[LUTE] Re: Piccinini's rolls
Well Ron you've provoked me into spending a thoroughly enjoyable hour playing through my Piccinini, which I haven't spent nearly enough time with since I got my archlute. Thank you! While it's certainly true that weak beat/index finger dots were sprinkled around so automatically and frequently as to function at least as well for keeping the accents of the passagi straight and aid tab/music reading, in the Piccinini I think he really was thumb-index picking his way all the way down in that no. XX Toccata. Dots in the bass down into the diapasons occur like that in only one other piece that I could find- the Partita Variate for chitarrone, 5th measure from the end. What makes p-i plausible in these two pieces is the nature of the run: by course, the notes descend 7 6. 8 7. 9 8. X 9. V in the Partita and in the Toccata go down two more to the 12th. In all the other pieces where the bass line is just linear, no skipping, there are no dots. Piccinini seems very picky about his his signs- he throws in those slurs exactly where he wants them, too. I wish I could have seen more of those fingerstyle guitarists (let alone studying with them!)- I've only seen Doc Watson and a few others, but what an experience. Classical guitar training, in some cases, causes more RH problems than benefits when taking up the lute. Thanks also for the Barto tip- I should have that newsletter. Daniel and all: I am not convinced those single dots always indicated use of the right-hand index finger. From the early prints of Spinacino on, I think the alternating dots were just a way of keeping track of strong-weak beats in a long run of tablature ciphers. We have seen that ornamentation signs meant different things to different printers and copyists, it should come as no surprise that fingering dots served different functions. Lute News Number 81 (April 2007) contains a transcription of a talk given by Bob Barto on the use of the right-hand ring finger in the music of Weiss. He seems to have drawn no conclusions but offers several interesting ideas. On the subject of fingerstyle guitarists, Doc Watson, Merle Travis, Etta Baker, John Jackson and doubtless others all played (or in the case of Doc, still play) with thumb and index finger. They seemed to do OK without embracing the modern classical guitar technique of using the ring finger. -- 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
Compare Cups Burger's and Peachy Ninny's arpeggio patterns to later 17th century separee practice! Take M. Gally Lays's and Junnon Shelly's editions into account (their sprezzature). Kinda common practice, no? Mathias Daniel Winheld [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: Well Ron you've provoked me into spending a thoroughly enjoyable hour playing through my Piccinini, which I haven't spent nearly enough time with since I got my archlute. Thank you! While it's certainly true that weak beat/index finger dots were sprinkled around so automatically and frequently as to function at least as well for keeping the accents of the passagi straight and aid tab/music reading, in the Piccinini I think he really was thumb-index picking his way all the way down in that no. XX Toccata. Dots in the bass down into the diapasons occur like that in only one other piece that I could find- the Partita Variate for chitarrone, 5th measure from the end. What makes p-i plausible in these two pieces is the nature of the run: by course, the notes descend 7 6. 8 7. 9 8. X 9. V in the Partita and in the Toccata go down two more to the 12th. In all the other pieces where the bass line is just linear, no skipping, there are no dots. Piccinini seems very picky about his his signs- he throws in those slurs exactly where he wants them, too. I wish I could have seen more of those fingerstyle guitarists (let alone studying with them!)- I've only seen Doc Watson and a few others, but what an experience. Classical guitar training, in some cases, causes more RH problems than benefits when taking up the lute. Thanks also for the Barto tip- I should have that newsletter. Daniel and all: I am not convinced those single dots always indicated use of the right-hand index finger. From the early prints of Spinacino on, I think the alternating dots were just a way of keeping track of strong-weak beats in a long run of tablature ciphers. We have seen that ornamentation signs meant different things to different printers and copyists, it should come as no surprise that fingering dots served different functions. Lute News Number 81 (April 2007) contains a transcription of a talk given by Bob Barto on the use of the right-hand ring finger in the music of Weiss. He seems to have drawn no conclusions but offers several interesting ideas. On the subject of fingerstyle guitarists, Doc Watson, Merle Travis, Etta Baker, John Jackson and doubtless others all played (or in the case of Doc, still play) with thumb and index finger. They seemed to do OK without embracing the modern classical guitar technique of using the ring finger. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- Viele Grüße Mathias Rösel http://mathiasroesel.livejournal.com http://www.myspace.com/mathiasroesel http://de.geocities.com/mathiasroesel
[LUTE] Re: Piccinini's rolls
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
