I'll second that sentiment. There is a small number of folks on this list
who feel called upon to put down a more wealthy and successful cousin.


On 2/27/14 8:49 AM, "Monica Hall" <[email protected]> wrote:

>    There is no reason why Campion should have been embarrassed at being a
>    guitar player as well as a theorbo player.   Foscarini, Bartolotti,
>    Grenerin, De Visee and Medard were all guitarists and theorboists and
>    indeed most professional players may have played both instruments as
>    and when required in a manner appropriated to the occasion.
> 
> 
> 
>    Please don't knock the guitar!!!
> 
> 
> 
>    Monica
> 
>    ----- Original Message -----
> 
>    From: [1]Shaun Ng
> 
>    To: [2]Monica Hall
> 
>    Cc: [3]R. Mattes ; [4]Lutelist
> 
>    Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 8:28 AM
> 
>    Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Bartolotti's continuo treatise
> 
>      Campion actually says that he reccommends his pupils to take a few
>      lessons on the guitar before starting with the lute.
> 
>    What I have found interesting is how Campion--who doesn't seem to be
>    embarrassed to call himself both a theorbo and guitar master--seems to
>    suggest that the way to play (or more precisely 'touch') the theorbo is
>    really similar to the guitar. I wonder what this says about French
>    eighteenth century performance style.
> 
>    Campion (my translations):
> 
>      There is an art to touching [the notes of] the chords. The thumb,
>      after having touched the essential note, must then do
>      a batterie with the other fingers, restruming [the strings] and
>      alternately multiplying the chord, unless the strings are separated
>      [....] This is why I always give a dozen guitar lessons to those who
>      intend to accompany on the theorbo.
>      The harpegement of chords on theorbo makes up superbly
>      when abbreviating the bass [in quick] movements. It is for this
>      reason that I usually give, as I said, a dozen lessons on the
>      guitar to those who intend to accompany on the theorbo. Its facility
>      brings about in a short time [an understanding of] the touch [of the
>      instrument].
> 
>    Shaun Ng
> 
>    On 27 Feb 2014, at 9:46 am, Monica Hall <[5][email protected]>
>    wrote:
> 
>      I have read all the messages in order but there are rather a lot of
>      them and
>      no reason why I should reply to all of them in detail.  To repeat
>      again what you
>      actually said...
>      "First, as I've said before: a guitar accompaniment is not a vaild
>      source
>      for continuo realizations! Guitar players where actually known for
>      there
>      inability to play sophisticated music (and that's why everyone and
>      their
>      grandmother sneered at them)."
>      There were a lot of amateur guitarists  but many of them were
>      perfectly
>      capable of playing sophisticated music.  In the passage which
>      Jean-Marie has
>      quoted Gramont says
>      The King's taste for Corbetta's compositions had made this
>      instrument so
>      fashionable that everyone played it, well or ill.
>      The Duke
>      of York could play it fairly well, and the count of Arran as well as
>      Francisco himself.
>      Clearly many of these people could play sophisticated music as well
>      as a professional player..
>      The memoires are a witty and entertaining account of life at the
>      Restoration Court but you don't have to take everything in them at
>      face value.
>      Some people may have sneered at the guitar but this is very often
>      just a matter of cultural snobbism which was alive and well in
>      the 17th century as it is today.
>      There is no reason why a guitar accompaniment should not be a vaild
>      source
>      of information about realizing a continuo. Many guitarists were
>      quite able to do this within the limitations which the instrument
>      imposes and they may have had a better grasp of the way chords can
>      be used than some lutenists. Campion actually says that he
>      reccommends his pupils to take a few lessons on the guitar before
>      starting with the lute.
>      That will have to do for tonight.
>      Monica
>      ----- Original Message ----- From: "R. Mattes"
>      <[6][email protected]>
>      To: "Monica Hall" <[7][email protected]>
>      Cc: "Lutelist" <[8][email protected]>
>      Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 9:18 PM
>      Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Bartolotti's continuo treatise
> 
>      On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 20:10:03 -0000, Monica Hall wrote
>      Monica - are you still reading up? It's really hard to answer
>      without
>      knowing which of my posts you have read so far.
> 
>> First, as I've said before: a guitar accompaniment is not a vaild
>> source
>> for continuo realizations! Guitar players where actually known for
>> there
>> inability to play sophisticated music (and that's why everyone and
>> their
>> grandmother sneered at them).
>      This is an outrageous remark.   Certainly there were some people in
>      the 17th century who disliked the guitar and had their own agenda to
>      pursue.  There are apparently some in the 21st century too.
> 
>      Please, no conspiracy theories. Even the very text Jean-Marie posted
>      and
>      you had so much fun translating hints at the guitar's problems (as
>      do
>      many other 17th century sources).
> 
>      But there is a substantial repertoire of fine music for the guitar -
>      by Bartolotti in particular, as well as Corbetta, De Visee and many
>      others.
> 
>      As I have said before - I'm not critisising baroque guitar music.
>      There's indeed some very fine ideomatic music written for that
>      instrument.
> 
>      Several of the guitar books include literate example on how to
>      accompany a bass line. These do sometimes indicate that compromise
>      was
>      necessary because the instrument has a limited compass.
> 
>      Yes, and the more refined these treaties get, the more the guitar
>      gets
>      treated like a "mini-lute".
> 
>      There are for
>      examples in Granatas 1659 book where although the bass line
>      indicates
>      a 4-3 suspension over a standard perfect cadence with the bass line
>      falling a 5th he has rearranged the parts so that the 4-3 suspension
>      is in the lowest sounding part. There is no earthly reason why this
>      should not be acceptable.
> 
>      Sorry, but that doesn't make any sense. You can't have a 4-3
>      suspension
>      in the lowest voice. You can have a forth between the lowest two
>      voices,
>      but than the higher on would need to resolve downwards to a third.
>      What
>      you describe sounds like a 4-3 voice played an octave to low (or
>      rather,
>      the bass voice being displaced an octave too high), but that would
>      result in a 5th resolving to a 6th [1] ... I'm absolutely convinced
>      that
>      this would make any 17th century musician cringe. This is something
>      that
>      just does never happen outside the guitar world. It's not as if we
>      had
>      no information about how musicians (including amateurs) learned and
>      perceived music.
> 
>      And no reason why lutenists should not have done the same if this
>      was
>      inconvenient.
> 
>      For me the issue pretty much is:  should I (as a lute player) take
>      as
>      a model an instrument which is severly limited (as a _basso_
>      continuo
>      instrument) as already noticed by contemporary writers or should I
>      just
>      follow contemporary BC instructions (literally hundreds of them!).
>      When
>      switching from the organ or harpsichord to a lute or theorbo, why
>      should
>      I all of a sudden ignore what I've learned about proper voice
>      leading?
>      With all the stylistic differences between the different continuo
>      styles
>      the common agreement seems to be that continuo should follow the
>      "rules"
>      of music (BC quasi beeing a "contapunto al mente") [2]
>      There really seems to be a great divide between the so-called guitar
>      world and the rest of the baroque crowd. To the later it seems
>      pretty
>      clear that BC was first and foremost a shorthand notation for
>      colla-parte playing. It's rather unfortunate that modern time picked
>      "basso continuo" and not Fundamentbass or "sopra la parte" or
>      "partimento" (the last literally meaning "little score" or
>      "short-hand
>      score").
>      Cheers, Ralf Mattes
>      [1] unless someone else provides a lower bass voice.
>      [2] im very reluctant to use the word "rules" here. This sounds like
>      something imposed from the outside. Maybe "grammar" would be the
>      more
>      fitting term.
> 
>      To get on or off this list see list information at
>      [9]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
> 
>    --
> 
> References
> 
>    Visible links
>    1. mailto:[email protected]
>    2. mailto:[email protected]
>    3. mailto:[email protected]
>    4. mailto:[email protected]
>    5. mailto:[email protected]
>    6. mailto:[email protected]
>    7. mailto:[email protected]
>    8. mailto:[email protected]
>    9. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
> 
>    Hidden links:
>   11. http://www.linkedin.com/in/shaunkfng
> 




Reply via email to