Just a theorbo and an archlute are enough. Not so bad :-)

   -------- Messaggio originale --------
   Da: [email protected]
   Data: 21/07/19 17:15 (GMT+01:00)
   A: tribioli <[email protected]>
   Cc: Matthew Daillie <[email protected]>, "[email protected]
   list" <[email protected]>
   Oggetto: [LUTE] Re:

   So - I took a quick look: l'Orfeo starts in C and goes through a, d, F,
   g, G, Bb, c and even f.
   A separate theorbo for each key change, I suppose!))
   RT
   ====
   http://turovsky.org
   Feci quod potui. Faciant meliora potentes.
   > On Jul 21, 2019, at 8:49 AM, [email protected] wrote:
   >
   > Out of curiosity:
   > There should be estimates around of how many keys say a Monteverdi
   opera goes through.
   > I am pretty sure Claudio didn't worry about the fretted guys
   temperaments, did he?
   > unless they had a different axe per movement.
   > RT
   >
   > ====
   > http://turovsky.org
   > Feci quod potui. Faciant meliora potentes.
   >
   >> On Jul 21, 2019, at 6:16 AM, tribioli <[email protected]>
   wrote:
   >>
   >>  I know only one thing: for me 1/6 comma practically works. No
   slanted
   >>  frets nor tastini. I don't bear anymore to play early Renaissance
   music
   >>  in equal temperament which on the other hand I use on all the later
   >>  music as it allows to play in other keys than the "standard"
   >>  Renaissance keys.
   >>
   >>  I think there were not so many rules in the past. Galilei advocates
   >>  against tastini, so there were people using them and meantone
   >>  temperament. How many we don't know. Piccinini advocates playing
   with
   >>  nails, others say not. Besard says to stretch the thumb out, some
   >>  others say to do so if your hand allows it (for instance, I have a
   >>  short thumb, one falanx shorter than usual). In any case, Besard
   (if I
   >>  remember correctly) blames those who play shaking their hand, so
   there
   >>  were some musicians that still played thumb under at his time. How
   many
   >>  we don't know. Lately, some, many?, people played with the pinky
   very
   >>  close or behind the bridge, so they probably had lower string
   tensions,
   >>  which is probably good for instruments with many strings, and a
   >>  completely different sound of what now people think is nice. Even
   our
   >>  instruments are biased by our ideal, sweet, sound, which BTW is
   >>  different from what was considered a good sound thirty years ago,
   but
   >>  if one reproduces exactly the thickness and bar dimensions of the
   >>  surviving boards, the sound that comes out is much brighter. Ok, it
   >>  depends on the board stiffness too, but that's it.
   >>
   >>  It is a modern, romantic, idea that everything in music must be
   >>  written, the thecnique must be absolutely that etc. The old
   masters,
   >>  simply did what they liked more and worked better for them, of
   course
   >>  to the degree the instrument allowed. They wrote their own music or
   >>  freely adapted what was composed by others, simplifying or adding
   >>  diminutions as they thought was fit and their thecnique allowed. As
   in
   >>  the case of the lute there is no continuity because no one have
   played
   >>  it for a couple of centuries, we can only guess and try to stay
   close
   >>  to what they "probably" did. If we like to do so, because at the
   end no
   >>  one wrote a law so the lutenists have to play only old music!
   Freedom
   >>  (in art, at least)!
   >>
   >>  Happy plucking
   >>
   >>  -------- Messaggio originale --------
   >>  Da: Matthew Daillie <[email protected]>
   >>  Data: 21/07/19 11:23 (GMT+01:00)
   >>  A: "[email protected] list" <[email protected]>
   >>  Oggetto: [LUTE] Re: Wishful thinking on lute temparaments was Re:
   Lute
   >>    Temperaments
   >>
   >>  OK, I stand corrected, you know best. Have a nice day.
   >>  Matthew
   >>  Le 21 juil. 2019 à 11:15, Martyn Hodgson
   >>  <[email protected]> a écrit :
   >>> Dear Matthew,
   >>> Thank you for his - though I really do not know why you suggest a
   >>> 'slanging match'!.  My intention is merely to put some historical
   >>  and
   >>> practical perspective on the matter rather than simple personal
   >>> assertion.  To repeat: you are making the common mistake  of
   >>  discussing
   >>> theoretical temperaments (mainly, in practice, only  employable on
   >>> keyboard instruments) with practical temperaments appropriate for
   >>> fretted instruments such as the lute.
   >>> Whether or not some modern players might adopt this manner
   >>  ('meantone')
   >>> of fretting is not, of course, the point - perhaps they might
   >>> themselves engage in a degree of wishful thinking.  Certainly,
   >>  modern
   >>> fashions come and go as fast as fads, and in other areas of lute
   >>> performance practice some modern players (even a few professionals
   >>  who
   >>> might be expected to know better) still insist on, for example,
   >>> employing thumb-under for repertoire other than the sixteenth
   >>  century.
   >>> In short, such anecdotal reports, even from 'professionals, are not
   >>> reliable evidence of historic practice.
   >>> regards
   >>> MH
   >>>
   >>  To get on or off this list see list information at
   >>  http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >>
   >
   >

Reply via email to