Hi Brent,

   that's something we have in common, indeed! Are you currently studying
   a section in that book? As for music, I like the F major section for
   the best.


   As for ornaments, I find it striking that he says, a trill starts on
   the main note, but it is fashionable to combine, and to start it, with
   a back-fall.

   In 1638, Pierre Gaultier published his own signs for ornaments. An x
   means a trill. Gaultier's trill (tremblement) starts on the main note,
   obviously, as he has another sign for the backfalls, but close to never
   combines the two signs.

   The Pickering lute book (ca. 1645) has # for the trill and a comma for
   the back fall. Both signs are more often than not combined. In other
   words, the fashion of starting a trill with the upper auxiliary note
   probably started during the 1640ies.

   Mace mirrors that development, obviously.


   I'm thinking about Vieux Gaultier's music. He ceased to work in public
   in 1631, which was before that fashion started. My conclusion is that
   trills in Vieux Gaultier's music should start on the main note. Which
   is a difficult thing as much of his music has gone through the sieve of
   his cousin's editions (1669 / 1672) some twenty years after Vieux
   Gaultier's death (1651).


   His music seems to have been rewritten, as it continued to be popular,
   but the tunings changed. Some of his pieces appear twice in one ms. in
   two tunings, viz. flat tuning and D minor tuning (e. g. in D-RO
   54-xvii).


   All of Ennemond Gaultier's music that Denis Gaultier published, is in
   the D minor tuning. However, the first prints that included this
   tuning, were published in 1638 (Ballard / Pierre Gaultier). Definitely
   after Vieux Gaultier's retirement.


   IMHO it seems safe to say that Vieux Gaultier probably used the tuning
   that old-fashioned Thomas Mace still propagated in 1676, but that the
   fashion of combining a trill with a back-fall hadn't yet started during
   Viux Gaultier's active days.


   Mathias




   -----Original-Nachricht-----
   > Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Mace
   > Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 03:53:44 +0200
   > From: brentlynk <[email protected]>
   > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
   >
   >
   > Hi Mathias,
   >
   > Thanks for that...I actually like the book, too...It's nice to hear
   > positive things about Mace!
   >
   >
   > Regards,
   > Brent
   >
   > ----- Original Message ----
   > From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> To:
   > "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
   > Sent: Tue, July 19, 2011 5:13:35 PM
   > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Mace
   >
   >
   >
   > May I say that I've learned a lot from Thomas Mace's book as regards
   > French and English music of nthe 1620ies through 1670ies. And I
   > particularly enjoyed his music which I perceived as a blend of French
   > texture and English folk tunes.
   >
   > His tuning allows you to play all of that sophisticated music with so
   > many accidentaly (at least in the CNRS editions) in simple keys with
   > no or not more than one accidentals.
   >
   > Even partbooks with Mace's tuning have survived in the Bodleian
   > iibrary. Nice consort music, or so I've read in an article by Rob
   > MacKillop.
   >
   > Mathias (from Tunisia)
   >
   >
   >
   >
   > To get on or off this list see list information at
   > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >
   >
   >




   --

Reply via email to