I agree. Indeed the Molinaro pieces usually "fit" the lute well although very demanding. But fantasias are usually simpler then intabulations, technically speaking. Which also corroborates the idea that intabulations are a compositional guide. If we compare fantasias and intabulations already from F. da Milano or J. Paladin, the difference is very clear. They try to keep the vocal original in the intabulation. As we advance into the end of the 16th century, fantasias also get increasingly difficult with the counterpoint complexity, number of voices, etc even looking more and more to vocal pieces.
Em qua., 29 de abr. de 2020 à s 02:21, Tristan von Neumann <[1][email protected]> escreveu: While I complained earlier that Molinaro's pieces are sometimes unplayable, many of the pieces fit the lute very well, and don't seem to be just transcriptions from the keyboard. (For example Fantasies No. 3 or 5) There is a possibility to finger some passages with a sliding barré - something that needs to be planned and does not occur naturally by just intabulating the keyboard score. André Nieuwlaat suggests that some of the pieces could actually be intabulations by John Dowland. Anyway, the polyphony in above mentioned pieces sounds extremely beautiful on the lute, and are surprisingly playable in relation to the effect. On 29.04.20 01:46, Ron Andrico wrote: > Yes. First and foremost, tablature was created to serve as a short > score of polyphonic music and printed or manuscript tablatures of > polyphonic music were meant to serve as a reservoir of information. > While the ideal is to play every note, I firmly believe that lutenists > always made adjustments, as you have described, for practical purposes. > > The idea of 16th-century lute tablatures being compared to a form such > as the preludes by Villa-Lobos, in terms of notes that must be > conquered through disciplined technique, is an absurdity imposed upon > historical music by 20th century guitarists who took up the lute. The > point of 16th-century tablatures was to gain an understanding of the > musical intent in the score and the greatest technical challenge is to > realize the polyphony to the best of one's ability. > > I have read V. Galilei's Fronimo forward and backwards, and his remarks > about not making concessions in intabulating polyphony for the sake of > fingering are an admonition to avoid altering the content of the piece > to reduce fingering difficulties because a tablature score is meant to > represent the music. Overcome the difficulties or not, but don't > change the polyphony. > > Molinaro was an organist and his tablatures show what is possible but > are certainly influenced by his conscious or unconscious reference to > keyboard practice. Terzi was a freak if he could play all those notes > in his intabulations while observing the tactus. Not bloody likely. > He's probably laughing at us from another world. > > If there is one thing I have absorbed over thirty years of lute-playing > and creating countless intabulations of sixteenth century polyphony, > the score is a reservoir of information. It was always meant to be so. > > RA > __________________________________________________________________ > > From: [2][email protected] > <[3][email protected]> on behalf of Guilherme Barroso > <[4][email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2020 9:15 PM > To: [5][email protected] <[6][email protected]> > Cc: LuteList <[7][email protected]>; > [8][email protected] > <[9][email protected]> > Subject: [LUTE] Re: About vocal intabulations > > Yes, indeed. > For me, it makes more and more sense to view these intabulations as > a > way to show the whole vocal piece and not something to be performed > exactly as written. > About the BarrÃÃà ©s with any other finger then the first. Has anyone > seen a historical source discuss this? I don't recall seeing one. > Em ter., 28 de abr. de 2020 Ãà s 23:04, <[1][10][email protected]> > escreveu: > This is really quite an extreme example! But maybe with a > different > technique it would be possible e.g. to play the first chord? > Sometimes, > I have the impression that they used also BarrÃÃà ©s with the second > or > third finger, which would (theoretically) make it possible to play > the > first chord. Just today I found an similar chord in a piece by > Hurel, > which would need a barrÃÃà © with the second or fourth finger. I'll > hopefully get my new renaissance lute this or next week (7courses, > 85cm), I'm very curious to try it! :-) and then still we have to > consider a world without 1. printed full scores and 2. recordings. > So, > in order to study a piece of music, you would have to perform - or > read > it - just by yourself. Maybe this was really kind of "full score" > for > them - you can use it to study the music and counterpoint, and if > you > actually want to perfor it you still can decide to omit some > notes. > Am 28.04.2020 21:25 schrieb Guilherme Barroso: > > 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 Ãà s 20:50, > <[2][11][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][3][12]www.guilherme-barroso.com [1] > >>> > >>> -- > >>> > >>> References > >>> > >>> 1. [4][13]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ [2] > >>> > >>> > >>> To get on or off this list see list information at > >>> [5][14]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html [3] > > > > -- > > > > Guilherme Barroso > > [6][15]www.guilherme-barroso.com [1] > > > > > > > > Links: > > ------ > > [1] [7][16]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com > > [2] [8][17]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ > > [3] [9][18]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > -- > Guilherme Barroso > [10][19]www.guilherme-barroso.com > -- > References > 1. [1]mailto:[20][email protected] > 2. [2]mailto:[21][email protected] > 3. [3][22]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ > 4. [4][23]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ > 5. [5][24]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > 6. [6][25]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ > 7. [7][26]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ > 8. [8][27]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ > 9. [9][28]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > 10. [10][29]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ > > -- > > References > > 1. mailto:[30][email protected] > 2. mailto:[31][email protected] > 3. [32]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ > 4. [33]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ > 5. [34]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > 6. [35]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ > 7. [36]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ > 8. [37]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ > 9. [38]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > 10. [39]http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ > -- Guilherme Barroso [40]www.guilherme-barroso.com -- 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. mailto:[email protected] 9. mailto:[email protected] 10. mailto:[email protected] 11. mailto:[email protected] 12. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 13. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 14. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html 15. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 16. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 17. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 18. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html 19. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 20. mailto:[email protected] 21. mailto:[email protected] 22. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 23. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 24. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html 25. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 26. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 27. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 28. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html 29. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 30. mailto:[email protected] 31. mailto:[email protected] 32. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 33. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 34. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html 35. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 36. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 37. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 38. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html 39. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/ 40. http://www.guilherme-barroso.com/
