[LUTE] Piccinini's rolls

2008-07-22 Thread Peter Nightingale
Dear list,

Is there a rationale for Piccinini's suggestion that chords, e.g. like 
this
---
-0-
---
-3-
-2-
-0-
be played by striking the courses in the order 5/p, 2/i ,1/m, 3/i.

Then there also is the other strange thing in his instructions.  I wonder, 
did he loose his ring finger in a duel?  After acknowledging in passing 
that finger's existence --maybe only in others?-- he seems to completely 
ignore it.

Peter.

the next auto-quote is:
Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool.
(Voltaire)
/\/\
Peter Nightingale  Telephone (401) 874-5882
Department of Physics, East Hall   Fax (401) 874-2380
University of Rhode Island Kingston, RI 02881



To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html


[LUTE] Re: Piccinini's rolls

2008-07-22 Thread Daniel Winheld

Peter wrote about Picinini:


Then there also is the other strange thing in his instructions.  I wonder,
did he loose his ring finger in a duel?  After acknowledging in passing
that finger's existence --maybe only in others?-- he seems to completely
ignore it.


There's a whole school of post 16th century 
century pluckers, including Piccinini, De Visée 
and Sor, just to mention some that spring to 
mind, that insist on still not using the ring 
finger. Some today like to to think it has to do 
with low tension stringing, some with playing 
thumb under, others with playing close to the 
bridge. One way or another, unless you adopt a 
modern classical guitar hand, there will be some 
compromise in tone production if you want to use 
all three (pinky is excused) fingers. Sor in his 
method even gives a neat diagram explaining how 
to get a better tone without the ring finger. I 
know, guitar is off-topic, but I think relevant 
to the subject in this case.


David - thinking they were all yakuza members, actually


That's not the only funny fingering he uses. 
Toccata XX for liuto has index finger dots going 
down to the 10 course in a bass run that finally 
ends on the 12th course. Has anyone tried to play 
it that way? I have also noted other ring finger 
allergy cases- from the usual suspects of 17th 
Century France to the late blues virtuoso 
Reverend Gary Davis (OT alert! Guitar!). Even 
Weiss eschews the ring finger in spots where I 
would tend to use it- unfortunately unlearning 
automatic ring finger usage is one thing I can't 
do- even with early Renaissance thumb under, 
planted pinky- but just four note chords in those 
instances.




--



To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html


[LUTE] Re: Piccinini's rolls

2008-07-22 Thread Mathias Rösel
Peter Nightingale [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
 Dear list,
 
 Is there a rationale for Piccinini's suggestion that chords, e.g. like 
 this
 ---
 -0-
 ---
 -3-
 -2-
 -0-
 be played by striking the courses in the order 5/p, 2/i ,1/m, 3/i.
 
 Then there also is the other strange thing in his instructions.  I wonder, 
 did he loose his ring finger in a duel?  After acknowledging in passing 
 that finger's existence --maybe only in others?-- he seems to completely 
 ignore it.

No idea about why this is so, but you can find the same with French
baroque lutenists.
-- 
Mathias



To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html


[LUTE] Re: Piccinini's rolls

2008-07-22 Thread G. Crona

Does it have anything to do with The Orbo? (cf. Kapsperger)


Peter Nightingale [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:

Dear list,

Is there a rationale for Piccinini's suggestion that chords, e.g. like
this
---
-0-
---
-3-
-2-
-0-
be played by striking the courses in the order 5/p, 2/i ,1/m, 3/i.

Then there also is the other strange thing in his instructions.  I 
wonder,

did he loose his ring finger in a duel?  After acknowledging in passing
that finger's existence --maybe only in others?-- he seems to completely
ignore it.


No idea about why this is so, but you can find the same with French
baroque lutenists.
--
Mathias 




To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html


[LUTE] Re: Piccinini's rolls

2008-07-22 Thread chriswilke
Peter,


--- Peter Nightingale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Dear list,
 
 Is there a rationale for Piccinini's suggestion that
 chords, e.g. like 
 this
 ---
 -0-
 ---
 -3-
 -2-
 -0-
 be played by striking the courses in the order 5/p,
 2/i ,1/m, 3/i.
 

This is what most people call a Kapsperger roll
after his usage of it on theorbo.  This kind of roll
makes perfect sense on a double re-entrant theorbo
since the pitches go from low to high.  On an archlute
it doesn't seem to make as much sense.  Maybe
Piccinini was advocating this only for his theorbo
works since he wrote for that instrument too?


 Then there also is the other strange thing in his
 instructions.  I wonder, 
 did he loose his ring finger in a duel?  After
 acknowledging in passing 
 that finger's existence --maybe only in others?-- he
 seems to completely 
 ignore it.
 

Another parallel with Kapsperger: he doesn't call for
the use of the ring finger at all because he
apparently planted it on the soundboard along with the
pinky.

Kapsperger is fairly clear about marking where he
wants these rolls to be done (basically any chord with
more than three notes).  I must admit that I've
sometimes found Kapsperger's arp. suggestions
frustrating.  Either these rolls are so technically
difficult to get all of the notes in quickly enough or
I find the constant ripples musically distracting. 
(It reminds me of many intermediate level classical
guitarists who roll every single chord without
realizing they're doing it.)
Perhaps I'm ignoring an essential clue to the tempo
and style of some of these pieces, but I'll admit to
occasionally using my ring finger in order to have a
better overall flow or a nice stacatto chord - even
where it is contrary to Kapsperger's technical
indication.
  

Chris   




  



To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html


[LUTE] Re: Piccinini's rolls

2008-07-22 Thread David Tayler
I'm sure he preferred the sound. Whether he himself, or others, 
adhered to the instructions religiously is another matter.
He certainly qualifies as an expert.

dt



At 10:43 AM 7/22/2008, you wrote:
Does it have anything to do with The Orbo? (cf. Kapsperger)

Peter Nightingale [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Dear list,

Is there a rationale for Piccinini's suggestion that chords, e.g. like
this
---
-0-
---
-3-
-2-
-0-
be played by striking the courses in the order 5/p, 2/i ,1/m, 3/i.

Then there also is the other strange thing in his instructions.  I wonder,
did he loose his ring finger in a duel?  After acknowledging in passing
that finger's existence --maybe only in others?-- he seems to completely
ignore it.

No idea about why this is so, but you can find the same with French
baroque lutenists.
--
Mathias



To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html




[LUTE] Re: Piccinini's rolls

2008-07-22 Thread David Tayler
I think Peachy falls into the very picky category. Hard to ignore 
the first responders.
dt



To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html


[LUTE] Re: Piccinini's rolls

2008-07-22 Thread Peter Nightingale
On Tue, 22 Jul 2008, David Tayler wrote:

 I think Peachy falls into the very picky category.

Peachy Ninny?  Well, that might explain it all.

 Hard to ignore the first responders.

Do you mean that he is on life support? Or do you think that those first 
responders who were talking about re-entrant tuning were on to something? 
Would that not be strange when on is talking about the introduction to a 
book called Intavolatura di liuto et di chitarrone. Who knows a whole 
new world of music opens up if one throws some random octave leaps into 
the music.  Or maybe I'm already in the alternative universe by not using 
reentrant tuning?  Only Mathias said that these Piccinini rolls were not 
uncommon in Baroque music without bringing up re-entrant tuning.

Anyway, Piccinini wrote about these rolls without ifs and buts, but still 
manages to be quite obscure:
   These are called arpeggiated chords because they sound similar in sound
to chords played on a harp.
In other words, rolls go up in pitch, i.e. reentrant tuning?  Hell, who 
knows what harpists used to do. anyway?

Here is a challenge for the reentrant-tuning crowd.  P'ni also has the 
following example
---
---
-0-
---
-3-
-2-
This, when it carries a 4 on top, should be played as 4 notes in the 
following order: 0/p, 3/i,2/m,3/i.  Now, there you have fascinating 
re-entrance!

Peter.





 dt



 To get on or off this list see list information at
 http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html


the next auto-quote is:
The truths of religion are never so well understood
as by those who have lost the power of reasoning.
(Voltaire)
/\/\
Peter Nightingale  Telephone (401) 874-5882
Department of Physics, East Hall   Fax (401) 874-2380
University of Rhode Island Kingston, RI 02881




[LUTE] Re: Piccinini's rolls

2008-07-22 Thread David Rastall
On Jul 22, 2008, at 5:29 PM, David Tayler wrote:

 I think Peachy falls into the very picky category. Hard to ignore
 the first responders.

Indulge me some room to babble a bit about Merle Travis here.  I  
personally think that Merle Travis did the same for American country  
music in the 1930's that Kap and Peachy did for Italian lute  
music in the 1630's (give or take a year or two):  he provided a  
definitive way of playing it.

Merle's style was not derivative:  he had very few predecessors to  
learn from.  But those who came after him emulated his playing to the  
point that it became known as Travis picking.  Doc Watson even  
named his son after him.  That's pretty cool, right?

But it was not Merle's thumb-and-one-finger technique that made him  
legendary.  It was his sound.  Chet Atkins and all the others who  
played in that style were going for that sound, and came to it each  
in his own way, some using thumb plus all four RH fingers!  (if you  
want to hear some wild Travis picking, find Doyle Dykes on YouTube.)

Okay, finally my point:  I'm suggesting that it was probably the same  
with K and P:  people heard them play and wanted that sound, which in  
it's day was the sound of the new music.  I'm willing to bet that  
lutenists who heard those guys play used that sound as a yardstick  
for developing their own ways of playing.

Never having heard that sound first hand ourselves, I guess we have  
try to recreate it by studying the sources, hopefully throwing a bit  
of intuition into the mix along the way.  But the last word as to  
what K's and P's music can sound like today, is in our hands.  My  
point is that we can all develop our own style of Travis picking.

Thanks for reading all the way to the end.

DR
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




--

To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html


[LUTE] Re: Piccinini's rolls

2008-07-22 Thread David Tayler
I think David R's point about Merle is not only exactly right but has 
a broader sense as well, which is that every odd thing we see in 
paintings, pcures, etc is reflected in popular music--including 
everything popular, that is.
Thumbs hanging over, two fingerd technique, the list goes on and on. 
Even the odd angle of holding the lute with the neck pointing down to 
the floor.

It was an age of freewheeling diversity.
dt


At 08:46 PM 7/22/2008, you wrote:
On Jul 22, 2008, at 5:29 PM, David Tayler wrote:

  I think Peachy falls into the very picky category. Hard to ignore
  the first responders.

Indulge me some room to babble a bit about Merle Travis here.  I
personally think that Merle Travis did the same for American country
music in the 1930's that Kap and Peachy did for Italian lute
music in the 1630's (give or take a year or two):  he provided a
definitive way of playing it.

Merle's style was not derivative:  he had very few predecessors to
learn from.  But those who came after him emulated his playing to the
point that it became known as Travis picking.  Doc Watson even
named his son after him.  That's pretty cool, right?

But it was not Merle's thumb-and-one-finger technique that made him
legendary.  It was his sound.  Chet Atkins and all the others who
played in that style were going for that sound, and came to it each
in his own way, some using thumb plus all four RH fingers!  (if you
want to hear some wild Travis picking, find Doyle Dykes on YouTube.)

Okay, finally my point:  I'm suggesting that it was probably the same
with K and P:  people heard them play and wanted that sound, which in
it's day was the sound of the new music.  I'm willing to bet that
lutenists who heard those guys play used that sound as a yardstick
for developing their own ways of playing.

Never having heard that sound first hand ourselves, I guess we have
try to recreate it by studying the sources, hopefully throwing a bit
of intuition into the mix along the way.  But the last word as to
what K's and P's music can sound like today, is in our hands.  My
point is that we can all develop our own style of Travis picking.

Thanks for reading all the way to the end.

DR
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




--

To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html