On 9 Aug 2006 at 19:34, John Howell wrote: > At 4:22 PM -0400 8/9/06, David W. Fenton wrote: > >On 9 Aug 2006 at 12:50, John Howell wrote:
[] > >> What you call a "fluttering" effect is more > >> likely a "flatement," an ornament unique to > >> woodwind instruments with open holes, . . . > > > >Er, it's not at all "unique to woodwind instruments." The flattement > >was a favorite ornament of the French viola da gambists. > > OK, I may have my terminology mixed up (not the > first time!). But how is the viol flattement > played, since the name describes a vibrato-like > ornament going below the main pitch? On the viol it's not below the main pitch, as you can't do that if you have other strings down below the sounding string. > >> . . . played as a > >> sort of finger vibrato on the lowest open holes > >> without actually closing that hole. (A similar > >> effect, the "pincée," is possible on fretted or > >> unfretted strings instruments, . . . > > > >The pincée and flattement are two distinctly different ornaments. The > >pincée is a mordent, while the flattement is the wide finger vibrato. > > Well, if the pincée is extended it's no longer a > mordent. The ornament I'm thinking of is a > 2-finger vibrato/trill extending over the fret, > but not raising the pitch a full halfstep and so > more of a vibrato than a trill. I used to think > it required frets, until I tried it on violin and > found that it works just fine. That's flattement in all the sources I've read, and also what my teacher has always called it. > >> . . . although in that > > > case the pitch variation is up rather than down.) > > > >Would you then also realize the appoghiaturas in the measures that > >follow? Either the player knows how to play this sort of music or > >they don't, and either knows that ornaments of this kind are > >generally on the beat or they don't. > > Editor's choice, of course. There's hardly any > question about the notation indicating > appoggiaturas, while the ornament in question > wouldn't have been brought up except for being a > pretty non-standard one. Even the rather > knowledgeable people on this list can't agree on > its realization. Sounds like an argument for *not* realizing it, except in an advisory ossia. > >Realizing it will only confuse > >those who *do* know the style, so I'd write it out as Finale grace > >notes, and assume that anyone interested in playing this repertory > >will be knowledgable enough to apply period practice. > > Again, mixing up a common sign with an unusual > one, but of course my choice as editor might be > different from yours. I hate editions that take away my choices. Printing the original notation with an ossia suggested realization would do the job, I think, and making it clear that the performer was free to disregard the ossia suggestion. -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
