The numbers 1575 and 25391 are the problem: If you have a look on this link from "Sources manuscrites en tablature", you will find as theorbo sources F-B 279.152 (the famous Saizenay, theorbo part) F-Pn Rés. 1106 F-Pn Rés. 1820 F-Pn Vm7 6265 F-AG J-Tm is not in this list because the sources now preserved in Japanese are not catalogued in SMT until now.
http://w1.bnu.fr/smt/peruv.htm That's it. Gérard Rebours published in 2000 "Index thématique et tableau de concordances" at Symétrie, ISBN 2-914373-00-7. From there we have a work index for Visée - but without the transcriptions. Andreas Am 12.08.2011 um 09:41 schrieb R. Mattes: > On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 20:57:08 -0700, David Smith wrote >> Excuse me for what may be a stupid question but which manuscripts >> are Paris BN 1575 and BN 25391? I have tried to search for these >> using Google with no success. Where are they located, names, and are >> they available? > > Sorry, I'm far away from my reference works, but I think these would > be F-BN ..., meaning "France, Bibliotheque National ..." > > HTH Ralf Mattes > >> Regards >> David Smith >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] >> On Behalf Of Mathias Rösel Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 2:46 PM >> To: [email protected] Subject: [LUTE] Re: Lute Strings for theorbo >> >>> I would object to the idea that some >>> version is a "rewrite" of another version. I take all three version >>> (guitar/theorbo/score) as renderings of the same compositional idea. >> >> A bit more than that, no? Exact transpositions of the same pieces, >> I'd say. Perhaps we won't be able to tell which was first (as in >> Lessing's Ring Parable), but it's pretty clear that one _was_ first >> and the others are adaptations. >> >>>> These pieces were not published in print as theorbo pieces at all. >>>> The publication of the Pieces de Theorbe et de Luth in 1716 suggests >>>> that the music previously existed as theorbo music, but it wasn't >>>> published in print. Saizenay is dated 1699, but R1575 (and its >>>> sister ms.) is considerably earlier, probably. >>>> >>> You know of any source earlier than 1682? Would you mind sharing? >> >> Paris BN 1575 and BN 25391 are two theorbo mss. that abound with >> music by de Visee. Some concordances with Saizenay, but both mss. >> seem to be much earlier than 1699 and earlier than 1680, I'd say. >> >>> Why? It might well be a written down version of the "core" composition. >>> The instrument-specific versions adapt to the resp. instruments range. >> >> I for one have never heard of such a thing like a core composition, >> to be used for instrument-specific adaptations, in the 17th century. >> >>> But who claimed that? The statement I questioned (and still do) was >>> that since the scored version is a forth higher that implies a theorbo >>> tuned a forth higher. >> >> An idea that was positively maintained e. g. by Jose Moreno in the booklet >> to his CD with music by de Visee. I agree with you in doubting it. >> >> Mathias >> >> 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] > >
