On 16 August 2011 17:53, Ron Andrico <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Monica: > > Besard's 1617 book was rather inelegantly engraved. He may have used the > services of a chimpanzee, which explains a great deal.
Oeps, did I say typeset? Engraved, that is, indeed. Not by a chimpanzee, though, more like spider. Need my glasses for this one. David > > Ron Andrico > >> Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 16:42:40 +0100 >> To: [email protected] >> CC: [email protected] >> From: [email protected] >> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Besard duets once more >> >> I know how to fix it: >> > rewrite it, and some of you send me their fixes when I last asked >> > about Besard last year (was it?). But looking at the music, it begs >> > the question: why? Why so many errors and/or poor writing, why bother >> > to publish it? Is there a theory out there, someone? >> >> I am not very familiar with this particular source but it doesn't surprise >> me that it is apparently a mess. I can think of a number of baroque guitar >> tablatures which are pretty useless. Have you ever looked at Pesori?. >> And then there is Dalza. >> Have you read Martin shepherd's article "Was Dalza really weird?" >> >> There are fairly obvious practical reasons why there might be a large >> number >> of >> printing errors. As far as the music is concerned it seems Besard was not >> a professional musician. A bad case of vanity publishing. Is the book >> engraved or printed from type? >> >> Monica >> >> > >> > -- >> > ******************************* >> > David van Ooijen >> > [email protected] >> > www.davidvanooijen.nl >> > ******************************* >> > >> > >> > >> > To get on or off this list see list information at >> > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >> >> > -- ******************************* David van Ooijen [email protected] www.davidvanooijen.nl *******************************
