Le 8 févr. 09 à 17:30, Jerzy Zak a écrit :
Anthony,
I'm really fascinted by your detailed analyzis of all technicall
matters concerning lute construction, stringing and playing. I wish
I had such an eye on all this things. But in my experience, after
some 40 years of observations of teaching music playing (including
my own regular education) I'm more and more incined to think that
the deciding requirement in a good music peformance is... a talent.
And a personal contact with a master. That was obvious in
historical times and persist until now, despite all technologicall
advance.
Jerzy
I am interested in this are of lute construction, stringing etc, but
I do not consider myself competent actually, and I have never said or
thought that this was an essential or necessary interest to be a
great musician. My interest in this area mainly feeds my ears when I
am litening to other lutenists performing.
Indeed, in a recent message, I said "
"If you excellent gut strings, but little knowledge of the "grammar"
of French rhetoric, then the best strings in the world will
not create a good performance."
I was thinking exactly as you are, although perhaps we don't have the
same masters in mind.
However, it is a little late for me to hope to become a great
musician, so I am mainly trying acheive the most beautiful gut sound
that I can from my lute, by careful selection of strings and
understanding string theory. Benjamin Narvey who is an excellent
Baroque lutenist can then have the occasional pleasure of playing
this lute, while advising me about my playing technique. I hope I
will make progress, but I assure you that my hopes are extremely modest.
After years you may develope a method which for you is good one,
for others may not.
Bthat is becouse a method is not the case. I'm pretty sure past
players played in a hudge variety of ways and we can only take very
general guidelines from them.
I think I have uderstood you, and again this is more or less what I
have been saying myself in recent messages. I do not think there is
one way. I enjoy variety.
Indeed, there are signs that there were disagreements, between
lutenists of past times.
About the practice of using Bologna lutes, we have an inkling that
not all lutenists were entirely in agreement about this practice:
Some lutenists like Mace and Jacques Gautier, who seem to have been
at least partly involved in lute making themselves, seem to be
laughing at the "pittiful Bologna lutes" that some of their wealthy
students have bought.
The description by Mace of J. Gautier showing him some expensive and
miserable old Maler lutes that his students had bought, seems to show
at least a certain distance from this practice.
" There are diversities of Mens Names in Lutes;
but the Chief Name we most esteem, is Laux Maller, ever written with
Text Letters: Two of which Lutes I have seen (pittifull Old,
Batter'd, Crack'd Things) valued at 100 l. a piece. Mr Gootiere, the
Famous Lutenist in His Time, shew'd me One of Them, which the King
paid 100 l. for. (...). I have often seen Lutes of three or four pounds
price, far more Illustrious and Taking, to a common Eye".
We see that the king, and one of Jacques Gaultier's students bought
these lutes, not Gaultier, himself, who may have been showing some
scorn about their pitiful state as Mace is doing here.
Gautier was supposed to have invented his own lute type, which
perhaps he was defending, and Mace also has some drawings of a
similar prototype.
While in Burwell, in contrast, we see a scathing attack on Gautier's
12c lute.
This makes me think that even then, there could be controversy
between "ancients and moderns". There was the same type of
disagreement as between those who use gut and those who use
synthetics today. So there was not just one sound, or one aesthetic.
I hope I understood you,
Am I wrong or not but all appogiaturas I hear are sharp
''backwords'', not to say about other ''nuances''...
I am afraid I have not quite understood this last remark, so I can
not tell you whether you are mistaken or not.
Regards
Anthony
As all know, there are several methods of playing -- a historical
one, a modern one (a post-modern one ;-))) and all in between. But
aside from the method, a player needs a good ear and a complex
musical inteligence which guides him how to get the most from his
instrument (when he pics up another instrument he may finde that
another method or place to place his fingers is better). An
instantanous feed-back is a pre condition, like with a new car (or
horse) which you are trying to bridle. After years you may develope
a method which for you is good one, for others may not.
Bthat is becouse a method is not the case. I'm pretty sure past
players played in a hudge variety of ways and we can only take very
general guidelines from them. What guided them (the good ones of
course) and shoud assist us, presently and always, is a musical end
to which mastering of an instrument leads. What is this 'musical
end' is a wide topic and can serve for another thread.
What I wanted to say is that inicially a player needs a master (or
rather masters, as combination of some two particular people may
not always work) and some kind and amount of musical talent. The
rest of the way lies in his hands and ears, must fit to his body
(or the other way arround) and be convincing to more then him. I'm
simply against mythologisation of a method and believe in a unique
human gift, which has been pushed aside in most discussions on HIP.
By the way...
I note that Satoh, is perhaps even further back (low tension), but
with with Gautier TO shape, see here, and also listen to the effect:
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~lsa/old/Cleveland2006/
TastingBaroque.html
http://tinyurl.com/2vxntm
Listen
http://tinyurl.com/2rsk5p
Am I wrong or not but all appogiaturas I hear are sharp
''backwords'', not to say about other ''nuances''...
I am interested in acquiring a deeper undesrtanding of these issues,
not necessarily looking for a catechism.
Me too, only the balance matters.
J
______
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
