Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
Dear David, Tablature does not show pitch, so unless there is some other indication, e.g. music in staff notation for a singer or other instrument, we cannot tell what pitch (if any) is intended. The aim of my previous e-mail was to show that number 14 was a mistake in Piccinini's Gagliarda IX. To do so I needed to compare Piccinini's arciliuto and tiorba. For the sake of my argument it was convenient to give both instruments the same nominal pitch of A. How big or small his instruments were, which would determine their real pitch, is another matter altogether. This is why I prefaced my comments with If we take Piccinini's instrument to be in A, and For the sake of comparison let us assume that his arciliuto and chitarrone are both tuned to A. To answer your question, from what I know about archlutes, they were normally tuned to a nominal g', but there is also evidence which points to instruments tuned to a nominal a'. Best wishes, Stewart. - Original Message - From: David Rastall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Stewart McCoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Lute Net [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 4:46 PM Subject: Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo? Dear Stewart, Hmmm! I never noticed before that Piccinini wrote for a 13-course archlute. That's what comes of not knowing enough history, I guess. ;-) ;-) I always assumed that P's archlute writing was for a 14-course instrument. So yes, the indication of the 14th course in Gagliarda IX must be a mistake. I was also assuming (maybe I shouldn't make so many assumptions) that Piccinini wrote for the archlute in G. Isn't G tuning the standard setup for an archlute? Regards, David Rastall
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
Thomas and Michael, thanks for your answers, they were inside the spam file, for some unknown reasons ( well, one reason is the use of html..) I agree that the A is to be played an octave upper, when lowering the 13th to G, in BWV 995 , but there are not so many..an archlute would also go ( I heard someone doing it and I think I played it once, but I preferred the Baroque lute), and why not a theorbo? It's strange for Bach writing something which had something to be changed to make it playable, but it's also true that many of his works are the music, so the instrument is just a means to reach what he wanted to and it was not his problem, but the player's... It's also possible that he had an istrument with one more course, Kapsberger had 19 on the theorbo, so why not 14 on the baroque? Anyway I put online my version in tablature of BWV 996, a couple of years ago, I've made some changes since then, but it's quite easy to remove notes or simplify if you want just a very playable thing. It's in E minor, and I must thank Alain Veylit for his programs, as I used to look for the right key when doing everything only with pencil and paper, and it took so many, many hours... in this way you can have a whole piece and see it at a glance.. Donatella http://web.tiscali.it/awebd - Original Message - From: sterling price [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Michael Stitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 6:22 AM Subject: Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo? The only one which I feel is particularly better suited for a guitar is BWV 996 ? perhaps because of the e minor key which is well suited to that instrument. You know the key of e minor gets a bad rap on the baroque lute. It is actually a pretty great key for the instrument. True there is not much written for it in that key but what there is works great. BWV 996 works well in e minor. I play the edition by Michihiko Okazawa and for me its much easier than in g minor. I have been playing the Falkenhagen prelude that goes in all keys, and if you want a truly horrid key for the b lute try C#major or Bmajor! Sterling Price
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
On Wednesday, January 7, 2004, at 06:56 AM, Stewart McCoy wrote: To answer your question, from what I know about archlutes, they were normally tuned to a nominal g', but there is also evidence which points to instruments tuned to a nominal a'. Thanks, Stewart. The reason for my question, and my recent query about the signum congruentiae in Zamboni, was that I'm trying to find out all I can about archlute playing. I've got one on order, which will be ready in about six month's time. (Six months! I can't wait that long!!) Regards, David Rastall
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
Dear Arto, the problem is that there are people around not so lucky as I am (and as obviously you are) which *have to* play the BWVs ... I share your feelings regarding the Bach works in so far as the effort you need to invest to get acceptable results is too high. And they are not among the best written for the lute (if Bach's works should be counted among works written for the lute). One easier solution is what Martin Junge did: put the music on a 10-course or an archlute taking it as what it is - a transcription. I even seldom hear the Fuga BWV 1000 played as it is written. Most lutenists borrow from the violin/guitar version (BWV 1001). Bach's so called lute work obviously has something arbitrary. I really enjoyed the idea of Rolf Lislewand (was it him?) to record just the transcriptions by Falckenhagen and Weyrauch which are at least historical lute works. To play arrangements as Bach's lute- or still better guitarworks is not honest IMHO. Best wishes Thomas Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 01.50 schrieb Arto Wikla: Dear all, On 5 Jan 2004, Thomas Schall wrote: BTW: BWV 995 works fine on a 13-ch instrument when tuning the 13th course at G and transposing just the very few passages an A is needed. And who, anyhow, would even like to play or listen the BWV's... ;-) Best wishes :) Arto -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss --
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
The piece in question (BWV 995) is the only one (apart from the short prelude BWV 999) clearly dedicated to the Lute. The rest could have been to the Lautenwerk (which would have a low g) but this one most likely really was rearranged for the lute. The compromise - as I already said - would be that Big B. made that tiny little mistake regarding the range of the lute. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 02.09 schrieb Howard Posner: Michael Stitt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for this Thomas. Assuming Bach either misunderstood the lowest tuning of the Baroque lute (which I very much doubt) not being an Gg but rather a Aa, or was in contact with such a 14 course instrument. I think it makes more sense to assume that he had a low G on his lautenwerk. -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss --
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
I don't think someone like Bach made tiny mistakes of this sort. I played BWV 995 years ago, at my final Diploma, setting the 13th course as a G and it worked, and I read from staff. Weyrauch is easier, but makes some changes I don't think Bach would have much appreciated. Donatella http://web.tiscali.it/awebd - Original Message - From: Thomas Schall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Howard Posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Michael Stitt [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Miles Dempster [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Lute Net [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 10:51 AM Subject: Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo? The piece in question (BWV 995) is the only one (apart from the short prelude BWV 999) clearly dedicated to the Lute. The rest could have been to the Lautenwerk (which would have a low g) but this one most likely really was rearranged for the lute. The compromise - as I already said - would be that Big B. made that tiny little mistake regarding the range of the lute. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 02.09 schrieb Howard Posner: Michael Stitt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for this Thomas. Assuming Bach either misunderstood the lowest tuning of the Baroque lute (which I very much doubt) not being an Gg but rather a Aa, or was in contact with such a 14 course instrument. I think it makes more sense to assume that he had a low G on his lautenwerk. -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss -- __ Tiscali ADSL SENZA CANONE: Attivazione GRATIS, contributo adesione GRATIS, modem GRATIS, 50 ore di navigazione GRATIS. ABBONARTI TI COSTA SOLO UN CLICK! http://point.tiscali.it/adsl/index.shtml
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
Dear Donatella, I'm not sure - there were many different types of lute around at Bach's day. Just as an example the low G usually would fit the tessitura of an archlute - giving the italian connections of the courts it would be understandable how this mistake could happen. Or - another possibility: It was even intended to be played on an archlute (which would make the complete work much easier). If you tune the 13th course down to g you will need to change the A which seldom but occassionally appears in the suite. So this would point into a similar direction: Bach wouldn't have known the tessitura of the baroque lute. Actually I don't think the work, even if dedicated to someone who is known to have played the lute, is arranged for a lute in baroque tuning. Writing such awkward difficult (if possible to play at all) compositions would have been considered bad at Bach's time. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 14.09 schrieb Donatella Galletti: I don't think someone like Bach made tiny mistakes of this sort. I played BWV 995 years ago, at my final Diploma, setting the 13th course as a G and it worked, and I read from staff. Weyrauch is easier, but makes some changes I don't think Bach would have much appreciated. Donatella http://web.tiscali.it/awebd - Original Message - From: Thomas Schall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Howard Posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Michael Stitt [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Miles Dempster [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Lute Net [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 10:51 AM Subject: Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo? The piece in question (BWV 995) is the only one (apart from the short prelude BWV 999) clearly dedicated to the Lute. The rest could have been to the Lautenwerk (which would have a low g) but this one most likely really was rearranged for the lute. The compromise - as I already said - would be that Big B. made that tiny little mistake regarding the range of the lute. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 02.09 schrieb Howard Posner: Michael Stitt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for this Thomas. Assuming Bach either misunderstood the lowest tuning of the Baroque lute (which I very much doubt) not being an Gg but rather a Aa, or was in contact with such a 14 course instrument. I think it makes more sense to assume that he had a low G on his lautenwerk. -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss -- __ Tiscali ADSL SENZA CANONE: Attivazione GRATIS, contributo adesione GRATIS, modem GRATIS, 50 ore di navigazione GRATIS. ABBONARTI TI COSTA SOLO UN CLICK! http://point.tiscali.it/adsl/index.shtml -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss --
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
Dear Thomas and all, it is entirely possible that the dedicatee Schouster was the proud owner of an italian 14-c archlute, whether he tuned it the Italian way or in d minor. But another solution would be that he played a 9 course Mandora in d, a typical amateur instrument as we know today. The music would fall under the fingers like most guitarists play it today, in a minor (sounding in g of course). Regards, Stephan Am 6 Jan 2004 um 14:28 hat Thomas Schall geschrieben: Dear Donatella, I'm not sure - there were many different types of lute around at Bach's day. Just as an example the low G usually would fit the tessitura of an archlute - giving the italian connections of the courts it would be understandable how this mistake could happen. Or - another possibility: It was even intended to be played on an archlute (which would make the complete work much easier). If you tune the 13th course down to g you will need to change the A which seldom but occassionally appears in the suite. So this would point into a similar direction: Bach wouldn't have known the tessitura of the baroque lute. Actually I don't think the work, even if dedicated to someone who is known to have played the lute, is arranged for a lute in baroque tuning. Writing such awkward difficult (if possible to play at all) compositions would have been considered bad at Bach's time. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 14.09 schrieb Donatella Galletti: I don't think someone like Bach made tiny mistakes of this sort. I played BWV 995 years ago, at my final Diploma, setting the 13th course as a G and it worked, and I read from staff. Weyrauch is easier, but makes some changes I don't think Bach would have much appreciated. Donatella http://web.tiscali.it/awebd - Original Message - From: Thomas Schall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Howard Posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Michael Stitt [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Miles Dempster [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Lute Net [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 10:51 AM Subject: Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo? The piece in question (BWV 995) is the only one (apart from the short prelude BWV 999) clearly dedicated to the Lute. The rest could have been to the Lautenwerk (which would have a low g) but this one most likely really was rearranged for the lute. The compromise - as I already said - would be that Big B. made that tiny little mistake regarding the range of the lute. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 02.09 schrieb Howard Posner: Michael Stitt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for this Thomas. Assuming Bach either misunderstood the lowest tuning of the Baroque lute (which I very much doubt) not being an Gg but rather a Aa, or was in contact with such a 14 course instrument. I think it makes more sense to assume that he had a low G on his lautenwerk. -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss -- __ Tiscali ADSL SENZA CANONE: Attivazione GRATIS, contributo adesione GRATIS, modem GRATIS, 50 ore di navigazione GRATIS. ABBONARTI TI COSTA SOLO UN CLICK! http://point.tiscali.it/adsl/index.shtml -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss --
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
Good on you Donatella, I concur with all the way on this! Reading Forkel and subsequent keyboard players note that Bach's music is very difficult to play. It is generally regarded that his music was written in his mind and not with his fingers. The man continually strived to write pure music without the limitation of finger tampering. The whole history of his music leading up to the Art of the Fugue (where no instruments are specified for this monumental work) always strives more and more complex, but necessarily idiomatic music. Bach was in possession of a lute worth a considerable sum in the inventory of his Estate following death. I just cant imagine a man with the mind of Bach conceiving masterpieces for so many instruments, not understanding the lute and missing a low Gg! Regards, Michael Stitt Thomas Schall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Donatella, I'm not sure - there were many different types of lute around at Bach's day. Just as an example the low G usually would fit the tessitura of an archlute - giving the italian connections of the courts it would be understandable how this mistake could happen. Or - another possibility: It was even intended to be played on an archlute (which would make the complete work much easier). If you tune the 13th course down to g you will need to change the A which seldom but occassionally appears in the suite. So this would point into a similar direction: Bach wouldn't have known the tessitura of the baroque lute. Actually I don't think the work, even if dedicated to someone who is known to have played the lute, is arranged for a lute in baroque tuning. Writing such awkward difficult (if possible to play at all) compositions would have been considered bad at Bach's time. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 14.09 schrieb Donatella Galletti: I don't think someone like Bach made tiny mistakes of this sort. I played BWV 995 years ago, at my final Diploma, setting the 13th course as a G and it worked, and I read from staff. Weyrauch is easier, but makes some changes I don't think Bach would have much appreciated. Donatella http://web.tiscali.it/awebd - Original Message - From: Thomas Schall To: Howard Posner Cc: Michael Stitt ; Miles Dempster ; Lute Net Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 10:51 AM Subject: Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo? The piece in question (BWV 995) is the only one (apart from the short prelude BWV 999) clearly dedicated to the Lute. The rest could have been to the Lautenwerk (which would have a low g) but this one most likely really was rearranged for the lute. The compromise - as I already said - would be that Big B. made that tiny little mistake regarding the range of the lute. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 02.09 schrieb Howard Posner: Michael Stitt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for this Thomas. Assuming Bach either misunderstood the lowest tuning of the Baroque lute (which I very much doubt) not being an Gg but rather a Aa, or was in contact with such a 14 course instrument. I think it makes more sense to assume that he had a low G on his lautenwerk. -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss -- __ Tiscali ADSL SENZA CANONE: Attivazione GRATIS, contributo adesione GRATIS, modem GRATIS, 50 ore di navigazione GRATIS. ABBONARTI TI COSTA SOLO UN CLICK! http://point.tiscali.it/adsl/index.shtml -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss -- - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the Signing Bonus Sweepstakes --
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
Hi Michael, if it was a lute or a mandora which Bach owned - nobody knows. His household had quite many instruments and he not necessarily played all of them. He was in firendly contact with JC Hoffmann, yes, bu Johann Christian also has built many other instruments apart from lutes. The difficulty could mean many things: technical difficulty or musical difficulty. Usually the works by Bach were regarded as musically difficult - difficult to understand, difficult to listen to them etc. old-fashioned. Bach was more famous for being an exceptional keyboard player during his lifetime than for his compositions! Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 22.59 schrieb Michael Stitt: Good on you Donatella, I concur with all the way on this! Reading Forkel and subsequent keyboard players note that Bach's music is very difficult to play. It is generally regarded that his music was written in his mind and not with his fingers. The man continually strived to write pure music without the limitation of finger tampering. The whole history of his music leading up to the Art of the Fugue (where no instruments are specified for this monumental work) always strives more and more complex, but necessarily idiomatic music. Bach was in possession of a lute worth a considerable sum in the inventory of his Estate following death. I just can?t imagine a man with the mind of Bach conceiving masterpieces for so many instruments, not understanding the lute and missing a low Gg! Regards, Michael Stitt Thomas Schall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Donatella, I'm not sure - there were many different types of lute around at Bach's day. Just as an example the low G usually would fit the tessitura of an archlute - giving the italian connections of the courts it would be understandable how this mistake could happen. Or - another possibility: It was even intended to be played on an archlute (which would make the complete work much easier). If you tune the 13th course down to g you will need to change the A which seldom but occassionally appears in the suite. So this would point into a similar direction: Bach wouldn't have known the tessitura of the baroque lute. Actually I don't think the work, even if dedicated to someone who is known to have played the lute, is arranged for a lute in baroque tuning. Writing such awkward difficult (if possible to play at all) compositions would have been considered bad at Bach's time. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 14.09 schrieb Donatella Galletti: I don't think someone like Bach made tiny mistakes of this sort. I played BWV 995 years ago, at my final Diploma, setting the 13th course as a G and it worked, and I read from staff. Weyrauch is easier, but makes some changes I don't think Bach would have much appreciated. Donatella http://web.tiscali.it/awebd - Original Message - From: Thomas Schall To: Howard Posner Cc: Michael Stitt ; Miles Dempster ; Lute Net Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 10:51 AM Subject: Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo? The piece in question (BWV 995) is the only one (apart from the short prelude BWV 999) clearly dedicated to the Lute. The rest could have been to the Lautenwerk (which would have a low g) but this one most likely really was rearranged for the lute. The compromise - as I already said - would be that Big B. made that tiny little mistake regarding the range of the lute. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 02.09 schrieb Howard Posner: Michael Stitt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for this Thomas. Assuming Bach either misunderstood the lowest tuning of the Baroque lute (which I very much doubt) not being an Gg but rather a Aa, or was in contact with such a 14 course instrument. I think it makes more sense to assume that he had a low G on his lautenwerk. -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
Dear Arto and Thomas, I think those who leave the Bach lute suites, however debateable they be that they were conceived on a lute, off their repertoire agenda, miss out on great music. It is hard work on the lute but IMHO well worth the effort. I play them all (although I still have some difficulty with the fuga BWV 997) . The only one which I feel is particularly better suited for a guitar is BWV 996 perhaps because of the e minor key which is well suited to that instrument. Over the years I have gained a greater appreciation for other composers, particularly Hagen and Weiss still primarily the German composer. Recently I have started writing my own music, but thats progressing slowly so far. As for Weiss, those late Dresden Suites are wonderful and thats what I have been playing on a daily basis. The problem I have is my old fashionness! I love contrapuntal music so while I enjoy Weisss idiomatic insight with the lute, I wish we had more fugas like BWV 996, 997, 998 and 1000. Thats why Im turning to my own compositions however, amateurish they may be. Michael Stitt Thomas Schall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hi Michael, if it was a lute or a mandora which Bach owned - nobody knows. His household had quite many instruments and he not necessarily played all of them. He was in firendly contact with JC Hoffmann, yes, bu Johann Christian also has built many other instruments apart from lutes. The difficulty could mean many things: technical difficulty or musical difficulty. Usually the works by Bach were regarded as musically difficult - difficult to understand, difficult to listen to them etc. old-fashioned. Bach was more famous for being an exceptional keyboard player during his lifetime than for his compositions! Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 22.59 schrieb Michael Stitt: Good on you Donatella, I concur with all the way on this! Reading Forkel and subsequent keyboard players note that Bach's music is very difficult to play. It is generally regarded that his music was written in his mind and not with his fingers. The man continually strived to write pure music without the limitation of finger tampering. The whole history of his music leading up to the Art of the Fugue (where no instruments are specified for this monumental work) always strives more and more complex, but necessarily idiomatic music. Bach was in possession of a lute worth a considerable sum in the inventory of his Estate following death. I just can?t imagine a man with the mind of Bach conceiving masterpieces for so many instruments, not understanding the lute and missing a low Gg! Regards, Michael Stitt Thomas Schall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Donatella, I'm not sure - there were many different types of lute around at Bach's day. Just as an example the low G usually would fit the tessitura of an archlute - giving the italian connections of the courts it would be understandable how this mistake could happen. Or - another possibility: It was even intended to be played on an archlute (which would make the complete work much easier). If you tune the 13th course down to g you will need to change the A which seldom but occassionally appears in the suite. So this would point into a similar direction: Bach wouldn't have known the tessitura of the baroque lute. Actually I don't think the work, even if dedicated to someone who is known to have played the lute, is arranged for a lute in baroque tuning. Writing such awkward difficult (if possible to play at all) compositions would have been considered bad at Bach's time. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 14.09 schrieb Donatella Galletti: I don't think someone like Bach made tiny mistakes of this sort. I played BWV 995 years ago, at my final Diploma, setting the 13th course as a G and it worked, and I read from staff. Weyrauch is easier, but makes some changes I don't think Bach would have much appreciated. Donatella http://web.tiscali.it/awebd - Original Message - From: Thomas Schall To: Howard Posner Cc: Michael Stitt ; Miles Dempster ; Lute Net Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 10:51 AM Subject: Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo? The piece in question (BWV 995) is the only one (apart from the short prelude BWV 999) clearly dedicated to the Lute. The rest could have been to the Lautenwerk (which would have a low g) but this one most likely really was rearranged for the lute. The compromise - as I already said - would be that Big B. made that tiny little mistake regarding the range of the lute. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 02.09 schrieb Howard Posner: Michael Stitt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for this Thomas. Assuming Bach either misunderstood the lowest tuning of the Baroque lute (which I very much doubt) not being an Gg but rather a Aa, or was in contact with such a 14 course instrument
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
That Bach was known as an exceptional keyboardist rivalling Handel and Scarlatti was indeed well known, however, Forkel and those who defended Bach in the mid eighteenth century acknowledged his abilities as a composer. I know of no other composer who transcribes so well to other instruments. It is truly pure music. Even Weiss does not hold well on other instruments I suspect compared with Bach. Regards, M. Thomas Schall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Michael, if it was a lute or a mandora which Bach owned - nobody knows. His household had quite many instruments and he not necessarily played all of them. He was in firendly contact with JC Hoffmann, yes, bu Johann Christian also has built many other instruments apart from lutes. The difficulty could mean many things: technical difficulty or musical difficulty. Usually the works by Bach were regarded as musically difficult - difficult to understand, difficult to listen to them etc. old-fashioned. Bach was more famous for being an exceptional keyboard player during his lifetime than for his compositions! Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 22.59 schrieb Michael Stitt: Good on you Donatella, I concur with all the way on this! Reading Forkel and subsequent keyboard players note that Bach's music is very difficult to play. It is generally regarded that his music was written in his mind and not with his fingers. The man continually strived to write pure music without the limitation of finger tampering. The whole history of his music leading up to the Art of the Fugue (where no instruments are specified for this monumental work) always strives more and more complex, but necessarily idiomatic music. Bach was in possession of a lute worth a considerable sum in the inventory of his Estate following death. I just can?t imagine a man with the mind of Bach conceiving masterpieces for so many instruments, not understanding the lute and missing a low Gg! Regards, Michael Stitt Thomas Schall wrote: Dear Donatella, I'm not sure - there were many different types of lute around at Bach's day. Just as an example the low G usually would fit the tessitura of an archlute - giving the italian connections of the courts it would be understandable how this mistake could happen. Or - another possibility: It was even intended to be played on an archlute (which would make the complete work much easier). If you tune the 13th course down to g you will need to change the A which seldom but occassionally appears in the suite. So this would point into a similar direction: Bach wouldn't have known the tessitura of the baroque lute. Actually I don't think the work, even if dedicated to someone who is known to have played the lute, is arranged for a lute in baroque tuning. Writing such awkward difficult (if possible to play at all) compositions would have been considered bad at Bach's time. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 14.09 schrieb Donatella Galletti: I don't think someone like Bach made tiny mistakes of this sort. I played BWV 995 years ago, at my final Diploma, setting the 13th course as a G and it worked, and I read from staff. Weyrauch is easier, but makes some changes I don't think Bach would have much appreciated. Donatella http://web.tiscali.it/awebd - Original Message - From: Thomas Schall To: Howard Posner Cc: Michael Stitt ; Miles Dempster ; Lute Net Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 10:51 AM Subject: Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo? The piece in question (BWV 995) is the only one (apart from the short prelude BWV 999) clearly dedicated to the Lute. The rest could have been to the Lautenwerk (which would have a low g) but this one most likely really was rearranged for the lute. The compromise - as I already said - would be that Big B. made that tiny little mistake regarding the range of the lute. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 02.09 schrieb Howard Posner: Michael Stitt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for this Thomas. Assuming Bach either misunderstood the lowest tuning of the Baroque lute (which I very much doubt) not being an Gg but rather a Aa, or was in contact with such a 14 course instrument. I think it makes more sense to assume that he had a low G on his lautenwerk. -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss -- __ Tiscali ADSL SENZA CANONE: Attivazione GRATIS, contributo adesione GRATIS, modem GRATIS, 50 ore di navigazione GRATIS. ABBONARTI TI COSTA SOLO UN CLICK! http://point.tiscali.it/adsl/index.shtml -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
. Actually I don't think the work, even if dedicated to someone who is known to have played the lute, is arranged for a lute in baroque tuning. Writing such awkward difficult (if possible to play at all) compositions would have been considered bad at Bach's time. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 14.09 schrieb Donatella Galletti: I don't think someone like Bach made tiny mistakes of this sort. I played BWV 995 years ago, at my final Diploma, setting the 13th course as a G and it worked, and I read from staff. Weyrauch is easier, but makes some changes I don't think Bach would have much appreciated. Donatella http://web.tiscali.it/awebd - Original Message - From: Thomas Schall To: Howard Posner Cc: Michael Stitt ; Miles Dempster ; Lute Net Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 10:51 AM Subject: Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo? The piece in question (BWV 995) is the only one (apart from the short prelude BWV 999) clearly dedicated to the Lute. The rest could have been to the Lautenwerk (which would have a low g) but this one most likely really was rearranged for the lute. The compromise - as I already said - would be that Big B. made that tiny little mistake regarding the range of the lute. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 02.09 schrieb Howard Posner: Michael Stitt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for this Thomas. Assuming Bach either misunderstood the lowest tuning of the Baroque lute (which I very much doubt) not being an Gg but rather a Aa, or was in contact with such a 14 course instrument. I think it makes more sense to assume that he had a low G on his lautenwerk. -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss -- __ Tiscali ADSL SENZA CANONE: Attivazione GRATIS, contributo adesione GRATIS, modem GRATIS, 50 ore di navigazione GRATIS. ABBONARTI TI COSTA SOLO UN CLICK! http://point.tiscali.it/adsl/index.shtml -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss -- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the Signing Bonus Sweepstakes -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the Signing Bonus Sweepstakes -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss --
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
Message - From: Thomas Schall To: Howard Posner Cc: Michael Stitt ; Miles Dempster ; Lute Net Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 10:51 AM Subject: Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo? The piece in question (BWV 995) is the only one (apart from the short prelude BWV 999) clearly dedicated to the Lute. The rest could have been to the Lautenwerk (which would have a low g) but this one most likely really was rearranged for the lute. The compromise - as I already said - would be that Big B. made that tiny little mistake regarding the range of the lute. Best wishes Thomas Am Die, 2004-01-06 um 02.09 schrieb Howard Posner: Michael Stitt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for this Thomas. Assuming Bach either misunderstood the lowest tuning of the Baroque lute (which I very much doubt) not being an Gg but rather a Aa, or was in contact with such a 14 course instrument. I think it makes more sense to assume that he had a low G on his lautenwerk. -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss -- __ Tiscali ADSL SENZA CANONE: Attivazione GRATIS, contributo adesione GRATIS, modem GRATIS, 50 ore di navigazione GRATIS. ABBONARTI TI COSTA SOLO UN CLICK! http://point.tiscali.it/adsl/index.shtml -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss -- - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the Signing Bonus Sweepstakes -- Thomas SchallNiederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach06196/[EMAIL PROTECTED] / www.tslaute.de/weiss - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the Signing Bonus Sweepstakes -- Thomas SchallNiederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach06196/[EMAIL PROTECTED] / www.tslaute.de/weiss - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the Signing Bonus Sweepstakes --
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
Thomas Schall at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The difficulty could mean many things: technical difficulty or musical difficulty. Usually the works by Bach were regarded as musically difficult - difficult to understand, difficult to listen to them etc. old-fashioned. Were regarded by whom, other than Johann Adolph Scheibe in a couple of paragraphs in a 1737 article that were roundly denounced by Birnbaum and Mizler? BTW, Scheibe wrote that Bach demands that singers and instrumentalists should be able to do with their throats and instruments whatever he can play on the clavier, but this is impossible. Bach was more famous for being an exceptional keyboard player during his lifetime than for his compositions! His keyboard playing would have consisted mostly of his compositions, improvisations and continuo playing, so I think it misses the point to draw a sharp distinction between Bach the player and Bach the composer. In any event, Scheibe's 1739 praise of the Italian Concerto (yes, the same Scheibe), Mizler's 1740 praise of the Clavier-Ubung, Mattheson's 1737 remarks on the A minor sonata for unaccompanies violin, Quantz's 1752 remarks about organ music, Marpurg's 1754 dedication that speaks about Bach's combination of melody and harmony, and others all speak of his skill as a composer. Just cruising through the excerpts in the Bach Reader, I see rather more about Bach's music itself than his execution. Howard
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
Which Clavier-Ubung? I assume No.3 - Goldberg variations? In which case, technically difficult indeed. I understand the Tocattas for keyboard are thought to have been written on clavichord (Here I refer not to the organ works) are the closest we have to Bach the improvisor - how the man extemporised and once again I understand are a tremendous challenge for a keyboard player to work through. regards, Michael. Howard Posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thomas Schall at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The difficulty could mean many things: technical difficulty or musical difficulty. Usually the works by Bach were regarded as musically difficult - difficult to understand, difficult to listen to them etc. old-fashioned. Were regarded by whom, other than Johann Adolph Scheibe in a couple of paragraphs in a 1737 article that were roundly denounced by Birnbaum and Mizler? BTW, Scheibe wrote that Bach demands that singers and instrumentalists should be able to do with their throats and instruments whatever he can play on the clavier, but this is impossible. Bach was more famous for being an exceptional keyboard player during his lifetime than for his compositions! His keyboard playing would have consisted mostly of his compositions, improvisations and continuo playing, so I think it misses the point to draw a sharp distinction between Bach the player and Bach the composer. In any event, Scheibe's 1739 praise of the Italian Concerto (yes, the same Scheibe), Mizler's 1740 praise of the Clavier-Ubung, Mattheson's 1737 remarks on the A minor sonata for unaccompanies violin, Quantz's 1752 remarks about organ music, Marpurg's 1754 dedication that speaks about Bach's combination of melody and harmony, and others all speak of his skill as a composer. Just cruising through the excerpts in the Bach Reader, I see rather more about Bach's music itself than his execution. Howard - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the Signing Bonus Sweepstakes --
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
My liuto attiorbato (14-ch. model after Sellas) has a low F and it's frequently used by Mellii, Zamboni and others. I have not seen up to now a piece in the italian baroque which uses a 15th ch. - many players even tune their 14th course at f-sharp (for easier continuo). BTW: BWV 995 works fine on a 13-ch instrument when tuning the 13th course at G and transposing just the very few passages an A is needed. Best wishes Thomas Am Mon, 2004-01-05 um 22.52 schrieb Michael Stitt: Thanks for this Thomas. Assuming Bach either misunderstood the lowest tuning of the Baroque lute (which I very much doubt) not being an Gg but rather a Aa, or was in contact with such a 14 course instrument. Just how low can the instrument be tuned down to take advantage of low bass strings for musical affect on the instrument? My thumb with little finger JUST manages the stretch to reach those low Gs, but I find that - say in the final bars of BWV 995 my hand assumes a guitarist-like position. I had once thought of adding a fifteenth course a very low Ff, but in the end musically what would this achieve? Any suggestions on the value of a very low Ff? Regards, Michael Stitt Thomas Schall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Miles, Zamboni wrote for an Archlute which is tuned in the vielle tone (renaissance tuning) while Michael tunes his instrument in the new (d-minor) tuning. Archlutes are usually 14-ch., I also know about 15-ch. examples (for example in Paris - take a look at the website of David van Edwards and search for liito attiorbato and you'll find fotos of replica). There are a lot of other differences to the baroque (d-minor) lute (barring, usual number of ribs etc.) and I think one need to name them as different instruments. best wishes Thomas Am Mon, 2004-01-05 um 19.45 schrieb Miles Dempster: Dear Michael, Zamboni' s sonatas very occasionally use a 14th course. Regards Miles Dempster On Sunday, January 4, 2004, at 09:29 PM, Michael Stitt wrote: Dear all, Am I right to assume that Bach's music is the only music to require that low Gg - fourteeth course? The ambiguity and terminology of description for this lute has always been a bit of problem for me. When asked what instrument I play and Courses versus `number of strings', it becomes a mouthful. I am asked: `What instrument do you play?' I play a 14 course German theorbo, is usually my reply. But then explaining that each course has two `doubled-up' strings but the first two are single, making a sum total of twenty-six NOT twenty-eight strings... Then there is `fourteen course??!' - I thought the Baroque lute has thirteen courses? My response is: `Yes, a Gg tp play Bach's BWV 995, 1997, 1000' Almost finally, but is it really a theorbo or a Baroque lute? `Yes it is a theorbo because it has the extra bass pegbox'. Why the German bit? `It is based on a lute constructed by JCHoffmann who was German...'. End of breath... I bet a guitarist does not get this, six strings will do! hehe. Regards, Michael Stitt - Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now -- -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss -- __ Do you Yahoo!? Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003 -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss --
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
Thomas, Very interesting indeed! Well I might try a retune and explore. Many thanks, Michael Stitt Thomas Schall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My liuto attiorbato (14-ch. model after Sellas) has a low F and it's frequently used by Mellii, Zamboni and others. I have not seen up to now a piece in the italian baroque which uses a 15th ch. - many players even tune their 14th course at f-sharp (for easier continuo). BTW: BWV 995 works fine on a 13-ch instrument when tuning the 13th course at G and transposing just the very few passages an A is needed. Best wishes Thomas Am Mon, 2004-01-05 um 22.52 schrieb Michael Stitt: Thanks for this Thomas. Assuming Bach either misunderstood the lowest tuning of the Baroque lute (which I very much doubt) not being an Gg but rather a Aa, or was in contact with such a 14 course instrument. Just how low can the instrument be tuned down to take advantage of low bass strings for musical affect on the instrument? My thumb with little finger JUST manages the stretch to reach those low Gs, but I find that - say in the final bars of BWV 995 my hand assumes a guitarist-like position. I had once thought of adding a fifteenth course a very low Ff, but in the end musically what would this achieve? Any suggestions on the value of a very low Ff? Regards, Michael Stitt Thomas Schall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Miles, Zamboni wrote for an Archlute which is tuned in the vielle tone (renaissance tuning) while Michael tunes his instrument in the new (d-minor) tuning. Archlutes are usually 14-ch., I also know about 15-ch. examples (for example in Paris - take a look at the website of David van Edwards and search for liito attiorbato and you'll find fotos of replica). There are a lot of other differences to the baroque (d-minor) lute (barring, usual number of ribs etc.) and I think one need to name them as different instruments. best wishes Thomas Am Mon, 2004-01-05 um 19.45 schrieb Miles Dempster: Dear Michael, Zamboni' s sonatas very occasionally use a 14th course. Regards Miles Dempster On Sunday, January 4, 2004, at 09:29 PM, Michael Stitt wrote: Dear all, Am I right to assume that Bach's music is the only music to require that low Gg - fourteeth course? The ambiguity and terminology of description for this lute has always been a bit of problem for me. When asked what instrument I play and Courses versus `number of strings', it becomes a mouthful. I am asked: `What instrument do you play?' I play a 14 course German theorbo, is usually my reply. But then explaining that each course has two `doubled-up' strings but the first two are single, making a sum total of twenty-six NOT twenty-eight strings... Then there is `fourteen course??!' - I thought the Baroque lute has thirteen courses? My response is: `Yes, a Gg tp play Bach's BWV 995, 1997, 1000' Almost finally, but is it really a theorbo or a Baroque lute? `Yes it is a theorbo because it has the extra bass pegbox'. Why the German bit? `It is based on a lute constructed by JCHoffmann who was German...'. End of breath... I bet a guitarist does not get this, six strings will do! hehe. Regards, Michael Stitt - Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now -- -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss -- - Do you Yahoo!? Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003 -- Thomas SchallNiederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach06196/[EMAIL PROTECTED] / www.tslaute.de/weiss - Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now --
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
Thanks for this Thomas. Assuming Bach either misunderstood the lowest tuning of the Baroque lute (which I very much doubt) not being an Gg but rather a Aa, or was in contact with such a 14 course instrument. Just how low can the instrument be tuned down to take advantage of low bass strings for musical affect on the instrument? My thumb with little finger JUST manages the stretch to reach those low Gs, but I find that - say in the final bars of BWV 995 my hand assumes a guitarist-like position. I had once thought of adding a fifteenth course a very low Ff, but in the end musically what would this achieve? Any suggestions on the value of a very low Ff? Regards, Michael Stitt Thomas Schall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Miles, Zamboni wrote for an Archlute which is tuned in the vielle tone (renaissance tuning) while Michael tunes his instrument in the new (d-minor) tuning. Archlutes are usually 14-ch., I also know about 15-ch. examples (for example in Paris - take a look at the website of David van Edwards and search for liito attiorbato and you'll find fotos of replica). There are a lot of other differences to the baroque (d-minor) lute (barring, usual number of ribs etc.) and I think one need to name them as different instruments. best wishes Thomas Am Mon, 2004-01-05 um 19.45 schrieb Miles Dempster: Dear Michael, Zamboni' s sonatas very occasionally use a 14th course. Regards Miles Dempster On Sunday, January 4, 2004, at 09:29 PM, Michael Stitt wrote: Dear all, Am I right to assume that Bach's music is the only music to require that low Gg - fourteeth course? The ambiguity and terminology of description for this lute has always been a bit of problem for me. When asked what instrument I play and Courses versus `number of strings', it becomes a mouthful. I am asked: `What instrument do you play?' I play a 14 course German theorbo, is usually my reply. But then explaining that each course has two `doubled-up' strings but the first two are single, making a sum total of twenty-six NOT twenty-eight strings... Then there is `fourteen course??!' - I thought the Baroque lute has thirteen courses? My response is: `Yes, a Gg tp play Bach's BWV 995, 1997, 1000' Almost finally, but is it really a theorbo or a Baroque lute? `Yes it is a theorbo because it has the extra bass pegbox'. Why the German bit? `It is based on a lute constructed by JCHoffmann who was German...'. End of breath... I bet a guitarist does not get this, six strings will do! hehe. Regards, Michael Stitt - Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now -- -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lautenist.de / www.tslaute.de/weiss -- - Do you Yahoo!? Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003 --
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
Dear Michael, On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, Michael Stitt wrote: Arto!!!Stop itt!!:-) ;-) I am sorry Michael! I just could not avoid saying so... ;-)) Arto
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo? BACH
Howard, This is fair assumption to make, but I don't think a man who devoted a greater part of his life to music, a meticulous thinker, friends of at least two lutenists, and one frequented by one of the greatest of them all (Weiss), without mistaking the lowest bass string on the lute. It just seems too hard to believe. He may have written it on the lautenwerke, but he intended it to be played on a lute, ( See autograph copy). I think it all points to Weyrauch (sp?) or Falkenhagen - or - and no one knows for sure on this - Schouster - a possible amateur lutenist? having ownership of a 14 course with that low Gg. Best regards, Michael. Howard Posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michael Stitt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for this Thomas. Assuming Bach either misunderstood the lowest tuning of the Baroque lute (which I very much doubt) not being an Gg but rather a Aa, or was in contact with such a 14 course instrument. I think it makes more sense to assume that he had a low G on his lautenwerk. - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the Signing Bonus Sweepstakes --
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo? BACH
Dear Michael all, I think it is wrong to assume that because BWV 995 calls for a low G, JSB must have had a 14 course lute in mind. I do not think it was a matter of practicality for JSB. He wrote pieces for other instruments as well that called for notes out of the tessitura. I think he wrote the piece in staff notation, with the lute in mind, not accounting for the tuning of the lowest possible note on the lute. I think the composition is based on an idea or an intention of the idea. Notice that the contemporary intabulation was unable to play the low G, had other solutions to the problem, often adding ornaments to cover up for the loss of the low tonic. In examining the contemporary intabulation, there are many, many areas that are different from what Bach wrote. I think that the intabulator merely thought it was great music ( indeed it is), adapted it for the lute, in a version that is more practical, or playable. Back in those times, people did not have the reverence that we have in our times for JSB. They were just compromising great music, to bring it into their particular style. Too often we judge these intabulations as being corrupt, when in actuality, they are bone fide works from the period, and they give us a clue as to what solutions they came up with. And after all, Falkenhagen was a professional, and I think he did us a great service to intabulate 995. In terms of Shouster, I seem to remember reading somewhere that he was a bookseller, who sold the books of Falkenhagen. Hence, the dedication of the copyist/intabulator [probably Falkenhagen] of BWV 995 to Mr. Schouster. ed He may have written it on the lautenwerke, but he intended it to be played on a lute, ( See autograph copy). I think it all points to Weyrauch (sp?) or Falkenhagen - or - and no one knows for sure on this - Schouster - a possible amateur lutenist? having ownership of a 14 course with that low Gg. Best regards, Michael.
Re: MORE THAN 14 course German theorbo?
David Rastall at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Picinnini also uses the 14th course at times, but it looks to me as if he is sometimes indicating something other than F. Did they use re-entrant tuning on those bass courses? In a way. Piccinini's 14th course was tuned to the F# below the sixth-course G, i.e. a major seventh above the 13th course.
