My points in the previous post had only to do whether a harmonic "gap" is relevant for instrumentation in Vivaldi. By framing the question in such a way as to test whether it is unusual or stylistically uncommon, I think I've shown that the gap is not relevant to the question of instrumentation, because there is nothing unusual about it.
My goal in gaining understanding of Vivaldi is look at each aspect of a problem, and to test it thoroughly, otherwise the it impossible to separate out and evaluate the various threads. To consider your points below, I would try to understand each one separately, and try to frame them within the context of all of Vivaldi's works. That's a big job, although as far as lute is concerned, Vivaldi is so intriguing. Also my comments specifically concern RV 93. Each concerto is different, and if a rubric exists, that means it is even more different, otherwise no rubric needed. A rubric is more often an exception than a rule. But let's consider just one of your points below, the one about the Ricordi/Malipiero's house editor's realization in the right hand of the concerto. The question then is, is the house editor's realization in any way relevant to the instrumentation? And how to frame it? I have to say, this is an unusual question, because in many cases in the Vivaldi edition the right hand realization is so bad that it does not even agree with figures from the printed sources. But I will try to frame it. 1. Is the right hand realization a reliable source of performance practice for Vivaldi? 2. Is the right hand realization similar to pieces in which the instruments absolutely cannot play down an octave, eg, violin, oboe? 3. Does the house editor have a sort of horror vacui, and not only fill in the spaces between instruments, but also in the case of instruments that do play lower, such as in the cello concertos, does the editor fill in the space ABOVE the cello (or bassoon): that is do they then play the pitches that the bassoon would play if the bassoon played UP an octave? Further, does the editor supply notes in places seemingly just to fill things in? 1. I think many musicologists would agree, due the large number of errors in the realization, including writing naturals directly above flats in the figures, that in Vivaldi the house editor for the right hand parts is neither reliable, musical, literate in continuo style, nor competent. I don't know any continuo players who would play them; we always cut them out. In any case, it shows little of what we know about continuo realization, nor resembles contemporaneous realizations. If there were a clue, it would be from the contemporaneous realizations. To be fair, it is designed for people who can't read score or figures, but unfortunately the house editor cannot read score or figures, either. To be more fair, in a large edition, there are lots of mistakes. Indeed, when performing a work by Vivaldi, most baroque orchestras nowadays ASSUME that the edition has mistakes, and that the realization has even more mistakes. The classic example is that the editor completely made up the contrabass parts, yet these are oft performed and recorded. But they are imaginary. 2. In the case of the instruments which cannot play lower, violin, oboe, and so on, and this is by far the majority of all of Vivaldi's concertos, the editor (I believe it is more than one, actually) quite often fills in the pitches that would sound if these instruments played lower. So this is of no significance that I can see. But, even if this piece were shown to have a drastically different realization, you would still have to consider, unfortunately, point one above. 3. The editor is habitually an overfiller. If you look at the concertos as a whole ( I would say I have been through 300 at this point, which is by no means all of them) the realizations relentlessly fill in the unused space. This is particularly evident in the realizations of the works for cello and bassoon, and no one would ever suggest (I'm hoping) that the bassoon therefore play an octave higher. Often, the editor has no more room to fill in lower, so he/she fills in higher. So the filling in of the spaces, in whatever way, can't help with sorting out the instrumentation. Lastly, we are still researching the pitch at which the basslines were played. If it was, as seems likely, a very mixed situation in which violas, violettas, organs, cellos, bassoons, etc each had their own style, then it quite possible, even likely, that the basslines occasionally were read up an ocatve in certain situations. Here we have the famous mandolin obbligato from Juditha Triumphans to confirm just that. But there is much more evidence. In the case of the violetta parts, from Scarlatti, we now have evidence that the basslines might have been shared by two cellos, the smaller one playing the higher notes; the big one the low notes--of course they used all gut strings so that makes perfect sense--and we are only now figuring out how to do that. Which means we can record the Four Seasons again! respectfully, David Tayler ofAt 01:08 PM 11/15/2007, you wrote: >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
