--0000000000000c0ca105a45ecdc0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear Yuval, Thanks a lot for your answer. I have a 7c course 60cm lute and it does not get much easier at some places. Of course with your lute, even worse. But there are some parts that even with a small lute, it is just not possible. I attach in this email an example from Barbetta's publication from 1582. In the marked passage, already the first chord is not possible to play (this chord appears often in this publication and also in Terzi's books), the next two bars are not better. even if you find a way to do it by some kind of arpeggio, how make it sound musical? Em ter., 28 de abr. de 2020 às 20:50, <[email protected]> escreveu: > Dear Guilherme, > > it's interesting what Philippe writes about Il Fronimo, it would be nice > to talk with him about all this stuff. I met him some weeks ago, and > he's the only guy I know who isn't lutenist at all and can read all kind > of tablature fluently - quite crazy! > To respond to your question I can only offer a view on my personal > experience as well as some thoughts about it: From my practical > experience I had to ask myself exactly these questions when Martina and > me were recording our CD with diminutions. She played them on traverso - > so I could just play the madrigals without the canto, which worked quite > well - but also with violone, and for this I had to play all the voices. > Since at this time I had only a fairly big lute (10 courses, 67cm), I > decided to step away from perfectly playing all voicing with a perfect > voiceleading, and instead making an arrangement which kept the madrigals > recognizable, but at the same time quitting some tones of the inner > voices and making the intabulations/arrangements more idiomatic for the > lute, because above all I though it was more important to get a good > phrasing and to make good music instead of hurting my hand. If you're > interested in the choices I made, you can find some of the pieces we > recorded on youtube. > Regarding the amount of instructions about making owns intabulations, > Philippe's argument seems not at all unlikely for me. But at the same > time I'm asking myself about the differences in taste then and now > (maybe for them it was most important to render the madrigal exactly? At > the end, they lived in a sphere where only polyphonic music existed, so > maybe they would have heard the mistakes made by making the > intabulations more suitable for the lute?), and also about which role > the size of the lute plays. Did you try to play the "unplayable" parts > on a smaller lute? You could just use an capo in your second or third > fret, just to try how it feels with a small instrument. > > All the best, > Yuval > > > > > Am 28.04.2020 15:12 schrieb Guilherme Barroso: > > Dear Lute collective, > > For some time i've been thinking about some aspects about the > > intabulation of vocal pieces and i would like to know your ideas. > > When we look to the gigantic repertoire of vocal intabulations to > > the > > lute we encounter several pieces that are incredibly difficult to > > play. > > Intabulations done by Molinaro, Terzi, Barbetta, for example, some > > times present passages that are not only very demanding technically > > but also with impossible chord positions. Canguilhem, in his book > > about Galilei's Fronimo treatise, says that the main goal of > > Galilei's > > intabulations was to study the counterpoint and composition, not to > > be > > played. He even compares Galilei's intabulation of Vestiva i Colli > > for > > solo lute (where the madrigal is complete with all the voices) and > > another version for lute and bass solo (where the lute part is > > extremely simplified with supression of voices). The lute and voice > > version for sure was intended to be performed while the other might > > be > > intended to be studied. The act of intabulating would be the same > > as > > making a score for study purposes. > > There are a lot of intabulations in the repertoire that are more > > concerned in maintaining all the voices of the original work then > > making some concessions to adapt it better to the instrument. > > Of course, we are dealing with a huge repertoire from several > > composers > > and several places with specific differences. Le Roy, for example, > > is > > more willing to make changes to adapt to the instrument, he says > > that > > the "playability and beauty should come first". > > But even very complex intabulations were clearly meant to be played, > > like the Terzi intabulations of vocal pieces that present a > > "Contrapunto" from another lute. Terzi intabulations clearly prefer > > to > > maintain the original vocal piece in the intabulation in spite of > > the > > diffculty to play. > > What do you think about this? > > When you play this repertoire, do you try to keep all notes? Do you > > omit certain notes to make it more playful? Do you make decision > > based > > on the musical flow? > > I am very curious to hear your ideas. > > All the best, > > -- > > Guilherme Barroso > > [1]www.guilherme-barroso.com > > > > -- > > > > References > > > > 1. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > -- Guilherme Barroso www.guilherme-barroso.com --0000000000000c0ca105a45ecdc0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir="ltr">Dear Yuval,<div><br></div><div>Thanks a lot for your answer.</div><div><br></div><div>I have a 7c course 60cm lute and it does not get much easier at some places. Of course with your lute, even worse.</div><div><br></div><div>But there are some parts that even with a small lute, it is just not possible.</div><div><br></div><div>I attach in this email an example from Barbetta's publication from 1582. In the marked passage, already the first chord is not possible to play (this chord appears often in this publication and also in Terzi's books), the next two bars are not better. even if you find a way to do it by some kind of arpeggio, how make it sound musical? <br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Em ter., 28 de abr. de 2020 às 20:50, <<a href="mailto:[email protected]";>[email protected]</a>> escreveu:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0p! x 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Dear Guilherme,<br> <br> it's interesting what Philippe writes about Il Fronimo, it would be nice <br> to talk with him about all this stuff. I met him some weeks ago, and <br> he's the only guy I know who isn't lutenist at all and can read all kind <br> of tablature fluently - quite crazy!<br> To respond to your question I can only offer a view on my personal <br> experience as well as some thoughts about it: From my practical <br> experience I had to ask myself exactly these questions when Martina and <br> me were recording our CD with diminutions. She played them on traverso - <br> so I could just play the madrigals without the canto, which worked quite <br> well - but also with violone, and for this I had to play all the voices. <br> Since at this time I had only a fairly big lute (10 courses, 67cm), I <br> decided to step away from perfectly playing all voicing with a perfect <br> voiceleading, and instead making an arrangement which kept the madrigals <br> recognizable, but at the same time quitting some tones of the inner <br> voices and making the intabulations/arrangements more idiomatic for the <br> lute, because above all I though it was more important to get a good <br> phrasing and to make good music instead of hurting my hand. If you're <br> interested in the choices I made, you can find some of the pieces we <br> recorded on youtube.<br> Regarding the amount of instructions about making owns intabulations, <br> Philippe's argument seems not at all unlikely for me. But at the same <br> time I'm asking myself about the differences in taste then and now <br> (maybe for them it was most important to render the madrigal exactly? At <br> the end, they lived in a sphere where only polyphonic music existed, so <br> maybe they would have heard the mistakes made by making the <br> intabulations more suitable for the lute?), and also about which role <br> the size of the lute plays. Did you try to play the "unplayable" parts <br> on a smaller lute? You could just use an capo in your second or third <br> fret, just to try how it feels with a small instrument.<br> <br> All the best,<br> Yuval<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> Am 28.04.2020 15:12 schrieb Guilherme Barroso:<br> > Dear Lute collective,<br> >  For some time i've been thinking about some aspects about the<br> >  intabulation of vocal pieces and i would like to know your ideas.<br> >  When we look to the gigantic repertoire of vocal intabulations to <br> > the<br> >  lute we encounter several pieces that are incredibly difficult to <br> > play.<br> >  Intabulations done by Molinaro, Terzi, Barbetta, for example, some<br> >  times present passages that are not only very demanding technically<br> >  but also with impossible chord positions. Canguilhem, in his book<br> >  about Galilei's Fronimo treatise, says that the main goal of <br> > Galilei's<br> >  intabulations was to study the counterpoint and composition, not to <br> > be<br> >  played. He even compares Galilei's intabulation of Vestiva i Colli <br> > for<br> >  solo lute (where the madrigal is complete with all the voices) and<br> >  another version for lute and bass solo (where the lute part is<br> >  extremely simplified with supression of voices). The lute and voice<br> >  version for sure was intended to be performed while the other might <br> > be<br> >  intended to be studied. The act of intabulating would be the same <br> > as<br> >  making a score for study purposes.<br> >  There are a lot of intabulations in the repertoire that are more<br> >  concerned in maintaining all the voices of the original work then<br> >  making some concessions to adapt it better to the instrument.<br> >  Of course, we are dealing with a huge repertoire from several <br> > composers<br> >  and several places with specific differences. Le Roy, for example, <br> > is<br> >  more willing to make changes to adapt to the instrument, he says <br> > that<br> >  the "playability and beauty should come first".<br> >  But even very complex intabulations were clearly meant to be played,<br> >  like the Terzi intabulations of vocal pieces that present a<br> >  "Contrapunto" from another lute. Terzi intabulations clearly prefer <br> > to<br> >  maintain the original vocal piece in the intabulation in spite of <br> > the<br> >  diffculty to play.<br> >  What do you think about this?<br> >  When you play this repertoire, do you try to keep all notes? Do you<br> >  omit certain notes to make it more playful? Do you make decision <br> > based<br> >  on the musical flow?<br> >  I am very curious to hear your ideas.<br> >  All the best,<br> >  --<br> >  Guilherme Barroso<br> >  [1]<a href="http://www.guilherme-barroso.com"; rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">www.guilherme-barroso.com</a><br> > <br> >  --<br> > <br> > References<br> > <br> >  1. <a href="http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/"; rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/</a><br> > <br> > <br> > To get on or off this list see list information at<br> > <a href="http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html"; rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html</a><br> </blockquote></div><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr">Guilherme Barroso<div><a href="http://www.guilherme-barroso.com"; target="_blank">www.guilherme-barroso.com</a></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div></div> --0000000000000c0ca105a45ecdc0-- --
