Sam,
> Articulation isn't necessarily deliberate - it can be an involuntary
consequence of what > > > you call choppy playing,
There is a specific term for the use of involuntary articulation:
inarticulate playing.
> However, much of what we take for granted has absolutely no
historical precedent. When > articulated playing is regarded as a
"period performance practice technique" and > > > > >
"historically informed", whereas legato is called "totally modern", I
take issue.
Hardly. In the lute world, the very basis of right hand technique is
founded on the strong-weak alternation of thumb-index (m-i in baroque
playing). Granted, the built in strong-weak component of lute's right
hand technique does not necessarily demand a long-short articulation,
but it does suggest something like it to me. Fortunately, we are not
confined to lute sources because other instruments go into much greater
depth. Violin tutors from the likes of Geminiani, Leopold Mozart,
Muffat, etc. reveal a bowing technique in which strategically placed
re-takes were common, suggesting that a resultant silence
d'articulation was endemic to conceptions of phrasing and metrical
structure. Quantz tongued using the syllables ti, di, ri, did'll and
tid'll. In numerous musical examples, the syllables are clearly laid
out under the notes - and often quite difficult to execute. Johann
Georg Tromlitz gives 13 rules for tonguing, and plenty of exceptions.
Presumably, these and many other authors did not go into such detail
because it was an unimportant part of the technique.
These are only a few examples, and while the situation is not as
clearly delineated as "articulated" vs. "legato," there is loads of
evidence showing that articulation was a major concern of baroque
performers. On the other hand, modern players are taught not to break
the sound as a default. Opera singers are instructed to elide words as
often as possible (This is why no one can understand an opera today
even if its in the listener's native tongue.) Think about modern
guitarists: one of the first things you're told is to work on making
every right hand finger sound the same. Many classical guitar teachers
even tell students that there should be no discernible difference
between apoyando and tirando strokes.
I'm not knocking the modern approach, but it is certainly built upon
different aesthetic principles than baroque music. It would be wrong
for a modern guitarist NOT to work on getting all fingers to sound
even; that is part of modern technique and it is needed to properly
present the aesthetic foundation of modern music. The player would not
be serving a contemporary piece by playing it in a baroque manner. Of
course, I believe the opposite to be true, too.
Chris
--- On Thu, 2/21/13, Sam Chapman <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Howard et al,
Isn't cutting a note short "articulating" by definition, regardless
of
what one does with all the other notes? Articulation isn't
necessarily
deliberate - it can be an involuntary consequence of what you call
choppy playing, or it can be part of a carefully-planned performance
(though the former is probably easier to justify historically).
I don't think you've done justice to the "first rule" I mentioned in
my
post. Most authors write about holding down the fingers for as long
as
possible, that is, sustaining the notes for as long as possible.
This
is not the same as avoiding "stopping notes prematurely". Whether
the
rule relates to establishing good technique or creating a certain
kind
of sound world (or both) is up for debate. If we see it as refering
to
an aesthetic preference and take it literally then yes, it is
evidence
against stopping notes for whatever purpose.
I have great respect for Paul O'Dette's playing and I have nothing
against articulation per se. However, much of what we take for
granted
has absolutely no historical precedent. When articulated playing is
regarded as a "period performance practice technique" and
"historically
informed", whereas legato is called "totally modern", I take issue.
As far as I know, Mace is the only author to describe shortening
notes
(not specifically bass notes) on the lute. He considers this effect
an
ornament (along with Piano/Forte and Pauses, among other things). He
writes "it will seem to speak the word tut" - perhaps we should use
this ornament as often as we would say the word "tut" in a sentence?
On several occasions Mace refers to his dissatisfaction with the
long
bass strings on the theorbo and their "snarling together".
Tellingly,
he does NOT suggest articulating the bass notes here as a solution.
Instead he suggests playing the basses softer, though admits that
this
is not an ideal solution. He seems to regard this problem as
intrinsic
to the nature of the instrument.
In other places, Mace praises playing which is "smooth and clean".
On
several occasions he describes a kind of over-legato effect: "Thus
holding of your letters stopt, all the while, will give a very fine
sound, or gingle beyond any other way of play". Other than the "tut"
Mace never mentions anything about what we today call articulation,
or
indeed musical phrasing. Since he writes about virtually everything
else, I think this is significant.
Personally, I feel that many performers today overarticulate, and
this
can have the effect of introducing unpleasant accents and (moreover)
reducing the volume/resonance of the instrument. The lute,
especially
when strung in gut, can be seen as a self-articulating instrument -
why
exaggerate this characteristic?
I anticipate your reply!
Sam
On 21 February 2013 20:13, howard posner
<[1][1][email protected]>
wrote:
On Feb 21, 2013, at 10:49 AM, Sam Chapman
<[2][2][email protected]>
wrote:
> There is far more evidence for a legato
> way of playing. One of the first rules we learn on the lute is
to
hold
> down the left hand fingers until they are needed for another
note -
> doesn't this indicate a desire for sustaining the resonance of
the
> instrument, rather than cutting it short (i.e. articulating).
Cutting a note short amounts to "articulating" only if it's a
contrast to other notes. If all the notes are short, it's just
choppy playing, and deliberately shortening a note is pointless if
that note is surrounded by notes that are inadvertently shortened.
So evidence of a preference for not inadvertently stopping notes
prematurely through poor technique 1) is not evidence against
preventing a bass note from ringing beyond its written value, and
2)
is not evidence against stopping stopping notes for expressive
purposes.
This doesn't settle the question of whether Weiss (for example)
would have been perfectly satisfied with how his basses sounded
without damping them.
O'Dette is a master at controlling the ends of notes, and it's the
reason he makes contrapuntal voice-leading dizzyingly obvious: a
note that comes after silence is
emphasized.
--
To get on or off this list see list information at
[3][3]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
Sam Chapman
Oetlingerstrasse 65
4057 Basel
(0041) 79 530 39 91
--
References
1. mailto:[4][email protected]
2. mailto:[5][email protected]
3. [6]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. file://localhost/mc/[email protected]
2. file://localhost/mc/[email protected]
3. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
4. file://localhost/mc/[email protected]
5. file://localhost/mc/[email protected]
6. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
