM, Mathias Rösel wrote:
might argue that there _was_ kinda ideal sound. On my way through
the
museum of musical instruments in Vienna, I learned that in the 16th
century it was Spaltklang
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 6:01 PM, vance wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is not difficult to assume that as more strings are added that, of
necessity, they would, or should have to be of lesser tension else the
instrument would implode under the combined pressure of additional courses.
Not to
howard posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
might argue that there _was_ kinda ideal sound. On my way through
the
museum of musical instruments in Vienna, I learned that in the 16th
century it was Spaltklang.
The obvious question would be who said that?
MGG (3rd ed) had it as a usual
).
Guy
-Original Message-
From: Sauvage Valéry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 12:22 PM
To: Lute List
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Lute sound
There's no such thing as sound that's objectively best. As soon as
you say best you've eliminated objectivity from
On Sep 27, 2008, at 2:39 PM, Mathias Rösel wrote:
Once you put the lute into a broader frame of 16th century
ensemble, one
might argue that there _was_ kinda ideal sound. On my way through the
museum of musical instruments in Vienna, I learned that in the 16th
century it was Spaltklang.
: Thursday, September 25, 2008 7:57 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Lute sound
Andrew,
I tend to agree with what the tutors
recommend.
(I don't know if I would use the words sharp or
pungent to describe it, however.) There is also
such circumstantial evidence as Capirola's advice
to
set
Valery,
There is no such thing as a best sound or playing
position. No idea of a best way to get a sound from
a lute existed back then:
I already tell my opinion on this, and ask luthier about it . Any luthier on
the list ?
The matter of taste of ancient players and listener is
On Sep 26, 2008, at 1:03 PM, Sauvage Valéry wrote:
I already tell my opinion on this, and ask luthier about it . Any
luthier on the list ?
The matter of taste of ancient players and listener is unknown now.
You can quote this or that, and who knows what else was said ?
(same with nails
The original lute tutors consistently recommend playing close to the
bridge - with the pinkie very close to the bridge - or even on or
behind the bridge. Taking into account the possible differences
between modern and historical strings, this still seems to indicate
16th c taste (early 16th c at
Andrew,
Yes, it seems obvious that players, at least later in the baroque period,
used a technique as you are describing. Actually, I think you have an
assumption that they were after a sharper, more pungent sound. Toyohiko
has shown the contrary. He plays with a historical technique, close
Andrew,
I tend to agree with what the tutors recommend.
(I don't know if I would use the words sharp or
pungent to describe it, however.) There is also
such circumstantial evidence as Capirola's advice to
set your frets so that they actually buzz against the
strings and the description of
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Andrew Gibbs [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Lute List
lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 7:57 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Lute sound
Andrew,
I tend to agree with what the tutors recommend.
(I don't know if I would use the words sharp or
pungent to describe
Yes you're right, sharp and pungent is overstating it - brightness is
a good way of putting it. Or perhaps pluckier? as in the old lute-
stop-on-harpsichords argument.
But to argue against myself there's lots of iconographical evidence
for lutenists not playing close to the bridge...
On 25 Sep
On Sep 25, 2008, at 11:16 AM, Sauvage Valéry wrote:
And the other evidence (speak with some luthiers) is to try to play
the strings in different places and hear where sound is the best
(objectively, not just as an idea of your ideal sound) Of couse it
depends on the lute, strings and
Hello Valery
Thomas Mace for sure. I'm fairly sure Marin Mersenne and Mary
Burwell. Now I was sure Gerle said something like 'plant the 4th and
the 5th finger on the soundboard close to the bridge' - but on
checking I find he actually says 'place the little finger and the
ringfinger on
]
To: Andrew Gibbs [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Lute List
lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 7:57 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Lute sound
Andrew,
I tend to agree with what the tutors recommend.
(I don't know if I would use the words sharp or
pungent to describe it, however
There's no such thing as sound that's objectively best. As soon as
you say best you've eliminated objectivity from consideration.
Well I'm not with you on this point... If you can't hear where the
instrument is best sounding... and best can be objective (ask some
acoustician specialists
for such instruments (not sure if it was for Ren
or Medieval).
Guy
-Original Message-
From: Sauvage Valéry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 12:22 PM
To: Lute List
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Lute sound
There's no such thing as sound that's objectively best. As soon
- Original Message -
From: vance wood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: David Tayler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2008 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Lute sound, esoteric or worldly?
That is I believe the key. It is the old emigration from the Guitar and
its single string
in a way I have found that the aim to tone production among lutenists
could perhaps be divided to two extremes: there are those very gentle
players, who hardly touch their strings, and then there are those, who
nearly beat the strings.
I'm not a prof player, but I know both approaches. On
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear lutenists,
in a way I have found that the aim to tone production among lutenists
could perhaps be divided to two extremes: there are those very gentle
players, who hardly touch their strings, and then there are those, who
nearly beat the strings. Esoteric and
45 matches
Mail list logo
