Thank you for your doubt, Monica. I'm looking at the second Conte Clare
in
Morlaye's second book and the frequent use of the
d
a
a
a
chord as the tonic. It keeps suggesting to my ear that to put the lowest
sounding note on the 3rd course and to use the 4th octave as the 5th in
its more proper place. Granted, he may have less ambiguously used
d
d
e
f
but he didn't - quite a few times. There would have been no question of
where the root was.
Also look at m. 12 going to 13. If one plays the 4th low string you get a
parallel octave against the treble line (again in m. 22).
Was Morlaye simply 'less discriminationg' or did he have other tricks up
his sleeve? The practice made sense to my ear long before I read
Michael's
article. I'll admit I was appreciative to see some support for it. If we
assume that all of Michael's argument is bunk is there any evidence that
it was never done? Forbidden even?
Oddly - and confusingly to this bundle of threads - it was Capirola that
first suggested it. The final chord to Nunqua fuit (53r) wants
clarification - that low A in the F chord is a curious note, isn't it? In
the vocal original, no note went to the lower octave (which we don't have
in this tuning of the 6c anyway) and neither was there a third. Did he
want just any old low note there - even the 3rd will do even though
nothing leads to it? A solution is to play only the 6th octave where the
3rd falls into a better place and adds the lightest hint of 3rd to the
root-5th. What do other players suggest here?
Sean
And if I might ask you a lute question, what do you make of the final
chord in 'Nunqua fuit' in the Capirola (f53)?
Sean
On May 13, 2015, at 1:42 AM, Monica Hall wrote:
I am sorry to say that what Michael has said in this article is highly
contentious and doesn't support the idea that the 4-course guitar was
deliberately strung so that the strings of the fourth course could be
used
independently.
1. The three examples which Michael refers to are flawed and can't be
taken as proof of the stringing arrangement which he proposes.
Giovanni Smit 4-course guitar (Vienna Kuntsthistorisches Museum SAM 49)
This is actually one of a pair of similar instruments dating 1646. The
present stringing is just what the Museum has come up with and gives no
indication of the original arrangement. It is uncertain whether the
bridge, or the spacing of the strings is original.
What is not clear from the photos is that both instruments are very small
with a scale length of only 37cms - much smaller than what is considered
the norm for 4-course guitar;
Michael says "The Smit guitar was undoubtedly tuned according to Ex.2a"
i.e.with a bourdon on the 4th course. We simply don't know whether this
was so. It would certainly have been tuned at least a minor 3rd higher
than what is assumed to be standard 4-course guitar pitch today. Pitch:
c"
(or d" ). Hardly suitable for the 16th century 4-course repertoire.
The two other drawings which he has reproduced are just artists
impressions - they are not photographs. The Cellier drawing may not be
accurate. There are obvious errors in the some of the other drawings in
the manuscript. The illustration of Carlo Cantu dates from the 1630s or
later and may actually be of a 5-course guitar.
French/Flemish iconography.
The illustrations in the Morlaye books and in Phalese clearly show the
strings equally spaced on all courses.
There are at least two other illustrations showing normal string spacing.
Harvey Turnbull pl. 17a & 18 & p. 141. Both show the strings of the
4th
course close together.
17a French - engraving from Bib. Nat. Paris.
18. Atributed to Tobias Stimmer 1539-1584. Swiss painter and
illustrator. Died in Strasbourg. One of 10 engravings in N.Y. Public
Library - Astor, Llennox and Tilden Foundation.
There is also an illustration of a 4-course guitar in a Spanish source
Francisco Guerrero - Sacrae Cantiones (Seville, 1555). It is difficult
to see the spacing but it seems to be equal. Harvey Turnbull pl. 16a &
p.
141.
I have posted these on my earlyguitar.ning.com site. This topic was
discussed there in some length a few weeks ago.
Bermudo
What Bermudo says does not really underline the universal use of standard
tuning. Like so many people Michael has just taken the sentence out of
context. He has omitted part of it and is just reading into it what he
wants.
Bermudo says that "They usually put on the 4th course another string"
which suggests that they did not always.
f.96 - Suelen poner a la quarta de la guitarra otra cuerda, que le
llaman
requinta. No se, si quando este nombre pusieron a la tal cuerda: formava
con la dicha quarta un diapente, que es quinta perfecta: y por esto tomo
nombre de requinta. Ahora no tienen este temple: mas forman ambas
cuerdas
una octava: segun tiene el laud, o vihuela de Flandes Este instrumento
teniendo las tres, o quatro ordenes de cuerdas dobladas, que forman entre
si octavas: dizen tener las cuerdas requintadas.
They usually put on the fourth course of the guitar another string which
they call "requinta". I do not know whether when they gave this name to
this string {in the past] it made the interval of a 5th with the fourth
course, and for this reason it has this name. Today it is not tuned in
this way; instead the two strings form an octave in the same way as on
the lute, or "vihuela de Flandes" [i.e. another name for the lute].
Because this instrument [i.e. the lute] has three or four strings doubled
in octaves they say that it has its strings "requintadas".
On a purely practical level it simply isn't necessary to string the
guitar in this way to avoid six-four chords. Invariably the upper
octave
note on the fourth course is doubled on one of the higher courses in
4-part chord and if players were worried about six-four chords they could
simply have omitted the fourth course altogether from chords which have
the 5th of the chord on the 4th course. In fact in the Leroy books this
is what often happens; the Morlaye books are less discriminating. Also
quite frequently the 4th course is to be tuned down a tone and this
eliminates the second inversion chords in some keys. It just isn't
necessary to go to such length.
I think people should be more careful in the way that they evaluate their
information...
Monica
----- Original Message ----- From: "Sean Smith" <[email protected]>
To: "lute" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 1:13 AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Vihuela Stringing
There may be reason to rethink the splitting of the 4th course in
renaissance guitar technique. In the December 2012 LSA Quarterly,
Michael
Fink has strongly argued for playing the octave seperately in the lowest
course of the renaissance guitar under cetain circumstances and for
certain reasons.
Apparently the Giovanni Smit chitarrina (1646) is a prime example. He
reproduces the plate (6.5) from James Tyler's 2002 book and it is a
significantly wider space within that course.
He also reproduces the drawing (~1583-1587) by Jacques Cellier for
presentation to Henry III of France. It requires a bit of photoshop
magic
to bring it out but it, too, has a wider split at the 4th course.
The Commedia dell'Arte Guitar (ca. 1630?) in the print of actor Carlo
Cantu ("Buffetto") printed as the frontispiece in Tyer's 1980 book also
reveals course IV is split wider.
He further shows the usefulness of playing the octave over the full
course
in a variety of examples.
Sean
On May 12, 2015, at 9:35 AM, Martin Shepherd wrote:
Let's not get confused here - the "split course" technique consists of
stopping only one string of a unison course so that the course produces
two different notes. This was used by Capirola, Fuenllana, Bakfark, and
possibly others. Playing the strings of an octave course separately is
a
completely different technique, not used (as far as I know) before
Mouton
in the late 17th century.
Martin
On 12/05/2015 18:25, Lex van Sante wrote:
Yes, for instance in Rechercar XIII one has to finger one string of the
fourth course and plucking both of them.
Op 12 mei 2015, om 18:18 heeft Monica Hall het volgende geschreven:
Does Capirola say that you should play one or other string of an
octave
strung course?
Monica
----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Wilke"
<[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 3:20 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Vihuela Stringing
I suppose he meant Capirola.
Chris
[1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
At May 12, 2015, 8:27:26 AM, Monica Hall<'[email protected]'>
"Fuenllana (1554) prescribes playing only one of the two strings in
the
course in some passages (as does Dalza - does he?)"
As far as I am aware this is not what Fuenllana does. What he does do
is
play two different notes on the same course - stopping one string of
a
course and leaving the other unstopped.
References
1. https://yho.com/footer0
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
