Dear Mathias,
Sorry. I am referring to the page number on which the [partita] _begins_ in
the tablature book. Chilesotti does not give the page numbers of individual
pieces. These are the [partitas] he transcribes:
page 13 (gagliarda/spezzata: div. style),
page 17 (gagliarda/spezzata: div style),
piece on page 26 <thought it went with page 17> (corrente senza
canto/spezzata: brise style),
page 40 (Corrente/spezzata: brise style),
page 43 (gagliarda/rotta della gagliarda).
I don't understand how you can say that the divisions in Johnson and Dowland,
or any other composer, have no bass lines. They may not have the full chords of
the strain, but just the bass line. Sometimes the divisions take the chords and
turn them into broken chord figuration, but the same figure each time.
Otherwise it's the melody that is ornamented with many rapid notes. Usually
four times faster than the strain, as page 17. The spezzate for page 13 and
page 17 have the melody ornamented with notes four-times faster and just the
bass line. And I wouldn't call the one from the [partita] beginning on page 13
"flowing." In fact page 17 isn't "flowing" either with all those jagged
figures. I think you'd call it, as one would call most divisions, "virtuoso
figuration." Usually linear.
Incidentally sometimes one finds dance pieces with just the strains,and no
reprises. This suggests to some that the book was owned by a novice, one
unable to hack the virtuoso figuration of the divisions. On the contrary, the
book probably belonged to a player who could improvise his own divisions, and
so did not need to have them written down.
It is the brise spezzate that are "flowing," In brise style the melody is part
of the broken chords, and a good player would emphasize it. I'm not saying to
play French baroque music as broken chords, ignoring the melody. You need to
realize the melody is incorporated into the broken chords, and it is easy to
determine the melodic notes by referring (in this case) to the original
gagliarda/corrente. An important aspect of style brise is that the broken
chord pattern changes from chord to chord, as I tried to show you with the
numbers, and how the melody as a result is "broken" with "off-beat" rhythms to
use your terminology. Of course the individual notes of the broken chords
should be permitted to continue to ring.
Best regards, Arthur
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mathias R=F6sel"
Cc: Lute Net
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 4:21 AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: tastegiata
"Arthur Ness" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> Actually Gianconcelli uses both the broken chord and division types. Using
the examples in Chilesotti, the Spezzate in the [partitas] on pages 13 and 17
of the tablaturebook are the division type,and on pages 17 (2nd one) and 40
the brise type.
Cannot see the difference. Are we talking about the same dances?
Gagliarda (p. 13), corente (p. 17) and another corente (p. 40)? BTW, I
don't have Chilesotti at hand, but in the S.P.E.S. facsimile there is no
second spezzata on p. 17. I couldn't find any dance with two spezzate in
Gianoncelli.
> I tend to think of divisions as being linear variation with many notes
added to the melody to ornament it. The melody is _divided_ into many equal
short notes, as you nicely put it. In divisions, if there are broken chords,
they follow the same pattern, 1-2-3/1-2-3.
If, that is. Mostly, divisions are made upon the treble line with some
rare bass notes put in between. That is the case from Newsidler's Ander
Buch fur die erfahrnen Schuler up to John Johnson and John Dowland. In
this sense, I shouldn't say that Gianoncelli's are divisions. In his
spezzate, both the bass and the treble lines are there, one interspersed
among the other.
Another feature of divisions is the wide range of different note
lengths. With divisions of the Dowland era, simples may consist of
minims and crotchets, whereas the respective divisions will consist of
quavers, semi- and even demiquavers. In contrast to that, Gianoncelli's
spezzate are evenly flowing streams of quavers.
> It is how the chords are broken up that causes the melody to be off the
beat most of the time.
> I think we're both saying the same thing using a different vocabulary.
well, closely, yes. But in this case, description has an immediate
impact on performance, the difference will be audible. Players who take
French baroque lute music to be broken chords, will play them as such.
(I shall drop none of the fab names here.) In contrast, players who
perceive the same stuff as broken voices, will play it as such. Can't
resist to name Catherine Liddell. IMHO, once you've recognized voices,
playing broken chords doesn't make sense any more.
All the best,
Mathias
--
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
