Interested people can ask me for a list of the pieces by a "Gaultier" 
(Ennemond, Jacques, Pierre and unknown) from the PAN-database (Pièces en 
Accords Nouveaux, based on the splendid work of François-Pierre Goy, see: 
http://www.accordsnouveaux.ch/de/Abhandlung/Abhandlung.html - in German, but 
the translation is on the way). The mail list doesn't allow attachments. So you 
have to cantact me directly.

And:
The CNRS-edition of Vieux Gaultier contains only the pieces in the NAO (nouvel 
accord ordinaire - d-minor-tuning). The pieces in accords nouveaux are in the 
PAN-database, as already said. François-Pierre Goy made also the catalogue for 
all pieces by a Gaultier in the Vieil ton. But it is not available until now. I 
hope that the complete Gaultier-Werkverzeichnis (with all pieces in all 
different accords) will be available soon. The big majority of the work is done 
- but there are discussions on the form and some additions...

All the best,

Andreas

Am 10.02.2017 um 18:24 schrieb Jean-Marie Poirier <[email protected]>:

> I agree with Ronabout mis-attributions of "Gautier" pieces to Jacques or 
> Ennemond.
> I have been doing quite a bit of research on that topic and am actually 
> planning to record the 
> pieces in vieil ton attributed to "Gautier" 'whatever the spelling) along 
> with the pieces by Mésangeau and Lespine, 
> when I get the funding...
> All these peopole are more or less exact contemporaries, including Robert 
> Ballard and teheir style is very 
> coherent indeed. Sometimes Jacques Gaultier distinguishes himself, not only 
> by using a 12 course lute, but by a
> different style too, not as "continental" as the others. But I must agree 
> that the distinction is very very hard to do sometimes.
> He (Jacques) left Frace not to return, in 1617 when the others were starting 
> careers at court or in the service of rich nobles. Very much a sort of 
> emerging "French school" there.
> 
> What is also interesting is that, some of them, Mesangeau, Ballard, Lespine, 
> and some "Gaultier", very probably Ennemond most of the time, are also 
> represented in the accord nouveaux repertoire.
> And yet, strangely enough Vieux Gaultier is mainly known for his pieces in 
> baroque tuning.
> Knowing that the first publication using this d minor tuning was by Bouvier 
> in 1638, it is hard to believe that Vieux Gaultier, who was about 63 then and 
> retiring to his original Dauphiné, 
> after the banishment of his employer, Queen Mother Marie de Medicis, would 
> have built up his immense reputation on pieces in the new baroque tuning in 
> the last 14 years of his life.....
> So it is a matter rational reasoning to admit of that a good deal of his 
> production lies in manuscripts in vieil ton and accord nouveaux. 
> And there is some evidence, (scant at the moment but in it's a work progress) 
> that pieces in transitional tuning also appear a bit later on in the D minor 
> tuning...
> 
> Best,
> 
> Jean-Marie Poirier
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> 
>>  Dear Ron,
>>  I have a whole volume of vieux Gautier by CNRS. Are you saying their
>>  scholarship is mostly just speculation?
>>  G.
>>  On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Ron Andrico <[1][email protected]>
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>       Hello Rainer:
>>       As you know from John Robinson's list, most of the manuscript
>>    pieces in
>>       old tuning cited merely indicate various spellings of "Gautier",
>>    and
>>       there are no firm attributions to Ennemond.   However, I believe
>>    that a
>>       handful of pieces from Herbert are by Ennemond and not by Jacques
>>    as
>>       they are usually speculatively ascribed.   My attribution is
>>    likewise
>>       pure speculation but based on sound reasoning.
>>       Mary Burwell's anonymous lute tutor described Jacques as having a
>>       thunderous approach to playing his basses, which may very well
>>    only
>>       have been a critique of his extended-bass instrument.    But if
>>    you
>>       spend a bit of time with Ennemond's music in d-minor tuning, you
>>    can
>>       develop a sense of his style, which appears quite simple but is
>>    very
>>       delicate and nuanced.
>>       Try the courante in Herbert f. 37, for instance, and the simpler
>>    but
>>       very delicate courante in Herbert f. 40v.   I also tend to think
>>       Aegidius f. 67v and f. 100v are by Ennemond.
>>       RA
>>         ____________________________________________________________
>>    ______
>>       From: [2][email protected] <[3][email protected]>
>>    on behalf
>>       of Rainer <[4][email protected]>
>>       Sent: Friday, February 10, 2017 2:54 PM
>>       To: Lute net
>>       Subject: [LUTE] Gautier in viel ton
>>       Dear lute netters,
>>       can anybody recommend pieces by Ennemond Gautier in viel ton
>>    (with
>>       sources)?
>>       I have John Robinson's list, but it is very old and, of course,
>>    doesn't
>>       tell us anything about the quality of the music.
>>       Rainer adS
>>       PS
>>       of course, I have a 10c lute.
>>       To get on or off this list see list information at
>>       [1][5]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>>       [2]Frequently Asked Technical Questions about the lute mail list
>>       [6]www.cs.dartmouth.edu
>>       Frequently Asked Technical Questions about the lute mail list.
>>    getting
>>       on and off the list; How do I get on the lute mail list? How do I
>>    get
>>       off the lute mail list?
>>       --
>>    References
>>       1. [7]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>>       2. [8]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>> 
>>  --
>> 
>> References
>> 
>>  1. mailto:[email protected]
>>  2. mailto:[email protected]
>>  3. mailto:[email protected]
>>  4. mailto:[email protected]
>>  5. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>>  6. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/
>>  7. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>>  8. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>> 
> 
> 

Andreas Schlegel
Eckstr. 6
CH-5737 Menziken
+41 (0)62 771 47 07
[email protected]


--

Reply via email to