Hello Ralf:
   Besard's 1617 print is the result of engraving - the medium of wood or
   copper or whatever matters less than the distinction of typeset with
   moveable type versus engraved plates.  As to whether Besard was a
   professional musician, I think not and he probably would have been
   insulted had anyone referred to him as such.  He was a gentleman and a
   scholar; his expertise in the field of music for the lute was just one
   facet of the sum total of his learning and the image he projected.
   Again, the mistakes are what they are, and the 1603 print actually
   contains a fairly extensive errata list.  I agree with Howard that
   printer's errors were a significant contribution.  I think Besard
   trusted that anyone smart enough to obtain his books would just figure
   things out.
   RA
   > From: [email protected]
   > To: [email protected]; [email protected];
   [email protected]
   > CC: [email protected]
   > Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Besard duets once more
   > Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 10:49:54 +0200
   >
   > On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 15:53:30 +0000, Ron Andrico 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.
   > > Ron Andrico
   >
   > Sorry, and I might be completely off here, but IIRC Besard 1617 was
   > neither engraved nor typeset - it's a woodcut. But I think that only
   > partially explains the problems in that print. While there are a lot
   > of errors that can be explained by the impossibility to correct
   errors
   > (letters being on the wrong line etc.) there are a _lot_ of errors
   > that can't be explained by this, like the ensemble parts not matching
   > harmonically or having non-matching length.
   >
   > > As far as the music is concerned it seems Besard was not
   > > a professional musician.
   >
   > Whatever "professional musician" means in that time. I think we need
   > to be very careful with such statements - ur inability the
   > read/interpret the original text might be just that: _our_
   > inanbility. May I mention the fact that Robert Dowland found Besard
   > worthy (and professional) enough to translate his lute instructions?
   >
   > Cheers, Ralf Mattes
   >
   > 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
   > > >
   > > >
   > >
   > > --
   >
   >
   > --
   > R. Mattes -
   > Hochschule fuer Musik Freiburg
   > [email protected]
   >

   --

Reply via email to