Mjos & Larson wrote:
>> Secondly, you guys are a tough audience!
>
> My apologies for that comment -- I must have been feeling vulnerable
> the day I wrote it.
No need to apologise to me.
If anything I should apologise to you. I got Fichte's triad
(thesis+antithesis=synthesis) so well drummed into me at high school,
it's become second nature to me. It is an extremely useful scientific
and artistic tool but it can be tough on people at times and sometimes I
forget that.
---
In this case it's my turn to eat my own words:
Mjos & Larson also wrote:
> Regarding number of courses, I wonder why the writer would bother
> with writing his fretting examples on page 3 with seven definite
> entries and two distinct notations (after the fifth course) if the
> 6th and 7th course were tuned the same.
I completely overlooked that page! Seven courses it is then.
My comment about 2nd inversion chords was based on the assumption that
the slashed letters signified seventh course and the un-slashed sixth
course. Switch the order and those chords at least makes much more sense.
> The two page 3 tuning charts only indicate tuning for six courses.
> What does this mean? The seventh was variably tuned?
Now it's getting really messy. The sixth course in the tuning charts are
not slashed which is how the *seventh* course are notated in the
fretting examples on the same page. The only explanation I can think of
is that the tuning charts are copied from a different source than the
rest of the ms and intended for a six course instrument.
> Overall, a C still makes more harmonic sense (to me), as it is often
> in a place where I would expect a dominant harmony).
Now that I've had a closer look at the music I agree. C is the only
tuning that would consistently fit all the pieces with no need for
retuning or "correcting" any bass notes.
> There are also passage (6 and 14) where the baseline seems to be
> displaced an octave (if the 7th is read as a C).
How about a re-entrant tuning: c'-f-bb-d'-f'-a'-d''
There are plenty of historical references to such a practice to add
extra bass strings to facilitate the playing of certain notes rather
than to expand the instrument's range although I have to admit I don't
know of any close to Storm in time and location.
Such a tuning would solve another problem that's been bothering me about
the manuscript: the range of the seven course instrument seems far to
wide for the string materials available at that time.
> Anon Egeland's suggestion of a 7th tuned to B-flat doesn't work to my
> ears. He's a fiddle/violin player so may have relied on information
> from a plucked string player.
As far as I know Egeland got the tuning from Storm's own written playing
instructions. I may have misunderstood though. We really need to get a
look at the manuscript as a whole, not just the pages with cittern music!
---
> Does anyone have other thoughts about the ornaments?
No idea. Sorry.
Frank Nordberg
http://www.musicaviva.com
http://stores.ebay.com/Nordbergs-Music-Store?refid=store
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
