Also well - I can't really agree with yr assertion that campanellas
have 'nothing to do with the stringing': if both lower courses were in
unison at the lower octave I think that even my 'Old Ones' (not
'ancients'!) would have raised an eyebrow or two......
Martyn
--- On Wed, 17/12/08, Monica Hall <mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
From: Monica Hall <mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk>
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: non-re-entrant campanella: de Gallot and
Granata
To: "Stuart Walsh" <s.wa...@ntlworld.com>
Cc: "Vihuelalist" <vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Date: Wednesday, 17 December, 2008, 1:46 PM
Well - as you say - we have been over this innumerable times before.
First and foremost I would say that - as far as we know - campanellas have
nothing to do with the method of stringing one might chose to use.
Everyone just misunderstands what Sanz says about this. He doesn't say
that re-entrant stringing is preferable because it eliminates octave
doubling or skips of a 7th or a 9th in the melodic line. He is concerned
with purely practical matters - it is difficult to stop two strings of
unequal thickness when playing ornaments and campanellas.....etc.
I would add to that - there are problems with tuning and fretting with octave
stringing especially at the higher frets which is another reason why re-entrant
tunings may have been preferred.
If you actually trying playing the music with the guitar strung throughout with
plain gut I think you will find that this is so. It is certainly my
experience. Why else does everyone use nylgut?
There seems to be this idea that all the music is specifically intended for one
method of string rather than another and somehow by analysing the music we can
prove what this is and make it conform to what we believe are "the rules of
musical theory".
Personally I don't think that is the case. Whichever method of stringing
you use, the music won't conform to the "rules of musical theory".
There is no reason why it should and no evidence that the "ancients"
as Martin calls them were concerned about such matters! What people invariably
overlook when analysing the music is that the octave stringing will result in
lower parts being duplicated in the upper octave all the time - not just in
campanellas. They will often overlap with notes on the upper courses so that
the melodic line and voice leading are different from what you imagine just
looking at the music on paper. This is very apparent when you follow the
tablature.
Really you have a situation rather similar to that with music for the cittern.
Some of the music may reflect the fact that it has a re-entrant tuning, and
some may not, but this doesn't alter the fact that it invariably has a
re-entrant tuning for practical reasons.
So rather than being a "mysterianist" - I personally think that
re-entrant tunings were preferred for most solo music simply because they worked
best in practice and that octave stringing on the 4th course but not the 5th is
a suitable compromise. There is no reason to think that this was
"new" in 1671 and no reason why Corbetta should not have been used it
throughout the whole of his career - and Granata too.
As far as the Gallot ms. is concerned I think that octave stringing on the 4th
course only is probably what Gallot himself would have used - for the same
reason.
As I am fond of saying - you are really looking for gold at the end of the
rainbow. And also I think that by trying to iron out all the
"idiosyncracies" you are actually destroying the unique quality of the
music. If players in the 17th century were really concerned about these things
they would have intabulated the music differently.
I hope that doesn't set the cat amongst the pigeons yet again!
Monica
----- Original Message ----- From: "Stuart Walsh"
<s.wa...@ntlworld.com>
To: "Monica Hall" <mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk>
Cc: "Vihuelalist" <vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 11:28 PM
Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: non-re-entrant campanella: de Gallot and Granata
>> Very nice although I think that Granata and Gallot probably used a
>> re-entrant tuning anyway!
>> Monica
>>
> The reason I was interested in these pieces was because I was assuming
> that they were not in re-entrant tuning: that the campanellas were made
> possible by the alternative tuning rather than the high octaves on the
> fourth (and maybe fifth) course(s).
>
> (But it's even possible, if rare, to have the normal guitar tuning,
and
> non-re-entrant stringing, and campanellas.)
>
> There is not much in Granata's 'Nuove Suonata' (c1650) to
suggest
> re-entrant tuning. The last three bars of the Corrente on p.19 of the same
> publication ('Nuove Suonate') has a hint of campanella which might
be a
> way of suggesting re-entrant tuning but it could be a case of using the
> ordinary tuning (without octaves in the basses) to achieve campanella
> effects.
>
> Here is the Granata piece (with a tuning diagram of the alternative
> tuning)
>
> http://www.pluckedturkeys.co.uk/granata.jpg
>
> But, looking at the piece yet again, I suppose the campanella passage
> (fourth bar from the end) does suggest re-entrant tuning. In fact,
it's
> probably a text-book example of it!
>
>
> The Prelude from the Gallot MS is different, though. It's later than
the
> Granata publication, and perhaps there are plenty of pieces in that MS
> with campanella - the Corbetta pieces? (Just looking through a selection
> of prints from the MS now, I don't see campanellas anywhere)
>
>
>
> But this particular piece? (I think it's the same tuning as the
Granata
> piece. I've not been able to look at folio2 of the MS yet). Well, it
could
> be in re-entrant tuning but just not using the high octaves to get the
> campanella effect. I've put an arrow on the score top point to a note
on
> the fourth course (an 'h').
>
>
> http://www.pluckedturkeys.co.uk/Prelude.jpg
>
>
> I know this is well-trodden ground - and this music is very ambiguous -
> and that we can't know what people of the time would have made of it -
and
> so on -(and what's so bad about going around in circles?)
>
> The chords in the piece (bars one and five) strongly suggest a bourdon on
> the fourth (I've been playing them with the thumb, playing only the
> bourdon - 'a la Rebours' - only not as well as he does it). But,
looking
> over the piece yet again, and playing just the high octave on the fourth,
> and, well....who knows? It sounds OK)
>
> So: so far I've back-tracked on everything! But that 'h' on
the fourth
> course of bar 7 (indicated with a red arrow)...can that really be an
> octave higher- the very same note that could equally have been notated as
> 'h' on the first course?. Well, octaves jump around on he Baroque
guitar.
> Yes - they do. Sometimes...but here?
>
>
> Stuart
>
>
>
>
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
