Fine, Peter, but 34 is another story altogether, isn't it ? "La Compagna", perfect, but not "La Sosia" ;-). The contrapuntal oprtions in the introductory motive are slightly, but significantly different. It seems impossible to me to adopt the same rhythmical symetry (semibreve, quarter, quarter) in the introduction and its answer in 33; I feel that Arthur's option, comforted by the English version in Cambridge Add Ms 3056, is more satisfactory and preserves the coherence in the imitation. But of course, that's only my twopence... :-) Among the recordings I could put my hands on, Paul O'Dette, Chris Wilson, Anthony Bailes, Massimo Lonardi, Hopkinson Smith share this opinion and all choose to play the "rectified" version (3 semi breves at the opening), perhaps it is not just a hasard ?
Best, Jean-Marie ================================= == En réponse au message du 24-11-2010, 14:25:10 == > We should look also at the next piece in the Siena manuscript, La > Compagna, which opens with the same theme and rhythm, suggesting that > number 33 was written as intended, and doesn't need to be changed. > That's what I play...... :) > > P > On 24 November 2010 12:56, Jean-Marie Poirier > <[1][email protected]> wrote: > > True, Peter. The Siena doesn't use the same rhythm in the answering > statement. Arthur Ness gives the exact Siena version in tab and his > transcription suggests a change to make both opening statements > rhythmically identical. Moreover there is a version of this very > Ricercar in an English manuscript, Cambridge Univ. Library, Add. Ms > 3056, which changes the Siena version to make both statement > conform, like Arthur suggested in his transcription. That's what I > play, and it would be interesting to have Arthur's opinion on > that... > > All the best, > Jean-Marie > ================================= > > == En reponse au message du 24-11-2010, 13:21:18 == > > > > > Looking at this piece in the Siena manuscript, the rhythm for the > > opening statement is not the same as in the answering statements. > So > > there's certainly room for doubt. > > > > I think the opening statement may have been 'corrected' in the Ness > > edition (I don't have it here to check). However, since several > > different rhythms are used for this motif, changing one of them > doesn't > > make the counterpoint any more uniform. Let it stand, and enjoy > the > > diversity! > > > > P > > On 24 November 2010 10:33, Jean-Marie Poirier > > <[1][2][email protected]> wrote: > > > > Same argument ! Listen to the counterpoint... > > Best, > > JM > > ================================= > > == En reponse au message du 24-11-2010, 11:27:59 == > > > > > > > > > > > > > >correction: Sorry, I meant the values of the second and third note > of > > the > > >first motif respectively the first bar in general... > > > > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Susanne Herre" <[2][3][email protected]> > > >To: "Lute List" <[3][4][email protected]> > > >Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 10:49 AM > > >Subject: [LUTE] Francesco da Milano - Ness 33 > > > > > > > > > > >> Dear lute lovers, > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> What are your opinions about the beginning of Francesco da > Milano > > - > > >> Fantasia Ness 33 regarding the note value of the first note of > the > > >> first motif? > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> My thoughts at the moment are that maybe it happened like > this: > > >> Francesco wrote the piece without bar lines. When they tried > to > > print > > >> it with bar lines it was not possible or not common to print > only > > an > > >> upbeat / a bar of half length. So they changed the rhythm to a > > very > > >> common pattern so the motif could now fit into one bar. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Could that be possible? Maybe that happened with other pieces > as > > well? > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Or maybe Francesco "had to" compose it like this because no > piece > > like > > >> a fantasia or ricercar would start with an upbeat? > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Best wishes, > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Susanne > > >> > > >> -- > > >> > > >> > > >> To get on or off this list see list information at > > >> [4][5]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > > > > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ----------------- > > >Orange vous informe que cet e-mail a ete controle par > l'anti-virus > > mail. > > >Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte. > > > > > > > > ======================================== > > > > -- > > Peter Martin > > 24 The Mount St Georges > > Second Avenue > > Newcastle under Lyme > > ST5 8RB > > tel: 0044 (0)1782 662089 > > mob: 0044 (0)7971 232614 > > [5][6][email protected] > > > > -- > > > >References > > > > 1. mailto:[7][email protected] > > 2. mailto:[8][email protected] > > 3. mailto:[9][email protected] > > 4. [10]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > 5. mailto:[11][email protected] > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------------- > > >Orange vous informe que cet e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus > mail. > >Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte. > > > > > ======================================== > > -- > Peter Martin > 24 The Mount St Georges > Second Avenue > Newcastle under Lyme > ST5 8RB > tel: 0044 (0)1782 662089 > mob: 0044 (0)7971 232614 > [12][email protected] > > -- > >References > > 1. mailto:[email protected] > 2. mailto:[email protected] > 3. mailto:[email protected] > 4. mailto:[email protected] > 5. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > 6. mailto:[email protected] > 7. mailto:[email protected] > 8. mailto:[email protected] > 9. mailto:[email protected] > 10. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > 11. mailto:[email protected] > 12. mailto:[email protected] > ========================================
