vihuela  

[VIHUELA] Re: 'Strumming' Foscarini (and others) - even more agreement

Monica Hall
Tue, 15 Jan 2008 06:42:44 -0800

In a different context - in the Corrente on p.60 in the first line there are 
passing notes following Chord M3 and G.   These are clearly !!! WHY 
meant to be played as single notes.   It is not possible to play those 
following Chord G and hold the chord.
*****************************************************

I'm sorry but at this point I am afraid that I have to disagree with you 
because Foscarini has explicitly said in Rule 4 that in this situation these 
notes should be played as single notes.

To quote it again...

Fourthly particular regard must  be had when playing  those numbers which are 
placed beside the letter.  These must be played singly; that is to say touching 
neither less nor more strings than those which are shown.  In this way the 
effect of the ornaments will be felt and the parts will follow distinctly one  
after the other; such is my intention.   Which observation will be both in 
general and especially in the Arie di Firenze Passegiate, Correnti Francese, 
Toccate, Gagliarde, e Balletti.  Otherwise if more or less numbers [than are 
shown] are played it will succeed in awakening  little pleasure in the 
listener.  This is to be observed even if the number is alone; that is to say 
only touch that string and fret which the said number shows.



The piece in question is a Corrente Francese.   On p.16 there is an Aria di 
Firenze Passeggiata and throughout this piece you are supposed to play the 
notes on the up strokes as single notes.



There is a certain amount of logic in marking them as up strokes because they 
will be played with an up stroke with one finger.



If this rule doesn't apply in these circumstances - where does it apply?

    *****************************
    RESPONSE
    In short, I do indeed still think that he knew what he wanted and was 
trying, within the confines of the notation, to indicate what he actually did

    So do I but I think that what he wants is something a bit different from 
what you seem to suggest!

    Monica


      Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
        Yes - I think we are more or less in agreement. I used to think with 
Bartolotti that you should always repeat the chord with the auxiliary note.

        But I have been re-reading the instructions in the earliest books and 
suddenly had this feeling that perhaps I got it wrong about Bartolotti as what 
he say is a bit ambiguous!

        Monica
        From: Martyn Hodgson 
        To: Monica Hall 
        Cc: Vihuelalist 
        Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 1:32 PM
        Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again -


        Yes - I think we're reaching some sort of middle way. However, in the 
case we were particularly discussing I still return to the strum sign which I 
think makes all the difference - Rob shows well how it can be translated in 
practice (even makes me want to return to F).
        Incidentally, I gave the B example simply to show how general the 
practice was (as I know you know) not because I'm still confusing the 
two..........

        Martyn



        Monica Hall wrote:
        Well - we are talking about Foscarini not Bartolotti.

        In his instructions at the beginning of Book 1 Bartolotti does say that 
you should hold the chord in place whilst you play the intervening notes but it 
is not entirely clear whether you should always repeat the chord with the 
passing note. In some circumstances I think that you should, and in others 
perhaps not. He quite clearly indicates notes which should be played as single 
notes - by putting 1 or 2 dots beside them.

        Foscarini is another matter. His Fourth rule reads as follows

        Fourthly particular regard must be had when playing those numbers which 
are placed beside the letter. These must be played singly; that is to say 
touching neither less nor more strings than those which are shown. In this way 
the effect of the ornaments will be felt and the parts will follow distinctly 
one after the other; such is my intention. Which observation will be both in 
general and especially in the Arie di Firenze Passegiate, Correnti Francese, 
Toccate, Gagliarde, e Balletti. Otherwise if more or less numbers [than are 
shown] are played it will succeed in awakening little pleasure in the listener. 
This is to be observed even if the number is alone; that is to say only touch 
that string and fret which the said number shows.



        As I said, in the particular passage under discussion the single 
figures don't follow an alfabeto chord but it seems to me that the same 
principle applies. Otherwise the part writing is obscured.



        However - as far as my specific query was concerned this isn't really 
relevant, as whether or not you play them as single notes or in combination 
with the preceding notes there are still only two notes in the strum...



        As far as the single notes which Stuart was referring to it is fairly 
obvious that these can't conveniently be played whilst the alfabeto chord is 
held and Foscarini has in fact said fairly clearly that they shouldn't be.



        But the general question as to whether you should should incorporate 
the passing notes into the chords or play them as single notes seems to be a 
bit of grey area. Perhaps it was left to the discretion of the player.



        Monica

        ----- Original Message ----- 
        From: Martyn Hodgson 
        To: Monica Hall ; Stuart Walsh 
        Cc: Vihuelalist 
        Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:58 AM
        Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again -


        Monica, why do you think that the single notes are not played as a 
chord with any of the preceding note(s)? I realise this is your position but I 
still don't understand why you hold it: as someone else has said, if F had 
wanted this there's a perfectly clear way to intabulate it. As you know I 
disagree with your view and find support in other tabs where just one note 
changes in a strummed chord progression.

        Numerous examples in other sources just one (from the real Bartolotti 
1640 top of page 19):

        B,(B)1'/A3,(A)2,13/ etc, etc, etc.......................

        Martyn

        PS I do wish B's book 5 existed
        Monica Hall wrote:
        > I wonder if you've added at least one bar towards the end. I'm sure 
there 
        > is definitely something dodgy about line 8, penultimate bar to final 
bar 
        > on that line (bars 10-11 in Monica's transcription). I think there is 
a 
        > bar - or more - missing and you have unconsciously compensated for it.

        You may be right - I haven't looked at that bit closely!
        >
        > Rob, while you have your guitar in one hand and the Edirol in the 
other, 
        > try playing line one, second half of bar 4. The single note (a) on 
the 
        > first course is marked with a strum sign. Can you physically play the 
        > preceding chord and add the a? And even if you could, does it sound 
        > remotely plausible as chord? And again the last two bars of line two, 
        > especially the penultimate bar. Can you strum them? Could you make a 
        > recording of a bit more of this piece?

        All these notes are meant to be played as single notes. They are not 
        intended to be included in the chord.
        >
        > Finally , line 9, bar 4. how do you add a top g to a full barre Bb 
chord?

        You don't - it's meant to be a G major chord - include the open 2nd and 
3rd 
        courses and it modulates to C minor...(K3)

        And the penultimate note of the penultimate bar: how do you add,
        > physically, add an a to a C minor chord? Surely this must be single 
note 
        > (but it's got a strum sign).

        Yes - it can only be a single note...
        >
        > I think Monica must be right in saying that some of Foscarini's strum 
        > signs aren't actually strum signs. And there are strum signs all over 
the 
        > place in Foscarini.
        >
        >

        Hooray!

        Monica
        >
        >
        >> -----Original Message-----
        >> From: Rob [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 13 January 2008 16:40
        >> To: 'Martyn Hodgson'; 'Stuart Walsh'; vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
        >> Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Foscarini again -
        >>
        >> I've made a stab at interpreting this on the guitar:
        >> www.rmguitar.info/temp.htm
        >> I think this is what Martyn is getting at - please forgive me, 
Martyn, if 
        >> it
        >> isn't. Obviously it is only an attempt after a couple of 
read-throughs, 
        >> and
        >> I got a little lost, but the general idea is, I think, one being 
        >> forwarded
        >> by Martyn. So apart from being slightly out of tune and hesitant in 
        >> parts,
        >> is there anything wrong with the interpretation? I think it is a 
        >> reasonable
        >> assumption of Foscarini's intentions - anyway, it is his fault for 
not 
        >> being
        >> explicit!.
        >>
        >> Rob MacKillop
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> To get on or off this list see list information at
        >> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >
        > 







        
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Sent from Yahoo! - a smarter inbox.
        --





        
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Sent from Yahoo! - a smarter inbox.
        --




--------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Sent from Yahoo! - a smarter inbox.




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Sent from Yahoo! - a smarter inbox.
--