On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:28:40 +0200, Mathias Rösel wrote > I was speaking of the "Pieces de Theorbe et de Luth, Mises en Partition > Dessus et Basse", 1716 (facsimile Madrid, 1983). The guitar is not > mentioned.
I was speaking of the two printed guitar books from 1682 and 1686. No theorbo mentioned in those. > One might take this to suggest that de Visée himself > viewed the pieces as theorbo and lute music. Not in 1680-something :-) > In his 1983 preface, Juan Marcos remarked that "many of these pieces > had, years before, an edition of its guitar versions" (sic!). > However, that it was "impossible to know for what instruments were > they originaly conceived" > (sic!). I for one cannot see good reasons why one should claim that > what de Visee called music for the theorbo and the lute, in fact is > guitar music (that must have been rewritten for the theorbo and the > lute). Nobody here made such a claim. Just that these pieces in score where published in the context of a guitar publication ca. 30 year before the where published as theorbo pieces. > As a matter of fact, pieces by de Visee that exist in versions for > the theorbo, the lute, the guitar and / or in score (en partition), > have in common that versions of a piece for lute, guitar and / or > in score share the same key, whereas the respective theorbo version > is a 4th lower. Maybe because they would be unplayable at the high pitch on a theorbo? Given that the keys of pieces are clearly given in manuscripts I think there's little to argue about. > IMO it is safe to say about the 1716 score edition, that if pieces > exists in versions for the theorbo as well as other versions, the > theorbo version is original, nevertheless. I think that's a claim hard to be proven. The earliest sources are for guitar. I tend to take these pieces as music published for a wide range of instruments (those most popular at the time: guitar, harpsichord, violin/flute/recorder with BC or lute / theorbo). It seems futile to claim that they are "originally" for one instrument with the other versions being mere "Bearbeitungen"/arrangements. I don't think we need to assume equal pitch for the different scorings since there seems to be no indication that these are meant to be used together. There's also astonishing little evidence for Theorbos in D from french sources. Cheers, Ralf Mattes > Mathias > > > > The theorbo pieces of de Visée's publication en musique stand a 4th > > > higher than the correspondent tablature versions. > > > Can the transposition of a 4th "en musique" be because > > de Visee was using his guitar pieces as his reference > > point? Most of the solo theorbo pieces that also exist > > in guitar versions are pitched down a 4th from the > > guitar. This makes sense since the guitar with > > re-entrant 5th course will have the 4th course as its lowest > > pitch, so as to be really "in d." > > > > Chris > > > > Christopher Wilke > > Lutenist, Guitarist and Composer > > www.christopherwilke.com > > > > > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- R. Mattes - Hochschule fuer Musik Freiburg [email protected]
