[LUTE] Re: The Online Lute Player

[Anthony Hind]

Dear Rob
 	  I had begun to write this before you sent your message, and then  
wondered whether it wasn't better to let sleeping lurkers lie.
I will cut my message into two, trying not to saturate your post,  
beginning with (1):

1) Easy pieces,
2) CD or MP3

I had just discovered your transcription of the Bach cello suite, by  
chance, during the recent "discussion" about whether certain pieces  
of music should be avoided by amateur musicians.
Thank you for making it available on your site, I have been enjoying  
playing around with it, almost as an exercise in RH fingering  
(horror!!!), on a single melodic line on Dm lute. What ever you do,  
the Bach is still there to encourage you along.

However, I have been told that most lutenists find their playing  
drops by around 20% when playing in public or before the mike. To  
account for this, some professionals tell me they only play pieces  
they know really well, and have been playing regularly for more than  
few months, while amateurs are often far less cautious.

I regularly attend an amateur salon of lute music, where amateurs and  
semi-pros can try out their new pieces in an nonhostile environment.  
However, the host, like our lurker, frequently complains that many  
play pieces well beyond their capability, simply because they play  
the music they like, rather than the music of their level.
This would argue that certain pieces probably are beyond the reach of  
the average amateur.

On the other hand, as a new old beginner, I find this idea quite  
difficult to follow. Easy pieces, such as the "58 Pieces for  
Renaissance Lute", seem extremely hard to make sound musical, at all.
In that respect they are not so easy as the title reports. And unless  
they are played by a master, like Jacob Heringman, they can sound as  
tedious as some air on a musical box.
If I can plough through the hours of boredom, until the rhythm is  
absolutely perfect, then sometimes they do begin to sound quite musical.
In fact I found much more pleasure while trying to pierce the secret  
of Jacob's dimunitions on some of these pieces, After all, pleasure  
is at least partly what this is all about.
Yet, I can bash away at a piece by Holborne, without it ever seeming  
to die on me, the music just carries me along, even if I am probably  
torturing it beyond recognition.

Now, adventuring on to the Baroque lute, I have found the "80 Pièces  
faciles pour luth Baroque", (chosen by Jean-Luc Bresson), actually  
does contain some "easy" pieces that are not quite so "musical-boxy";  
yet that still does not prevent me from being drawn to the Baroque  
treasures I love, which are, well, far beyond my capability. (I would  
highly recommend this collection, by the way).

Of course practising for oneself, and playing in front of a few  
friends, is not quite like making a definitive CD. I am sure there  
ARE pieces that should only be recorded late in a career.
The problem with YouTube and MP3 on the net, is that it has an  
ambiguous status. Some lutenists are using these to put up their  
definitive performances of a piece (which I rather regret, even if I  
understand the motives, but more in 2), while most of us consider  
these as tools, or notebooks, which are just intended to give a flash  
glimpse of how we are playing at a particular moment, rather like the  
sketch before one makes a painting.
(Yes, I know,  the sketch IS often preferred by many to the finalized  
painting, and this could sometimes be true for  a CD if it is is over  
edited and loses all spontaneity).

An excellent use of MP3 was shown during exchanges between, yourself,  
Rob, and our friend Stephen Arndt. On Stephen's first MP3 recording,  
he made it very clear that he was hoping for critical analysis, and  
Rob you very kindly replied with very helpful comments. I thought  
that was nearing the sort of thing you expect in a master class. It  
was truly helpful to many of us. Thank you both for that!

I am a little more reticent about these formats for finalized works,  
although I do understand why some of you do use them.
However, that was the subject of (2), if I have the time.
Regards
Anthony


Le 17 nov. 08 à 09:57, Rob MacKillop a écrit :

   Sorry this is so long...



   The recent Igor = The Devil thread has been gnawing away at me. He
   might have been clumsy in the way he expressed himself, but he was
   entitled to his view. However, he has highlighted the topic of the
   Online Lute Player, and what one might expect that to be, and  
that is
   what I would like to turn our attention to.



   In the days before YouTube, one would have expected a degree of
   professional standard from a recording artist (setting aside  
personal
   preference for one artist over another). Professional reviewers
   (rightly or wrongly) saw it as part of their job to inform their
   readers of who was hot and who was not, and why they thought so.
   YouTube has blown all that away. Someone who has just picked up  
his/her
   first guitar and decides to pluck it with a banana (not you,  
Val!), can
   reach an audience of thousands within days. You, the watcher- 
listener,
   have to make up your own mind whether something is 'good' or  
not. You
   can watch the video or not. I imagine Igor (and he is not alone)  
would
   like to see a return to a situation where one would expect a
   professional standard of performance and presentation. But that  
just
   isn't going to happen - well, I can't see any signs of it at the
   moment.



   David Taylor has raised two interesting points: 1. These videos  
give an
   insight into how the lute/guitar is actually played, and 2. the
   professionals are waiting until they can completely control the
   production process before submitting their 'performances' for  
public
   scrutiny (they can already do this, of course, if they have enough
   money or their record company are willing to pay for it).



   It would be wonderful if we could hear how the average lute player
   played in the 16th/17th centuries. We tend to assume that  
someone like
   Mary Burwel or Logy or some other high-profile amateur, would  
play well
   (within our present-day aesthetics). We have lute players today  
copying
   right-hand positions from paintings of amateurs who, for all we  
know,
   might have sounded terrible to their contemporaries. YT allows  
us to
   hear how (dare I say?) 'ordinary' people at the start of the 21st
   century played. That will be of use to future researchers, I'm  
sure.



   I consider myself as a semi-professional player. I have CD  
recordings
   and play concerts. Some years have been more busy than others,  
but I
   have never been in a position to make a living exclusively from  
lute
   playing. A few weeks ago the reality of who my audience is was  
brought
   home to me. I recorded the video of me playing the so-called
   archguitar. I did that early in the morning. I uploaded it, and  
then
   left the house to play a lunchtime concert in the local church in
   Edinburgh during the Edinburgh International Festival when the
   population of the city almost doubles. Bearing in mind that I  
have had
   three number one CDs in the Scottish classical charts, I might have
   been expected to get a decent-sized audience. There were six  
people.
   And that included my wife, daughter and the guy who opened the  
church
   doors. Three people paid - all pensioners, and therefore paid  
the lower
   rate - and two of them were blind. Why do I mention this? Well,  
their
   companion spent the entire time talking them through what I looked
   like, what the instrument looked like, what the church looked like,
   etc, etc - while I was playing. The point of all this? By the  
time I
   returned home, ninety minutes after leaving the house, the video  
had
   over 200 plays.



   Earlier this week, when I added up all my video plays from YT,  
Vimeo
   and my own web pages, I was surprised to learn I had over 16,000  
plays
   in just a few months. How many concerts would I have to play to  
reach
   so many people? These figures are not special - many of our lute- 
video
   contributors could mention similar figures. There is no money in  
it, of
   course, but at least there is the satisfaction that someone  
somewhere
   is listening and hopefully enjoying the music.



   The downside? Even though the concert I played that lunchtime  
was on
   the face of it a negative experience, my wife and daughter  
stated that
   they had never heard me play so well. Why? I think there were two
   contributing factors - the acoustics were marvelous, and opened  
up for
   me subtleties in the music I never imagined were there - I was
   experiencing the music afresh, and that inspired me. And, there  
is a
   HUGE difference between playing to an audience, no matter how  
small,
   and playing to a camera.



   So, I for one will continue making mp3 files and videos, because  
I know
   there are people who get something positive out of it, and I will
   continue to try to play concerts even though I live in a country  
which
   has no interest whatsoever in Early Music.



   And I hope that my lute-playing colleagues do so too, no matter  
what
   their 'standard'. I am in their audience.



   Rob MacKillop

   [1]www.songoftherose.co.uk - free mp3 files and videos :-)



   PS I've just remembered...it is interesting to note the difference
   between my acoustic guitar audience and my Early Music audience:  
I have
   a 'donations' button on various pages. The Acoustic guitar pages
   (Scottish/Celtic stuff - some of it arrangements of Scottish lute
   pieces) has had enough hits to allow me to purchase an  
instrument. The
   Song of the Rose site - lute and baroque guitar - has raised  
only six
   pounds. Enough to buy two first strings. Don't worry, this is not a
   criticism, just a humorous observation :-)















   --

References

   1. http://www.songoftherose.co.uk/


To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html