Re: Otras tres diferencias
> Thanks Monica. 'Guardame las vacas' is certainly based on the romanesca, but > the 'Otras tres diferencias' only partially fits the passamezzo antico: > i/VII/i/V/III/VII/i-V/i. > > 'Otras' has this chordal outline: i/VII/VI/V/i/VII/iv-V/i/iv-V/I - the first > half of which is often referred to now as the 'Andalusian cadence'. The > interesting chord is VI, which appears in first inversion (implying but > changing the passamezzo antico sequence). Yes - you are right although arguably he has just touched on the F major chord = III at the mid point. I think the point is we classify these things and give them names today for our convenience, but in the 16th and 17th centuries they were actually more fluid. What was important was the bass line and melody and how the harmony was filled in could vary. Hence the B flat major chord instead of D minor. The bass line is D C D A etc. The melody is just the four descending notes - F, E, D, C# which also fits the romanesca - III VII i V or F C D A. (My transcription is in D minor.) It is interesting that Murcia often introduces the "Andalusian cadence" into his passacalles which are generally based on i iv V i but it is also associated with the chacona. Cheers Monica > -Original Message- > From: Monica Hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 09 July 2005 15:43 > To: Rob MacKillop > Cc: vihuela > Subject: Re: Otras tres diferencias > > > I think that these are two quite separate pieces. The Spanish translates > better as "Another three variations on 'Guardame las vacas' made on the > other (or another) part" - the other part being a different version of the > bass line. > > In his dissertation on the vihuela John Ward says that the bass line is that > of the passamezzo antico instead of the romanesca, but that the discant of > the romanesca is retained. I haven't played it recently but I'm sure he > must be right. > > Monica > > Monica > > - Original Message - > From: Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 10:05 AM > Subject: Otras tres diferencias > > > > Have we a definitive understanding of what Narvaez was referring to > > when > he > > entitled the piece after 'Guardame las vacas' as ''Otras tres > > diferencias sobre 'Guardame las vacas', hechas por otra parte''? > > > ''Otras tres diferencias > > sobre , hechas por otra parte''? > > > The grounds each piece > > are built upon are entirely different, likewise the melody (if we can > > call it that - seems more like variations without a theme, just > > doodling on the chord structures). So the first part of the title is > > confusing : 'three > more > > variations on Guardame las vacas'. My Spanish is very poor, and the > > second part of the title looks like 'one has for the other part', or > > 'we have for the other part'. > > > > Rob > > > > > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > > > > > > > >
RE: Otras tres diferencias
Thanks Monica. 'Guardame las vacas' is certainly based on the romanesca, but the 'Otras tres diferencias' only partially fits the passamezzo antico: i/VII/i/V/III/VII/i-V/i. 'Otras' has this chordal outline: i/VII/VI/V/i/VII/iv-V/i/iv-V/I - the first half of which is often referred to now as the 'Andalusian cadence'. The interesting chord is VI, which appears in first inversion (implying but changing the passamezzo antico sequence). I haven't read Ward (he is usually correct!) and wonder what is the 'discant' of Guardame, and how does it fit into this sequence? Rob -Original Message- From: Monica Hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 July 2005 15:43 To: Rob MacKillop Cc: vihuela Subject: Re: Otras tres diferencias I think that these are two quite separate pieces. The Spanish translates better as "Another three variations on 'Guardame las vacas' made on the other (or another) part" - the other part being a different version of the bass line. In his dissertation on the vihuela John Ward says that the bass line is that of the passamezzo antico instead of the romanesca, but that the discant of the romanesca is retained. I haven't played it recently but I'm sure he must be right. Monica Monica - Original Message - From: Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 10:05 AM Subject: Otras tres diferencias > Have we a definitive understanding of what Narvaez was referring to > when he > entitled the piece after 'Guardame las vacas' as ''Otras tres > diferencias sobre 'Guardame las vacas', hechas por otra parte''? ''Otras tres diferencias > sobre , hechas por otra parte''? The grounds each piece > are built upon are entirely different, likewise the melody (if we can > call it that - seems more like variations without a theme, just > doodling on the chord structures). So the first part of the title is > confusing : 'three more > variations on Guardame las vacas'. My Spanish is very poor, and the > second part of the title looks like 'one has for the other part', or > 'we have for the other part'. > > Rob > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > >
Re: Otras tres diferencias
I think that these are two quite separate pieces. The Spanish translates better as "Another three variations on 'Guardame las vacas' made on the other (or another) part" - the other part being a different version of the bass line. In his dissertation on the vihuela John Ward says that the bass line is that of the passamezzo antico instead of the romanesca, but that the discant of the romanesca is retained. I haven't played it recently but I'm sure he must be right. Monica Monica - Original Message - From: Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 10:05 AM Subject: Otras tres diferencias > Have we a definitive understanding of what Narvaez was referring to when he > entitled the piece after 'Guardame las vacas' as ''Otras tres diferencias > sobre 'Guardame las vacas', hechas por otra parte''? ''Otras tres diferencias > sobre , hechas por otra parte''? The grounds each piece > are built upon are entirely different, likewise the melody (if we can call > it that - seems more like variations without a theme, just doodling on the > chord structures). So the first part of the title is confusing : 'three more > variations on Guardame las vacas'. My Spanish is very poor, and the second > part of the title looks like 'one has for the other part', or 'we have for > the other part'. > > Rob > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > >
Otras tres diferencias
Have we a definitive understanding of what Narvaez was referring to when he entitled the piece after 'Guardame las vacas' as ''Otras tres diferencias sobre 'Guardame las vacas', hechas por otra parte''? The grounds each piece are built upon are entirely different, likewise the melody (if we can call it that - seems more like variations without a theme, just doodling on the chord structures). So the first part of the title is confusing : 'three more variations on Guardame las vacas'. My Spanish is very poor, and the second part of the title looks like 'one has for the other part', or 'we have for the other part'. Rob To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
