To answer Martyn's question I can only summarize my position:
I think that it is possible that players ('amateurs' or not) have left out
the fifth course in certain occasions.
No more no less
To which I should add however:
that I suppose there have individually different approaches and different
repertoires, at different times (such as sung dances and basso continuo
songs), in which players could have done differently.
Then to Monica's remarks:
Sanseverino's six (dance-) songs are accompaniments to well-known
melodies.
Obviously you haven't seen them.
Actually, I checked them this morning. Leading Musicologists nowadays treat
such repertoire as dance-songs.
I am sure that it was and if you read what Marini has said and study how
he
has added the alfabeto to the songs you can see that he had in mind
something quite different from what you seem to think
There's the Chinese whispering again.
[could we please have
this discussion in Dutch ?:~) ]
Double Dutch perhaps. What you are saying sounds like pedantry to me.
You asked me what I thought of Alexander Dean's views, to which I answered
quite seriously.
If you don't agree, please be so kind to explain.
I think you are mistaken. Most of these song books are not intended for
amateurs
Which I didn't say. But even if they were, what is your problem?
About Foscarini:
we are so fortunate to have his BC instructions, even if they are late.
That is the point isn't it. They are included in the latest (surviving)
edition of his work - 1640 - not the earlier one. But sources from the
1620s tell a different
story.
And songs from the 1630s?
Should we really suppose that Foscarini's instructions don't apply for
anything from before 1640?
Lex
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
