Andreas,
On 2009-02-01, at 18:50, Andreas Schlegel wrote:
Here's what Denis Gaultier (or M.de Montarcis) wrote as last
comment in rule 7 in the Livre de tablature (in French - for
English translation see the article of Jorge Torres in the recent
LSA Journal):
... mais il faut observer que chacun peut ménager ces especes d
agreements, selon la nature du chant de la piece et du mouvement.
What in the Torres translation reads: ''...But it must be observed
that everyone can treat these kinds of ornaments, according to the
nature of the piece’s melody and its tempo (mouvement).''
What now it may sound like: ...listen to the music arround and look
how people are singing and playing similar passages; but if in doubt,
come to my place, it's Rue de Vaugirard 7...''
But it was over 330 years ago, alas... Such is the ''precise nature''
of historical sources. We'd now need a cold technical instruction,
which is hard to find. But even if it is somewhere, it's still not
enough. It's music, and one needs and Artist to bring it to life
again. He puts his stemp on it, which for some is a new religion, for
others unacceptable.
These are paradoxes of the so called historical music.
J
_______
Andreas
Am 01.02.2009 um 17:52 schrieb Jerzy Zak:
The problem is, it is a long note and a simple ''shake/trill''
concisting of three notes (as one can surmise from Mersenne
twisting description) biginning from the main note, is not enough.
It is a long note and long notes invite something extra, something
special.
The well known Lacrimae by JD also in some sources begins with an
ornamental sign on the third of its first chord (it is also a
doted crochet). Does the Bocquet's Allemande (1640<->1680) belongs
to the earlier performance tradition (lets call it Dowland-
Mersenne) or to the later one (say Brossard-Mouton)?
I think it may be a question of our very personal taste and
stylistic preference. Each style, to be rendered convincingly,
needs to be very, very familiarized with it. A quick, intensive
research is not enough. Sometime an answer to a tiny problem is
somewhere between lines, to be rediscovered through years, and
most refinements are permanently lost. Ornamentation is such a
refinement.
But lets not forget about ouerseves. Here and Now! We can not only
keep reproducing the lost art, but also continue the ''school''
and bring forward new refinements. In fact sometinme it can be the
only feasible thing, however some will insiste to call it HIP.
J
_______
Simple shake (simplified):
.4 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 (4 = crotchet, 2 = quaver, 1 = semiquaver)
---|-------------a--#e-e-|
-a-|-a-r-a-r-a-r'--a-----|
---|-a-------------------|
---|-a-------------------|
---|---------------------|
---|---------------------|
. ///a
Shake preceded by appogiatura (simplified):
.4 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 (4 = crotchet, 2 = quaver, 1 = semiquaver)
---|-----------a--#e-e-|
-a-|-r-a-r-a-r'--a-----|
---|-a-----------------|
---|-a-----------------|
---|-------------------|
---|-------------------|
. ///a
Mathias
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
