Dear list, dear Monica, I'm sorry, this one is going to be long...
> As Lex has drawn attention to his web site presumably he is inviting = comment > upon it. > > It is only reasonable to point out that most of what he says is = supposition, > unsupported by any evidence and some of it is inaccurate.. >=20 > 1. Very few Italian books give any indication as to whether or not the = 4th > and 5th courses were strung in octaves. Those that do are Montesardo, > Sanseverino and Foscarini in the introduction to Il primo, secondo e = terzo > libro (ca.1629) reproduced in subsequent editions of the books. I = have not > seen Banfi or Pesori, but will take Lex's word for it. It should be > emphasized however that many Italian books are just re-hashed versions = of > earlier books, including introductory information. =20 There are too many that are probably not. Unfortunately most members on = this list will not have no easy access to a great number of sources. Even Foscarini has taken > some of his introduction from Colonna. Some of the information is of > questionable value. >=20 > 2. The tuning charts which Lex refers to are the same as the example = from > Foscarini, but none of the other books includes Foscarini's octave = check. Pesori adds 'in ottave', like Foscarini, but many others have a tuning = check of which I suppose it is an octave check. If those would not be in = octaves then in what? What do you mean exactly by "Foscarini's octave = check"? > The suggestion that this type of tuning chart should most likely be > understood as an instruction to compare courses in unisons is bending = the > evidence to support a particular point of view. Taken literally they = imply > no treble strings on the 4th and 5th courses.=20 Taken literally they only tell us there were low strings. They just give = no information on added high octaves. Guitar tuning charts almost never = do.=20 It would be more honest to > admit that they are ambiguous and cannot therefore be regarded as = evidence > in favour of one method or another.=20 Why on earth would they be ambigueous? Only because the high octaves are = not indicated? However, I should point out that the > tuning check at the beginning of the scordatura pieces in Corbetta's = 1648 > book (p.58) if interpreted as unisons indicates a re-entrant tuning = and the > instructions for tuning 4 guitars of different sizes to play together = in his > 1639 book imply only treble strings on the 4th and 5th courses. He is = just > as likely to have used the re-entrant tuning for his early work. This is what I would call "bending the evidence" A similar text on = tuning a "guitar band" can be found with Foscarini. Who probably tuned = with two bourdons. As I see it Foscarini (and Corbetta) used the high octave that is there = ready on the low courses, to compare to high strings on another = instrument. Very practical. >=20 > 3. The fact that only Valdambrini's two guitar books explicitly = describe the > re-entrant tuning and that they were printed in Rome proves nothing at = all. > We have no way of telling how representative of contemporary practice > surviving books are. It is impossible to say how widely the = re-entrant > tuning was used in Italy. Agreed. But there are many books in which I suppose to see instructions = for a tuning with low strings. And only one with clear instructions for = re-entrant. >=20 > Bartolotti's "Lettere tagliate" do not indicate the tuning with a low = A > string. They are actually when passing notes are introduced between = the > chords. Alternative symbols are given for the chords G (F major) P (F > minor), and F (E major) from which the note on the fifth course, the = fifth > of the chord is to be omitted, but not for + (E minor), C (D major) = or E (D > minor), which are also six-four chords. This is because of a = difference in > the left hand fingering. They are really just a convenient shorthand > device to save the trouble of writing out different chords in full. Please have a second look at my examples in staff. No passing notes. No = awkward left hand fingerings at all. What are you talking about? >=20 > 4. Valdambrini's books also include sections of instructions for > accompanying a bass line which are no different from those of Corbetta = and > other Italian books. There is evidence that different methods of = stringing > were used for accompanying and the bass line would in any case have = been > supplied by another instrument. >=20 I looked at Valdambrini's instructions. Guess what? He's the only one = who gives every possible Alfabeto chord in every inversion to figured = basses. Unlike Corbetta, Carre and the others. My guess is that this is = the only way to strum chords on a guitar in re-entrant tuning that makes = sense. Neglect the inversions. Corbetta (almost) always gives proper = inversions in his charts. At least when we suppose a tuning with low = bourdons.... I do not believe that "the bass line would in any case have been = supplied by another instrument", like Monica states. > 5. Few people would now regard the comment on stringing in the Italian > preface to La guitarre royale as uncertain or as indicating anything = other > than that a low octave or bourdon should be put on the 4th course = which was > usually strung without one - that is to the re-entrant tuning. =20 Matanya???? There are > several other sources besides de Vis=E9e and Carr=E9 which clearly = refer to > this method of stringing. "Picciol" refers to the quality or guage of = the > string to be used for the bourdon.=20 Now this is sheer speculation! The most likely scenario is that this was > the method of stringing preferred by Corbetta and adopted by his = younger > French contemporaries. This is what everybody always says. And I have grave doubts. >=20 > 6. La Guitarre royale is not the first book Corbetta published after > twenty-three years. He had published at least two, possible three = other > books between 1648 and 1671 which have not survived, although much of = his > music which has survived in the Gallot manuscript and the manuscripts = copied > by Jean-Baptiste de Castillion is probably from these missing books. It is the first book of which we can be certain it has been published. = Where the music with Gallot and Castillion comes from should be seen as = a guess. >=20 > 7. Finally Corbetta left Italy in about 1650 and spent the rest of his = life > in England and in France. Much of the music in Guitarre royale is = dedicated > to different members of the English royal family (the book itself is > dedicated to Charles II) and would have been composed between = 1660-1670 > whilst Corbetta was living in England. One must assume that Corbetta = was > already using the "French" tuning by this time even though it is not > mentioned in print until 1671. =20 And why should one assume that? Lex --
