Many pieces exist in different keys and therefore different
arrangements. Here are some reasons:
- the piece was originally for some other instruments and the arrangers
are looking for ways to fit it into the range of the lute (look at the
pieces by Byrd for lute)
- some of what we think are solos might actually have been played with
additional bass on treble parts (look at the many Quadros &
Passymeasures)
I think the 16th century lute players loved to re-write. They could put
their own stamp on a piece, change some or a lot of the divisions. One
of the things that interests me is that when you compare different
versions of a piece what they changed and what they didn't change. I
recently copied into score format the Dd.9.33, Dallis and Brongytyn
versions of John Johnson's Quadro Pavan. In more places two versions
were the same, but not always the same two. I have made myself a
composite version to play as well. All 3 versions have kept a few of
the odd places that I would have changed first.
If anyone wants to see the Quadros email me and I can send you a pdf.
Nancy
To be honest, lute music is stuffed full of consecutive fifths.
You
don't have to look far to find many examples much more obvious
than
this one. The voice leading is usually pretty ropy too. The
'Poulton'
Lachrimae appears to switch between 6, 4 and 3 voices in the
first two
bars. But then, they weren't writing in strict Palestrina style
- and
indeed, why should they?
Interesting, incidentally, this business of solo versions of
Lachrimae
in two different keys. How often does this happen? I can think
off
the top of my head of Danyel's Rosa and Milano's Janequin
Bataille.
Why did people bother doing what is in effect a complete rewrite?
The toughest criticism of Dowland came from Burney, nearly two
centuries later, who was 'disappointed and astonished at his
scanty
abilities in counterpoint'. Curiously, the music examples given
by
Burney don't actually include any lute music.
P
On 24 February 2010 19:46, vance wood <[1][email protected]>
wrote:
Maybe we are seeing here what some of Dowland's contemporary
critics
meant when they remarked about Dowland's lousy counterpoint.
Can it
be that we are assuming that Dowland would not write in such a
manner, ignoring the fact that indeed he did---on purpose?
----- Original Message ----- From: "David van Ooijen"
<[2][email protected]>
To: "[3]lute-cs.dartmouth.edu" <[4][email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 12:20 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Dowland's "Lachrimae"
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:09 AM, David Tayler
<[5][email protected]> wrote:
As printed in the Poulton edition, The fifths and direct
octaves
cross the bar, from G to D in the lowest sounding voices to E
flat
to
B flat in the lowest sounding voices.
I see, consecutive fifths between what I regard as bass and
middle
voice (altus/tenor) to bass and tenor, with the middle voice of
the
first chord clearly going to the altus of the second chord. I
think we
can agree to disagree on calling that a parallel fifth - we
definitively went to different counterpoint classes - but if
your
ears perceive it such, so much the better for your ears. Mine are
less
well-attuned, I must confess.
Your fix, replacing the b-flat by a g (second fret, fourth
course) is
elegant - and not more difficult - but I must say I like the
stepwise
motion of b-flat to c' to d' tenor line in the second measure, in
imitation of what is happening in the middle voice of measure
one. As
you say, hearing counterpoint in lute writing can be a personal
thing.
But adding the g might have the best of both worlds: warmer
chord,
third to avoid attention to bare 5-8 sound, retaining stepwise
tenor.
I will try it for a while.
Thanks for the clarification, anyway.
David
--
*******************************
David van Ooijen
[6][email protected]
[7][1] www.davidvanooijen.nl
*******************************
--
Peter Martin
Belle Serre
La Caulie
81100 Castres
France
tel: 0033 (0)5 63 35 68 46
mob: 0044 (0)7971 232614
e: [8][email protected]
[9]www.silvius.co.uk
--
References
1. [2]mailto:[email protected]
2. [3]mailto:[email protected]
3. [4]http://lute-cs.dartmouth.edu/
4. [5]mailto:[email protected]
5. [6]mailto:[email protected]
6. [7]mailto:[email protected]
7. [8]http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
8. [9]mailto:[email protected]
9. [10]http://www.silvius.co.uk/
To get on or off this list see list information at
[11]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Nancy Carlin Associates
P.O. Box 6499
Concord, CA 94524 USA
phone 925/686-5800 fax 925/680-2582
web site - [12]www.nancycarlinassociates.com
Representing:
FROM WALES - Crasdant & Carreg Lafar, FROM ENGLAND - Jez Lowe & Jez
Lowe & The Bad Pennies, FROM SPAIN - La Musgana and now representing
EARLY MUSIC - The Venere Lute Quartet, Paul Beier, The Good Pennyworths
& Morrongiello & Young
Administrator THE LUTE SOCIETY OF AMERICA
web site - [13]http://LuteSocietyofAmerica.org
--
References
1. http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
2. mailto:[email protected]
3. mailto:[email protected]
4. http://lute-cs.dartmouth.edu/
5. mailto:[email protected]
6. mailto:[email protected]
7. mailto:[email protected]
8. http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/
9. mailto:[email protected]
10. http://www.silvius.co.uk/
11. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
12. http://www.nancycarlinassociates.com/
13. http://lutesocietyofamerica.org/
