Sorry- didn’t mean to come across as a hornet! F.
> On Jun 1, 2015, at 7:26 AM, Michael Muskett <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> On 1 Jun 2015, at 08:30, [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: > > Oh dear,! The hornets are out, but I am not stung because I did not originate > this remark, but merely repeated it. >> It came from Frans Bruggen, who, in 1965, was fast becoming recognised as >> the best recorder player since several consecutive generations and whose >> knowledge and insight were far greater than mine. > The “cognoscenti” (sorry. My sarcasm) were mentioned some time ago on > Matt Loibner’s website as people who thought the HG was incomplete. > Presumably in an attempt to satisfy these people he produced a CD in which > some pieces had no drones, if I remember correctly. > > There seems to be a misunderstanding for I am not discussing temperament, > > with which I came to terms long ago when tuning Doreen’s harpsichord. I > > find just temperament ideal for the vielle, and with a couple of tweaks I > > use it at all time. I could not possibly use a tuning where almost all > > notes are are of tune. Some are forced to use it so as to lay with others > > and the ear adjusts. But for solo and chamber music - horrible. > My contention remains that if we judge early music as an experience on the > basis of all that has preceded it, including modulation, then we may well be > confused and dissatisfied, for it will seem to be lacking. But if we are to > play baroque music correctly we must understand the musical rules and > interpretation of the time, free from later influences. > Now, let us upright the applecart and munch an apple. > Michael >> >> [email protected] >> <https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email#!forum/hurdygurdy/topics> >> Google Groups >> <https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email/#!overview> >> >> <https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email/#!overview> >> >> Topic digest <> >> View all topics >> <https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email#!forum/hurdygurdy/topics> >> modulation <x-msg://12/#group_thread_0> - 3 Updates >> <>modulation >> <http://groups.google.com/group/hurdygurdy/t/b3ed9c692c62ed0c?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email> >> Michael Muskett <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>>: May 31 10:51AM +0100 >> >> From across the pond >> >> I have heard that in the opinion of some cognocenti that the >> hurdy-gurdy/vielle is not a true musical instrument because its music can >> not modulate. >> >> Modulation means the ability to change from one key to another by the use of >> a system of chord changes. The G/C tuning of a vielle allows of playing in >> only two keys, C major and its tonic minor, (c minor). But if an F sharp is >> introduced we can make a cadence in the dominant, G, although we can not >> remain in that key because it would clash with the drones. >> >> The drones, however, are so harmonically rich that they constantly support >> the melody whatever the note and this is fully satisfying without the need >> to modulate. The music must, of course, be composed with this in mind as is >> the case with all other instruments, for all have both limitations and >> special qualities. In fact the art of orchestration is a study in itself and >> goes alongside composition. >> >> Modulation was developed only by the mid 17th century and the vielle is not >> the only instrument of history whose music does not modulate. For instance >> the principal domestic keyboard instrument from the early 16th century to >> the mid 17th was the virginal. There is much beautiful music for this quiet >> instrument created by composers such as Wm Byrd, Orlando Gibbons, Giles >> Farnaby, and we must not close our ears to this wealth of music from former >> times, for we would be the poorer by doing so. >> >> Going further back there is also plainsong, ultimately the foundation of our >> present Western system. And then there has been illiterate folk music since >> the beginning of time. >> >> If we are to understand the music of past ages, whether for study or >> pleasure we must disregard all that has followed, for our preconceptions >> will otherwise get in the way of its performance and enjoyment. >> >> >> >> (P.S. Just a thought. How can we stop reporters from using the word >> orchestrated when they simply mean organized, but seem afraid to say so?) >> Arle Lommel <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>: May 31 >> 01:57PM +0200 >> >> Hi Michael, >> >> I'm curious who would actually say such an ignorant thing (“that the >> hurdy-gurdy/vielle is not a true musical instrument because its music can >> not modulate”). Any such person who would make such a statement surely >> cannot be called a cognoscente. As you note, modulation (outside a limited >> range of keys) only become common late on in Western music (and the >> development largely corresponds to the development of equal temperament, >> without which arbitrary modulation is hardly possible). >> >> However, I am not sure that we can actually “disregard all that has >> followed, for our preconceptions will otherwise get in the way of its >> performance and enjoyment”. If, like the late Victorians, we hold that >> change is evolution toward an ideal endpoint, then we will fail to >> appreciate earlier music, forever seeing it as a “primitive” waypoint, at >> most quaintly charming, but I think one can derive great enjoyment from >> comparing musics from different times and places. >> >> I can no more disregard my knowledge of Bach when listening to Tallis than I >> can read a treatise on medieval concepts physics while somehow forgetting >> what I know of Newtonian physics. But that is not to say that I cannot >> appreciate Tallis or medieval physics greatly. And in the case of Tallis I >> probably enjoy it all the more for knowing where polyphonic music would >> arrive with Bach and seeing how Tallis anticipated what later composers did >> or the ways in which his work is (re)interpreted in striking ways today. >> (Surely no-one would argue that Kronos Quartet’s Spem in Alium, done in ten >> layered takes, represents period performance or interpretation, yet I find >> it a compelling interpretation of Tallis.) >> >> Similarly, I find the samba-infused interpretations of Medieval and >> Renaissance music by the Brazilian group Anima to breathe wonderful life >> into their repertoire in a way that a purist stance that closes off all >> later development cannot do, simply because I have no way of listening to >> period music with period ears. >> >> It's a thought-provoking question, and you have touched on a debate that >> will never be resolved one way or the other. I do like to hear a passionate >> defense in the discussion though, so thank you. >> >> Best, >> >> Arle >> Alden Hackmann <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>: >> May 31 12:22PM -0700 >> >> My short answer is that the definition of "true musical instrument as >> needing to modulate" seems arbitrary and elitist. I'll let that pass, and >> move on: >> >> Until we adopted equal temperament, NO instrument was capable of modulating >> to all keys. In just temperament, or any non-equal temperament, some keys >> are better than others. The HG as a drone instrument is ideal for a just >> temperament: all of the notes should be in perfect harmony with the drone. >> If we tune the HG in equal temperament, all of the notes are a little off >> from the drone. It's just the way the universe works. >> >> The difficulty with just temperament is that not every key sounds good, but >> some keys sound fabulous. >> >> The difficulty with equal temperament is that every key sound equally good, >> but no key sounds fabulous. >> >> Given this choice, I choose some keys sound fabulous. We can modulate when >> we're in just temperament, just not to every key. Even in equal >> temperament, the drones limit us, and that's fine. >> >> Alden >> >> Back to top <x-msg://12/#digest_top> >> You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this >> group. You can change your settings on the group membership page >> <https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email#!forum/hurdygurdy/join>. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an >> email to [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. > > > -- > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "hurdygurdy" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/hurdygurdy > <http://groups.google.com/group/hurdygurdy> > > The rules of posting, courtesy, and other list information may be found at > http://hurdygurdy.com/mailinglist/index.htm > <http://hurdygurdy.com/mailinglist/index.htm>. To reduce spam, posts from new > subscribers are held pending approval by the webmaster. > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "hurdygurdy" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hurdygurdy" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hurdygurdy The rules of posting, courtesy, and other list information may be found at http://hurdygurdy.com/mailinglist/index.htm. To reduce spam, posts from new subscribers are held pending approval by the webmaster. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hurdygurdy" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
