Thank you Sean, this is a well-pondered thought.
I very much appreciate this comment.
You are absolutely right. In one episode of me:mo, Lukas Henning talked
about a source describing the music of a lutenist (I guess, need to
watch that again),
who obviously used devices as great dynamics, weird rhythms and other
gimmicks not found in any printed or written source.
One can find these rhythms and devices in Ganassi's instructions. You
need very good timing skills to pull off those garlands of 3, 5, 7, 10
based divisions. The fact that there are those legitimate devices, but
they don't appear in printed compositions, makes your assumption very
plausible.
If you enjoy playing this stuff, I highly recommend these pieces:
http://gerbode.net/sources/CH-Bu_university_library_basel/ms_F.IX.70_Wurstisen_lute_book/v5_passamezzos/pdf/
(earlier I said it's Vol. 6, sorry for that)
You will even find moving powerchords (No. 46), and other fun stuff like
switching to "Francesco Ricercar mode".
So to thread that needle, there is plenty of unique devices to be
discovered in manuscripts. These can be used for improvisation, together
with the division practice derived from Ganassi and Ortiz.
To me this seems very sufficient and covers all possible quirks of fancy
improvisation, and inspires the player to find similar ones.
Improvising in style means: it must fall into the harmonic language. For
the 16th century, you will find all possible chords and dissonances to
them in the work of Albert de Rippe. There's none greater when it comes
to exploring which clashes of notes still sound amazing.
Later, chromatic linking of chords may be an additional device in
improvisation. See this passamezzo by Biagio Marini about 6:10min in:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=px7oIWCHC1c
Around 1600 you can use basically any dissonance within the mode/key (or
even beyond). You just need to wait for the next possibility to resolve
it. Don't try to correct it right away, and the resolution will sound
fancy but correct.
Seconda Prattica comes to mind, and this practice is described in
theoretical works that deal with improvisation. Most lutenists don't
read books about wind instrument based theory, but a cornetto player
wouldn't have used different divisions than a lutenist, so reading these
books might be rewarding.
But I very rarely see people improvise. This needs to be changed :)
I think people who improvise a lot also have a different attitude when
playing from score, somehow there is more immediacy to it and less
artificiality.
:)
T*
On 11.08.19 21:05, Sean Smith wrote:
The answer may lie with the undocumented performers and performing
groups. They improvised and different groups would have varied success
among tastes of various patrons, situations and other qualifiers.
Sometimes these techniques would surface in the printed materials, mss,
accounts or iconography. Some of this survives as we have found.
Getting back to the passages that your first illustrated, I'm wondering
if that was a printed way of saying "this is how you can get the most
sound/volume for these parts, should you need them." It's almost a
strum but we know that never happened, right? Or suppose you were
duetting with a cittern player who wanted a solo and you were called on
to imitate his accompaniment?
A lot of Adr./Phalese (1563 onwards) is performance-based and the
all-inclusiveness suggests to me that many of the volumes were meant
and advertised as "all-you-need" for one's lutering needs, the Adr of
'84 and '92 being the epitomes of the concept. So I think there are
examples of everything we need to understand the art of lute playing as
Adr./Phalese saw it in his time. While they are complete in their way,
it needs (or wants) the player to expand on it.
If we played Adr. perfectly then we would be no Idifferent than the
other player (or group) who plays Adr. perfectly. Then, as now, how
would the player sell himself as better other than bringing something
new to the table? I'm not suggesting we be anachronistic or bring in
influence from places that would not have been influential at the time
by any means but there are enough hints that the printed page is not
sacrosanct.
If we improvise there is the pitfall of those rightly saying "but that
note/passage/instrument/combination wasn't played". On the other hand
there is the stronger suggestion for lutenists that you must learn to
improvise in their tradition (notes and instruments). We, in the 21st
century must thread that needle.
So, yes: that passage feels anachronistic but only because we --now--
can't see what possibilities they felt were available to them or the
demands made of them.
Sean
On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 10:25 AM Tristan von Neumann
<[1][email protected]> wrote:
Dear Joachim,
yes I know, I have played all of those. But really I am interested
in
this kind of off-beat figuration that thrives on thirds.
Dowland and maybe Huwet used those sometimes. Huwet was also from
the
Netherlands and I read Dowland befriended Huwet in Wolfenbüttel.
I don't know who influenced whom, but maybe you know?
On 11.08.19 18:36, Joachim Lüdtke wrote:
> Dear Tristan,
>
> just in short (I am traveling and I don't have the sources at
hand): You may not find exactly the same accord arpeggios (another
anachronism, ;) ), but you will find similar things in different
sets of variations on Conde Claros and other tunes and models.
>
> Best
>
> Joachim
>
>
> -----Original-Nachricht-----
> Betreff: [LUTE] Re: Anachronistic playing style - Adriaenssen
> Datum: 2019-08-10T12:55:41+0200
> Von: "Tristan von Neumann" <[2][email protected]>
> An: "[3][email protected]" <[4][email protected]>
>
> Dear Joachim,
>
>
> I used this term to give the idea for someone who can't just look
at it,
> you know this is erbsenzahlery :)
>
> And where is the same accuracy when trying to show me an example?
;-)))
>
> By Condes Claros you mean those of Valderrabano I guess?
>
> They are fancy, but not that fancy. I was looking for the exact
figuration.
>
> Trying to explain the figuration by saying that variations need
> variation (...duh!) doesn't really tell me anything. ;-)
>
>
>
>
>
> On 10.08.19 11:23, Joachim Lüdtke wrote:
>> Dear Tristan,
>>
>> to be truely Alberti one would have to be a bass, ;), and it's
anachronistic to connect such figurations to Alberti because the
source precedes the time of Alberti (at least a bit).
>>
>> You will find similar things in Spanish variations of e.g. Conde
claros. I think one could describe what we find there as a possible
solution to the question how to write (or play or improvise)
variations on a rather slow moving progression, if you have the
scale runs already through.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Joachim
>>
>>
>> -----Original-Nachricht-----
>> Betreff: [LUTE] Anachronistic playing style - Adriaenssen
>> Datum: 2019-08-09T02:38:53+0200
>> Von: "Tristan von Neumann" <[5][email protected]>
>> An: "[6][email protected]" <[7][email protected]>
>>
>> The "Passomeso in Basso" from Adriaenssen's Pratum Musicum 1584
features
>> two variations in a very odd anachronistic/visionary style:
>>
>> It's basically the idea of "Alberti bass".
>>
>> (m. 114 - 119 and 225 - 238)
>>
>>
[8]http://gerbode.net/sources/Adriaenssen/pratum_musicum_1584/pdf/61
_passomeso_in_basso.pdf
>>
>>
>> This style seems to come from nowhere, and it has to my knowledge
never
>> been used afterwards.
>>
>> But I haven't looked at everything.
>>
>>
>> Does anyone know any similar passage in that era?
>>
>> And: is there a recording of the piece? It is probably the most
>> elaborate and creative Passamezzo ever.
>>
>> I use it as exercise - feels like training for a marathon.
>>
>>
>> :)
>> T*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> To get on or off this list see list information at
>> [9]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. mailto:[email protected]
6. mailto:[email protected]
7. mailto:[email protected]
8.
http://gerbode.net/sources/Adriaenssen/pratum_musicum_1584/pdf/61_passomeso_in_basso.pdf
9. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
