Dear All,
My suspicion is that very often what we regard as "solo lute pieces" are
lute arrangements of pieces originally conceived for other media (or
none at all), hence the title "Intavolatura de lauto", etc. English
music is full of this, the Sharp Pavan being the obvious example: as far
On Feb 24, 2010, at 1:56 PM, Martin Shepherd wrote:
> Also one has to ask whether Francesco da Milano, brilliant though he must
> have been, was actually able to invent extended strict canons without
> recourse to mensural notation. Some of his pieces are so intricately worked
> that the idea
On Feb 24, 2010, at 2:05 PM, howard posner wrote:
On Feb 24, 2010, at 1:56 PM, Martin Shepherd wrote:
Also one has to ask whether Francesco da Milano, brilliant though
he must have been, was actually able to invent extended strict
canons without recourse to mensural notation. Some of hi
Dear list members,
the evidence about Palestrina and the lute suggests not that he
composed on the lute, but that he intabulated his new compositions and
tested them on the lute before releasing them.
The best known reference is a letter from Annibale Capello to Guglielmo
Gonzag
Thank you for the clarification.
Sean
On Feb 24, 2010, at 4:13 PM, John Griffiths wrote:
Dear list members,
the evidence about Palestrina and the lute suggests not that he
composed on the lute, but that he intabulated his new compositions
and
tested them on the lute before releasing t
\On Feb 24, 2010, at 4:13 PM, John Griffiths wrote:
> the evidence about Palestrina and the lute suggests not that he
> composed on the lute, but that he intabulated his new compositions and
> tested them on the lute before releasing them.
I'm not sure what "tested" or "released" would mean
>
> Thank you for the clarification.
>
> Sean
>
> On Feb 24, 2010, at 4:13 PM, John Griffiths wrote:
>
>> Dear list members,
>>
>> the evidence about Palestrina and the lute suggests not that he
>> composed on the lute, but that he intabulated his new compositions
>> and
>> tested them on the
I think Howard is right on as far as the process
goes. I don't think we can rule out the lute in
any way based on this quote a far as being part
of the compositional process. It may have been
used for thematic material, for harmony, or any
number of things, but it looks like a direct reference
d&d&h
I can see this approach easily enough. What I couldn't see was playing
through large liturgical works and getting the whole picture. I'm sure
he could play enough to let his mind fill in the rest.
Sean
On Feb 24, 2010, at 5:29 PM, David Tayler wrote:
I think Howard is right on
Re different pitches,
if you accept that they used a transposing system, and that tab was
equivalent, for the professionals, to music notation, then there is
effectively no difference in pitch or key.
dt
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-a
No doubt the lute was part of the compositional process as Jessie Ann
Owens asserts, and it is difficult to draw any definitive conclusion
about the exact role of the instrument from the brief bits of
information in the letters concerning Palestrina. One detail that might
make some d
Respectfully, I can't really agree that those are similar since
Galileo uses the word intavolare and the other source does not,
plus the simple fact is that intabulate had the meaning of score, not
tablature, since there was organ tablature and tablature for other
instruments as well.
dt
At 10:
That sounds fine in theory, but Lachrimae in G minor or A minor are
certainly very different when you actually play them!
P
On 25 February 2010 04:26, David Tayler <[1]vidan...@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
Re different pitches,
if you accept that they used a transposing system,
Thanks David. I know we are splitting hairs here and I mean no
disrespect either, but I presume your opinion is based on your
familiarity with old Italian. I don't pretend to be an expert but your
response says, in effect, that you do not believe that "porre sul
liuto" means "to plac
Just a question, are you a fixed "do" (or ut) person or a movable do
person? Most of use are fixed do people. But even 40 years ago, this
was not the case. My teacher was trained in moveable Do, and as a music
student I was tained in both--although I had to teach myself the clefs.
Tr
Well, the thing about old Italian, and I use the old dictionaries, is
that they don't go to the intent of the writer. Occasionally you will
see an expression that is "keyed" to the meaning. But my point is
that TAB and mensural notation are the same, becuase for a composer
like Palestrina, Lass
Howard--that totally cracked me up. I have to now have my third beer.
But just to play Devil's Avocado, a piece like "Le Greygnour bien"
can't be written in tab. But I guess it is just music, plain and
simple, as you say! I need to remember that.
dt
But there's no such thing as mensural musi
I meant, as you must have realised, that *physically* they are very
different to play, and no amount of movable "do" is going to explain
that away : )
P
On 26 February 2010 05:43, David Tayler <[1]vidan...@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
Just a question, are you a fixed "do" (or u
18 matches
Mail list logo
