> In the present discussion it is important to understand > the essential difference between an ARRANGEMENT and a > TRANSCRIPTION. Thames misses the point completely when > he equates the two (see below). The terms are not > interchangeable, when used according to their proper > meaning.First point, How on earth can you say I equate the two terms.I listed > three different possibilities. You have an amazing ability to distort the > written word. Second point, I never once said lutenists couldn't resd pitch > notation, I said the preferred notation was Tablature. Judging from the > inclusion of elementary instructions in > many early lute tablature books, tablature was > originally intended > for novice players. Yea Ness, I guess by your standards Weiss was a > novice as well! What an unbelievably ignorant statement! I guess now, Ness > has changed the standards of what we call original lute music. Using Ness's > NEW classificationof what we have mistakenly assumed was lute music, I could > transcribe, or arrange Leyenda, or Romanza, for lute, and this would go down > in musical history as an Original lute piece. Sorry Ness I think I'll stick > with the old fashion way, thesame as most other educated musicologists, you > seem to be making it up as you go along. I might remind you that I haven't > been as insulting to you as your writing on this list...I don't use words > Like " kill list"I've noticed every email on the subject you proclaim it's > your last why don't you make good on your word.Michael Thames www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com --
To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
