Hi Martin,
I know you play quite a bit of this early stuff, that is, pieces that
really have their roots in the previous century and have seen some of
the unconventional characters found in it so may I bounce these ideas
off you? Actually despite all the baroque topics I daily see here I
hope there are still a few more enthousiasts out there ;^)
I'm going out on a limb here but from what I gather, the Capirola
pieces are all taken from the same repertory that fed the plectrum
lutes. Capirola is obviously a generation later but the variety of
tone colors available to plectrum would have still been in everyone's
ears. This would have allowed (and encouraged) less emphasis on what
we are now traditionally taught as the lute's clarity. In the back of
my mind I wonder if our notions of even these standards are a red
herring.
Another point from the music's point of view: If we are to bring out
one voice over another we can do it through volume and/or color. If
all the lute/fret intersections have different colors it would be
easier to emphasize as we are constantly hit w/ different colors for
all the notes. Of course this leads to the question of 'If they're
all different what makes anything stand out?'. I still think it works
to our favor. Consider a vocal trio w/ all voices nearly identical
compared to a variety of voice colors. Remember, these vocal works are
rarely created in the same mold of later Parisian chansons where
homogeny and repetion are the norm. Earlier works contained vocal
parts with specific purposes (how the tenor relates to the cantus,
etc), histories (Agricola's addition to Ghizeghem's etc etc) and
textures (every human voice really is different and differs again,
note to note).
Also, the first lute polyphonies were originally on two instruments w/
2 different players which again varied the tone colors. I don't think
we should denigrate this buzzing string or that slightly dead fret but
use them to whatever effects might work to bring out the music's --or
the musician's-- character.
Sorry this is a little rambling (I'm at work) but I think Capirola,
Spinacino and other earlies played to this variety.
best regards,
Sean
On Feb 19, 2010, at 1:00 PM, Martin Shepherd wrote:
Thanks, Sean.
A bray effect might be good - it sounds good on a harp, and
strangely seems to increase the duration of the sound - but have you
tried to achieve it with a lute? The easiest way is to thread a
piece of paper or something between the strings at the bridge end of
things. To get *all* the frets and open strings to buzz by simply
having a low action/appropriate-sized frets is a tall order (because
some notes will buzz much more than others, some will not sound at
all). Is that really what Capirola had in mind? Especially since
he also talks (apparently) about raising(?) the nut to bring a lute
to life, or is that a misinterpretation?
We have a lot to learn about this....
Martin
Sean Smith wrote:
Good point, Alexander. There could easily be an aesthetic point to
a slight bray and I confess to enjoying this aspect of double frets.
Although unrelated to renaissance music as we know it, many Indian
instruments like the vina, sitar and tamboura have a braying
mechanism just north of the bridge. A clear ringing string is
avoided in favor of a buzz that causes the ring to mutate over its
timespan. In other words, a long note changes over its life adding
sonic textures outside the player's control.
Sean
On Feb 19, 2010, at 6:54 AM, alexander wrote:
Well! As the jumping into hot water already started... The double
frets that we know of, came into use at the same period as the
bray harp, and the "bray" attachments in virginals. Again,
aesthetics of the sound, it was considered that a hard object
slightly touching the string near its' cut-off point makes sustain
longer, and the sound, well, more beautiful. When this effect is
taken into consideration and the frets tied with this idea, and
the string tension light enough for it to work, the results can be
quite nice.
It is certainly an important mantra: THEY WERE NOT CRAZY, they
were not crazy... alexander r.
Martyn,
The continuing, if strange,
fascination single loops seems to
defy historical evidence and practical
experience.
Time to wake up that sleeping dog! Once again I'll jump into hot
water and point out that the old gut material had quite different
physical properties than our modern reconstructions. This
probably explains Mace's emphasis on stretching frets before
putting them on.
Perhaps modern gut is hard/stiff enough to maintain its shape and
allow for single frets. On the other hand, if period gut was
sort of "rubbery," it would therefore need to be doubled up in
order to provide enough of a substantial bump on the neck to
effectively stop a string. This would in turn account for the
tiny, tiny double frets seen in paintings.
Chris - has experience with both double and single frets.
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
