> Do you think that the Spanish tuning with a bourdon and upper octave in the > 4th course [gg'-c'c'-e'e'-a'(a')] is an early form of semi-re-entrant > tuning? Or, is it more like an analogue to the upper octave strings in the > lute's bass courses? Would it depend on whether the bourdon is on the > outside or inside?
I think that the Spanish 4-course guitar may have originally had a re-entrant tuning in the 15th and early 16th century but that composers like Mudarra and Fuenllana needed a low octave string to increase the compass of the instrument when writing polyphonic music for it. Mudarra's note is an instruction to the player as to how the instrument should be set up to play his music. Bermudo is simply describing it as he knew it without going into details as to why the instrument is strung in the way that it is. He does say he is not sure about some things! > > BTW, I notice that LeRoy's tuning chart (end of Book I -- Brown 1551/3) > shows no sign of an upper octave in the 4th course. I guess that does not > preclude an octave string, however. Maybe the same goes for tunings given in > Praetorius. What do you think? As far as the French repertoire we are completely in the dark as none of the sources as far as I know explain clearly how the instrument is strung. The chart in Leroy is really just a way of checking whether the instrument is in tune. The first part could be unisons and the last part octaves; if the middle section is meant to be unisons this would imply a high octave string on the 4th course - I think (it's a bit early in the morning)! But I don't think charts like this are a clear indication of stringing. There was an article in the Lute Society Journal vol. 26, 1974, p.17-23 - by Charles Dobson, Ephraim Segerman and James Tyler "Tunings of the 4-course French cittern and 4-course guitar" in which they try to re-construct the tuning instructions from LeRoy's missing guitar tutor. I think they conclude that the guitar had octave stringing on the 3rd and 4th courses - but this seems to me to be questionable. > > Tuning in Cerretto's treatise (1601) (the re-entrant ukulele tuning) is very > different from the pieces by Barberiis (1549). I've played over the four > Barberiis "Fantasias," and the 4th course has a definite bass function in > all pieces. I have not seen Tyler's 2003 article, nor that by Meucchi -- > thanks for the references. This illustrates the difficulties in identifying instruments and how they were strung. I guess the same applies as with Mudarra. Sometimes the instrument had a re-entrant tuning, sometimes not - depending on the context. > > I'm so happy all this has come up, because I am having a 4-course instrument > built, and I've not settled on a stringing plan. I am not very familiar with the French repertoire but I don't think that a high octave string is essential for the music to make sense. The arguments for using one would depend on the quality of the strings and any practical problems attendant thereon. This is something which is often overlooked. I believe there are lots of places where - unless you leave out the bourdon - the dreaded 6/4 chords will rear their siren like heads. However, since every other chord in cittern music is a 6/4 and there is no way in which they can be eliminated I can't really believe that guitarists would have lost any sleep over them. Monica > > Regards, > > Michael > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Monica Hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 2:29 PM > To: vihuela > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Monica Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Lex Eisenhardt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 8:26 PM > Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? > > > > I am not on the lute list so have missed the beginning of this discussion. > > > > There is no music for "vihuela a cino ordenes" with a guitar tuning in > > Valderrabano's book. There is however music for 5-course vihuela with the > > same interval pattern as the 5-course guitar in Fuenllana. It certainly > > doesn't have any campanellas! Fuenllana refers to the 4-course vihuela > as > > being known as the guitar. > > > > Perhaps Richard is thinking of Valdambrini? > > > > James Tyler is probably mistaken in thinking that the 4-course guitar was > > widely used in Italy in the 16th century or that it had a re-entrant > tuning. > > The instrument referred to as a "chitarra" by Barberiis, Cerretto and in > > other sources is probably a 4-coruse mandola. The article by Meucchi > > explains all this. > > > > However Mudarra includes pieces for 4-course guitar. These are preceded > by > > a note which reads > > > > "A de estar entrastada como vihuela con diez trastes - a de tener bordon > en > > la quarta". > > > > It (the guitar) must be fretted like the vihuela with ten frets; it must > > have a bordon (or low octave string) on the fourth course. > > > > This implies that it didn't always have ten frets or a bordon on the > fourth > > course but that these are necessary for to provide an adequate compass for > > Mudarra's music.. > > > > It is quite possible that as a popular instrument - played with a plectrum > > and strummed - the 4-course guitar sometimes had a re-entrant tuning - > like > > its cousin the cittern. > > > > As I am not on the Lutelist perhaps one of you would pass this message on > if > > you think it useful > > > > Monica > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Lex Eisenhardt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>; "Vihuela Net" > > <vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu> > > Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 6:53 PM > > Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? > > > > > > > (We're on the lutelist here, but anyway, Valderrabano is sort of > neutral.) > > > Fact is that there is very little evidence for a guitar in re-entrant > > tuning > > > in the 16th c. > > > In an article in the Journal of Seventeenth Century Music (2003), James > > > Tyler states that in southern Italy, in the late sixteenth and > seventeenth > > > centuries the guitar was commonly (if not exclusively) tuned in a > totally > > > re-entrant manner-aa, d'd', gg, bb, e'[e']-that is, without any true > bass > > > strings. The idea is that this tuning was spread over Italy around 1600. > > > Makes one wonder on what evidence this is based. > > > > > > All this may not make much difference for the question where the > > re-entrant > > > tuning came from. > > > We can be sure that it was mentioned (by Briceno and Mersenne, in > France) > > > long before any cascading scalar passages appeared in guitar tablature. > > > > > > ============= > > > Dr. O wrote: > > > > "woahahwoahcomeheavysleep!" da-dada-dah ... > > > Is that you, Sting??? > > > ============== > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Hi Lex, > > > > > > > > There is music for a "vihuela a cino ordenes" with a guitar tuning > > > > configuration in Valderrabano's book, but, if I am not mistaken this > > music > > > has no > > > > campanella passages. (> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > > > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
