On 6 May 2005 at 9:18, Ken Moore wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> David Fenton > writes: >But I believe the tunings on the typical 3-string Viennese > basses of >the time was not the same as our modern conbrabasses. > > Do you have evidence that 4- and 5-string instruments were not > available? . . .
No. I'm only hazily remembering what the situation was in Vienna. The remarkable thing for me was the idea that the 3-string bass was the norm, but I don't mean to imply by that that other instruments were *not* in use. > . . . This part requires a virtuoso, and he probably owned an > instrument that would not be typical of an orchestral bass section. I > shall see whether tuning a 3-string in fifths, with the bottom string > on G (needed in measure 56), would work. The top E in 60 would then > be close to the end of the fingerboard on the A string. I will check > later whether that would be feasible. Well, I don't know about bass players in Mozart's Vienna, but I know I have no difficulty at all tuning down the bottom string of my gamba when called for. There are plenty of pieces in the viol repertory that have low cello C's written, because 7-string basses (and the great double bass, with strings a fourth lower than the bass viol) were common, and because I'm often called on to play continuo bass for works that were probably intended for cello. It's quite easy to tune down a step, and the fingerings work out OK, because there generally isn't anything remarkably complex written in such parts down in that range. > >I don't know > >enough about the actual tunings for those instruments, so can't say, > >but I'm struck by the performer's change from 15ba to 8ba in the one > >passage. > > Yes, measure 55 makes your case very strong. I think it's pretty much indisputable based on that! -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
