Hi David,
Thanks for your insights. I agree with your some of your points. I'm
afraid I can't agree with the upper octave and use of continuo to
accompany the liuto/leuto for RV82, RV85, and RV93. A continuo
role *is* clearly intended for the leuto itself in RV540 (as he
specifically
instructs the leuto to play with the bassi in the tuttis) likely
implying a
tenor rather than soprano instrument (he also tells the viola d'amore to
play with the first violins (plural) during tuttis).
"Tutti, la Viola d'amore rinforza, a unisono, i Violini I. e il
Liuto i Bassi"
Let me try to clarify what I said initially, in case you don't have
the article.
My mentioning of this "gap" was specific to the simpler (Prague) pieces,
the trios especially, and was secondary to the primary (albeit highly-
subjective)
observation that doubling a violins in unison with a soprano plucked
instrument
doesn't really add much. I realize that Vivaldi *does* do such
things occasionally,
and in the article I cited the andante molto of RV588 as one such
example,
where he pairs unison mandolinos and violins. It makes for an
interesting
effect, but it doesn't seem nearly as interesting to me if that color
is carried
throughout entire pieces.
Also, to your points about continuo. As far as I can tell, these
pieces are
scored for a single-line bass instrument "basso", a gamba or cello
for instance,
and I found no indications for basso continuo in the Prague pieces.
My statement
about the gap in the original article made that assumption clear.
"Additionally, while Vivaldi is known for his spare part writing,
interpreting
the leuto part pitched as written seems extreme if we assume a
single-line
basso instrument (violincello) for RV82, RV85, and RV93."
While I see no evidence for basso continuo, it can always be
realized, of course.
In fact, the Ricordi editions for these pieces do exactly that,
keeping the leuto part
at the higher octave and providing cembalo realizations written in
smaller notes
for the right hand. I wrote:
"The cembalo realizations provided by the Ricordi editions often add
exactly the same pitches the leuto would play if its part were
transposed
down an octave from the written pitch."
In essence, I think we are close to saying the same thing, either:
- Assume the leuto part is to be played as written at the higher
octave
and there is a large gap, and that is fine if you are using
B.C.,
which essentially fills in the gap with its realization, or,
- There is no gap because the leuto actually plays its part down an
octave
from where it is written, accompanied by a single-line basso
instrument.
As I said, I prefer the second explanation. Either way, there really
is no large
harmonic gap in the final product.
At the same time, if you are proposing the leuto at the upper
(written) octave, I think
there's more to it than this. Specifically, what 18th-century
soprano plucked
instrument would you propose for the leuto, if not a mandolino?
Best,
Eric
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
