Hi,
after Stewart's recent mail on Matelart's fantasia terza, I had a thorough
look again, (after a very long time), at his fifteen solo fantasias, and
liked them very much. They contain mistakes, but are "intermediate",
idiomatic and fun to play. What struck me at once, was the similarity in
styl
doesn't work any more. I'll ask a friend to
> help, or send you a photocopy of a page or two via snail mail.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Stewart.
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Stewart McCoy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc:
"Stewart McCoy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
"Lute Net"
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 4:04 AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Matelart Fantasia Terza
> Dear Stewart
>
>> facsimile, using the Paris copy instead of the one at
>> Bologna.
>> Presumably they thought that
any more. I'll ask a friend to
> help, or send you a photocopy of a page or two via snail mail.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Stewart.
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Stewart McCoy" <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Stewart McCoy wrote:
> I am puzzled by the presence of large crosses scattered here and
> there, mostly like big plus signs (+), but sometimes with two or even
> three horizontal strokes, and at least twice with two vertical and
> two horizontal strokes looking like a sharp sign (#). I don't know
Dear Stewart:
Addressing the question of crosses, Arthur Ness' edition of Francesco da
Milano reproduces these as 'plus' signs in the duet arrangements from
Matelart, 1559 (Ness Appendix C, Nos. 17-23). I always assumed that they
represent hold signs. I'm sure Arthur can clear u
I would suggest that these are rhythm signs that were added and later crossed
out as incorrect.
Peter Danner
In a message dated 8/27/06 6:41:04 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> One or two rhythm signs have also been added by hand. There
> is nothing too unusual about that. However, I am puzzled
Dear Stewart,
at first I was puzzled by your mail until I realized that my copy of the
SPES-facsimile of the Matelart book is from the second printing (1984)
of Archivum Musicum 10 which was made from the Paris copy of the
original print - and this is free from manuscript barlines and diverse
forms
