Sorry - it's not you that is going batty. It is me being careless
(well - it was late on Saturday night).
I was referring to the Ciaccona which is on p.49 and the actual passage
is towards the end - on p.50, the 3rd stave down. The first full 4
bar variation is played on the 4th and 5th couses with alternating
thumb and fingers. With octave stringing on the 4th course it is very
difficult to play that passage evenly (at least for me) because it is
natural to stress the high string with the thumb and the bourdon with
the finger.
Perhaps Lex can do it perfectly - but I would like to hear him do it.
As ever
Monica
----- Original Message -----
From: [1]Martyn Hodgson
To: [2]Monica Hall
Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 9:24 AM
Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar bridges
Dear Monica,
Your observations below generally seem spot on - except I can't find
the bit you refer to when you write this:
"Following on from what Chris has said in his later message the
Ciaccona on
p.48 - the first variation on the third stave is to be played
alternating
the thumb and fingers, the fingers being used for notes on the 4th and
5th
courses."
I'm clearly going batty but on the third stave of page 48 of the 1640
book, I can see no notes at all on the 5th
course...................... Or are you meaning the second stave with
the 6 4 on the 5th and 4 on the third? If the latter why would one
pluck the 6 with the thumb?
rgds
Martyn
--- On Sat, 3/12/11, Monica Hall <mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
From: Monica Hall <mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk>
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar bridges
To: "Lex Eisenhardt" <eisenha...@planet.nl>
Cc: "Vihuelalist" <vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu>, "Chris Despopoulos"
<despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com>
Date: Saturday, 3 December, 2011, 22:42
Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar bridges
> It is often assumed that after c 1600 most lutenists played thumb
out,
> because of the separated functions of thumb and fingers in most of
the
> music (the thumb playing the bass). I don't think that iconography
from
> the 17th century shows many thumb inside positions on guitar. Which
of
> course doesn't say all.
That may be the case with the lute - but it is not true that the thumb
has
an entirely separate function from the fingers on the
guitar. Campanellas
are the obvious example but it goes much further than that. I don't
want to
get endlessly involved in this but just to give some example - the
first half
of the Allemanda p.71 of Bartolotti's 1st book -
- the two semiquavers in the first full bar on the first line, one on
the
4th course followed by one on the 1st course (f-g)
- the two semiquavers in the second full bar on the first line, one on
the
5th course followed by one on the 2nd course (a-b)
- the two semiquavers in the first full bar on the second line, one on
the
5th course followed by one on the 4th course (c-d)
- at the cadence - the changing note figure (e-d-e)
in all of these places the notes on the 4th or 5th courses belong to
the
upper melodic line but will be played with the thumb.
There are lots of other similar places.
This alternating of the thumb and fingers seems to be derived from
playing
with a
plectrum - the melody is split between the outer courses played with
up and
down strokes of the plectrum.
Following on from what Chris has said in his later message the Ciaccona
on
p.48 - the first variation on the third stave is to be played
alternating
the thumb and fingers, the fingers being used for notes on the 4th and
5th
courses.
> If we would suppose for one second that Bartolotti used bourdons (we
all
> seem to consider this an one of the possible stringing options), and
has
> written a bass in counterpoint to treble melodies, would there be any
> reason why the bass should not be clearly audible? And played with
good
> tone?
In theory perhaps. But I don't think he does very often write a bass
in
counterpoint to treble melodies although it may seem like it to
you! There may be odd places - for example in
the E minor gigue on p. 7 of book 2 where there is an imitative entry
in
bar 6 on the first stave which appears to be in the bass because it is
on the 4th and 5th courses. Because of the octave doubling - which
even you with whatever strings and technique you are using can't
eliminate - sounds to me in the treble with inappropriate doubling in
the octave below. The entry would be clearest without bourdons on
either course. (I listened to both recordings) I have no difficulty
in following the counterpoint one way or another.
You seem to think that people won't be able to follow the music unless
it is spelt out in the most literal way. You are hooked on the idea
that the counterpoint must be explicit otherwise no-one will be able to
follow it. That may be true of most of your audiences. But to quote
an article I.just been reading - you are trying to perform the music in
a way that meets modern performing needs, not to mention the needs of
record companies, not in the way that it would necessarily have been
performed in the 17th century. Bartolotti's audience - which would
have been quite small and of course would only ever have heard him play
live (lucky them) - may have perceived things differently.
Why I was asking these questions about bridges and such was because I
think we tend to approach the problem the wrong way round. The music
is the way it is because that is how the instrument was, and the
instrument was like that for practical reasons.
And so to bed.
Monica
To get on or off this list see list information at
[3]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
2. mailto:mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
3. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
