subject:"\[LUTE\] Re\: Playing in time"

Peter,
I am afraid this is not correct. I've just took the first manuscript from my
shelf with Italian renaissance music without any particular digging for
something special and what I can see? This is a facsimile edition of
Intabolatura de lauto by Antonio Rotta edited in Venetia 1546. If we turn
the title page we have the first piece which is Passamezzo with two flags
(crotchets using contemporary system of notation) per bar. The next piece is
Gagliarda with three flags per bar (of the same value). If we play both
pieces it becomes quite clear that one bar from Passamezzo equals one bar
from Gagliarda. So Donnington was right I am afraid ( the citation was from
his 1990 edition) and most things we can find in his book are still valid.
The whole mess with Pavan - Galliard proportions comes from our modern
thinking in uni-proportional system. In multi-proportional system which was
commonly used in renaissance this problem wouldn't exist because proportion
for this set of dances was very clear and easy; modus imperfectus equals
modus perfectus. This is why I said the pulse remains the same only dancers
change their steps.
All the best

Jaroslaw

-Original Message-
From: Peter Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 9:18 AM
To: lute
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Playing in time

Thanks to all who have replied.  We seem to have arrived at one bar of
galliard = half a bar of pavan, which is certainly is more plausible than
the original 'Donington' proposal.

However I still have a niggling problem with applying this to Dowland, with
whom this discussion started.  The prevailing note-length for divisions in
his solo lute pavans is four flags. For galliards, the prevailing
note-length is three flags.  At the suggested tempo relationship, the
divisions in the galliard will only be three-quarters as fast as the
divisions in the pavan.  So the 'faster' dance comes out sounding slower.
Can that really be right?

Donington isn't the best authority to rely on for these things.  You will
struggle to find anything about renaissance lute in his book, not
surprisingly since he explains (page 91) that the book is mainly about
baroque music from Monteverdi to JSB.  It was first published in 1963, long
before Poulton's Dowland volumes.

P


On 05/02/2008, Jean-Marie Poirier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 There is no such obvious equivalence really, but keep in mind the
 equivalence of one breve with two beats (Pavan) and one breve with three
 beats (Galliard). The augmentation of the number of notes to a beat -
three
 for two - gives the feeling of an acceleration sufficient to differentiate
 the two dances. At least that's how I usually find my way around in this
 particular matter and it works fine, even with dancers...

 Hope it helps !

 All the best,

 Jean-Marie

 === 05-02-2008 21:: ===
 The same is Jean-Marie reminding and everybody agree to it. The
 problem appeares which time values of each dance equals. That is in
 what containes one galliarde beat and one pavane beat.
 
  After reading you and looking again to the Arthur's exemples, I
  should have written:
  1 galliard measure (one beat) = 1/2 of a pavan measure (one beat)
 
  and in an original mensural notation would be:
  3 half notes of a galliard (one beat to a measure) = 1 whole note of
  a pavan (one beat or half of the measure)
 
  Is it correct?
  Jurek
  __
 
  1 galliard measure = 1/4 of a pavan measure.
 
  In mensural notation (not modern, often changing values) it might
  be:
  3 half notes of a galliard (one measure) = 1 half note in a pavan
  (1/4 of a measure).
 
  On 2008-02-05, at 17:49, Jean-Marie Poirier wrote:
 
  Exactly Jerzy.
 
  I think that's what theoreticians call tactus inequalis : 1
  tactus in a binary measure (= normally a half measure in modern
  transcriptions ) is equivalent to 1 tactus in triple time ( one
  measure in modern transcrition). In other words if you beat time
  with a regular tactus in duple  time - hand touching down for each
  breve duration, as you see in some paintings with singers - , not
  considering the modern concept of bar, as there were no bars then
  as you know, and if this tactus remains the same for a triple time
  measure, it means you keep the same tactus all the time with a
  clear proportion, so it's quite easy to shift from duple time to
  triple and back, if necessary.  Usually a breve, with two demi-
  breves, in duple time becomes a breve in triple with three semi-
  breves to it.
  Try it and you'll see it works almost all the time ! It works all
  the time for Pavan-Galliard proportion.  So, take care, you have to
  consider what speed your triple time breve will be like to choose a
  correct tempo for the Pavan, [and be able to keep it ;-)]...
 
  Best,
 
  Jean-Marie
 
  === 05-02-2008 17:27:26 ===
 
 
  On 2008-02-05, at 15:15, Arthur Ness wrote:
 
  http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/dihtml/divideos.html
 
  Thank you, Arthur

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

Jaroslaw,

I think it's right ! I have attached two examples : the first strain of the 
Pavane La Bataille in Phalèse, Chorearum Molliorum, 1583, and the eqivalent 
first strain of the adjoining Gaillarde. What I tried to explain is apparent 
here  and the tactus inequalis applies perfectly. I was probaly confused and 
confusing too in my attempt to explain. 

The Pavan has a regular tactus , one breve down, one breve up.
The Gaillard keeps the same breve down,( i.e. 2 semibreves) and the up beat is 
inequalis, that is unequal, so the hand goes up with one semibreve of the 
Gaillarde instead of one breve in the Pavan. 

The interesting point is you keep the same tactus for the down beat, and thus 
it is very easy to return to duple time and keep a proper equivalence.

How this applies to the lute litterature is a quite different story 
altogether... Actually, the transcriptions from polyphonic music to tablature 
are not always consistent and you can observe variations in the equivalence 
adopted between score and tablature. Musical flair and good sense have to 
come to the rescue I'm afraid... Some will split the dance (Pavan) into half 
measures, which then become whole measures in the tab, some will stick to the 
original format... 
So where do we stand ? That's the critical moment when the structure of the 
piece has to be thoroughly dismantled and analysed to try and understand the 
better possible solution, in terms of rhythm, phrasing and, possibly, steps.

As for Elizbethan dance movements such as Pavan etc., I think we have to be 
very careful before deciding if theyhave to be danceable or if they are 
stylised forms. Both cases coexist in the repertoire, and here again nothing is 
clearly indicated in the sources. Only a very close analysis and a good dose of 
musical sense will help you come to an acceptable solution. 

If you think of Chopin's Waltzes for the piano, you can hear very different 
versions of them, some more dance like than others. IMHO it may be the same 
with early baroque dance forms and I put a good deal of the Elizabethan lute 
music in that category.

Best,

Jean-Marie 
=== 06-02-2008 12:29:10 ===

Peter,
I am afraid this is not correct. I've just took the first manuscript from my
shelf with Italian renaissance music without any particular digging for
something special and what I can see? This is a facsimile edition of
Intabolatura de lauto by Antonio Rotta edited in Venetia 1546. If we turn
the title page we have the first piece which is Passamezzo with two flags
(crotchets using contemporary system of notation) per bar. The next piece is
Gagliarda with three flags per bar (of the same value). If we play both
pieces it becomes quite clear that one bar from Passamezzo equals one bar
from Gagliarda. So Donnington was right I am afraid ( the citation was from
his 1990 edition) and most things we can find in his book are still valid.
The whole mess with Pavan - Galliard proportions comes from our modern
thinking in uni-proportional system. In multi-proportional system which was
commonly used in renaissance this problem wouldn't exist because proportion
for this set of dances was very clear and easy; modus imperfectus equals
modus perfectus. This is why I said the pulse remains the same only dancers
change their steps.
All the best

Jaroslaw
  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://poirierjm.free.fr
06-02-2008 


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

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

Sorry, Jaroslaw, the list doesn't seem to take attachments... :-(
JM

=== 06-02-2008 13:33:01 ===

Jaroslaw,

I think it's right ! I have attached two examples : the first strain of the 
Pavane La Bataille in Phalèse, Chorearum Molliorum, 1583, and the eqivalent 
first strain of the adjoining Gaillarde. What I tried to explain is apparent 
here  and the tactus inequalis applies perfectly. I was probaly confused and 
confusing too in my attempt to explain. 

The Pavan has a regular tactus , one breve down, one breve up.
The Gaillard keeps the same breve down,( i.e. 2 semibreves) and the up beat is 
inequalis, that is unequal, so the hand goes up with one semibreve of the 
Gaillarde instead of one breve in the Pavan. 

The interesting point is you keep the same tactus for the down beat, and 
thus it is very easy to return to duple time and keep a proper equivalence.

How this applies to the lute litterature is a quite different story 
altogether... Actually, the transcriptions from polyphonic music to tablature 
are not always consistent and you can observe variations in the equivalence 
adopted between score and tablature. Musical flair and good sense have to 
come to the rescue I'm afraid... Some will split the dance (Pavan) into half 
measures, which then become whole measures in the tab, some will stick to the 
original format... 
So where do we stand ? That's the critical moment when the structure of the 
piece has to be thoroughly dismantled and analysed to try and understand the 
better possible solution, in terms of rhythm, phrasing and, possibly, steps.

As for Elizbethan dance movements such as Pavan etc., I think we have to be 
very careful before deciding if theyhave to be danceable or if they are 
stylised forms. Both cases coexist in the repertoire, and here again nothing 
is clearly indicated in the sources. Only a very close analysis and a good 
dose of musical sense will help you come to an acceptable solution. 

If you think of Chopin's Waltzes for the piano, you can hear very different 
versions of them, some more dance like than others. IMHO it may be the same 
with early baroque dance forms and I put a good deal of the Elizabethan lute 
music in that category.

Best,

Jean-Marie 
=== 06-02-2008 12:29:10 ===

Peter,
I am afraid this is not correct. I've just took the first manuscript from my
shelf with Italian renaissance music without any particular digging for
something special and what I can see? This is a facsimile edition of
Intabolatura de lauto by Antonio Rotta edited in Venetia 1546. If we turn
the title page we have the first piece which is Passamezzo with two flags
(crotchets using contemporary system of notation) per bar. The next piece is
Gagliarda with three flags per bar (of the same value). If we play both
pieces it becomes quite clear that one bar from Passamezzo equals one bar
from Gagliarda. So Donnington was right I am afraid ( the citation was from
his 1990 edition) and most things we can find in his book are still valid.
The whole mess with Pavan - Galliard proportions comes from our modern
thinking in uni-proportional system. In multi-proportional system which was
commonly used in renaissance this problem wouldn't exist because proportion
for this set of dances was very clear and easy; modus imperfectus equals
modus perfectus. This is why I said the pulse remains the same only dancers
change their steps.
All the best

Jaroslaw
  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://poirierjm.free.fr
06-02-2008 


To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
---
Orange vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail. 
Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.



= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://poirierjm.free.fr
06-02-2008 
N¶è®ß¶¬+-±ç¥Ëbú+«b¢vÛiÿü0ÁËj»f¢ëayÛ¿Á·?ë^iÙ¢ø§uìa¶i

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time (linking)

Thank you for the tip, Anthony. I am just as glad to know you are around !

So, Jaroslaw and all those interested, my music examples are here :
http://adueliuti.free.fr/examples.htm

Best,

Jean-Marie


=== 06-02-2008 13:43:17 ===

Jean-Marie
   You have to attatch by links, to a photographic site for example.
Nice to see you on this list.
Regards
Anthony
   
Le 6 févr. 08 à 13:38, Jean-Marie Poirier a écrit :

 Sorry, Jaroslaw, the list doesn't seem to take attachments... :-(
 JM

 === 06-02-2008 13:33:01 ===

 Jaroslaw,

 I think it's right ! I have attached two examples : the first  
 strain of the Pavane La Bataille in Phalèse, Chorearum Molliorum,  
 1583, and the eqivalent first strain of the adjoining Gaillarde.  
 What I tried to explain is apparent here  and the tactus  
 inequalis applies perfectly. I was probaly confused and confusing  
 too in my attempt to explain.

 The Pavan has a regular tactus , one breve down, one breve up.
 The Gaillard keeps the same breve down,( i.e. 2 semibreves) and  
 the up beat is inequalis, that is unequal, so the hand goes up  
 with one semibreve of the Gaillarde instead of one breve in the  
 Pavan.

 The interesting point is you keep the same tactus for the down  
 beat, and thus it is very easy to return to duple time and keep a  
 proper equivalence.

 How this applies to the lute litterature is a quite different  
 story altogether... Actually, the transcriptions from polyphonic  
 music to tablature are not always consistent and you can observe  
 variations in the equivalence adopted between score and  
 tablature. Musical flair and good sense have to come to the rescue  
 I'm afraid... Some will split the dance (Pavan) into half  
 measures, which then become whole measures in the tab, some will  
 stick to the original format...
 So where do we stand ? That's the critical moment when the  
 structure of the piece has to be thoroughly dismantled and  
 analysed to try and understand the better possible solution, in  
 terms of rhythm, phrasing and, possibly, steps.

 As for Elizbethan dance movements such as Pavan etc., I think we  
 have to be very careful before deciding if theyhave to be  
 danceable or if they are stylised forms. Both cases coexist in  
 the repertoire, and here again nothing is clearly indicated in the  
 sources. Only a very close analysis and a good dose of musical  
 sense will help you come to an acceptable solution.

 If you think of Chopin's Waltzes for the piano, you can hear very  
 different versions of them, some more dance like than others. IMHO  
 it may be the same with early baroque dance forms and I put a good  
 deal of the Elizabethan lute music in that category.

 Best,

 Jean-Marie
 === 06-02-2008 12:29:10 ===

 Peter,
 I am afraid this is not correct. I've just took the first  
 manuscript from my
 shelf with Italian renaissance music without any particular  
 digging for
 something special and what I can see? This is a facsimile edition of
 Intabolatura de lauto by Antonio Rotta edited in Venetia 1546.  
 If we turn
 the title page we have the first piece which is Passamezzo with  
 two flags
 (crotchets using contemporary system of notation) per bar. The  
 next piece is
 Gagliarda with three flags per bar (of the same value). If we  
 play both
 pieces it becomes quite clear that one bar from Passamezzo equals  
 one bar
 from Gagliarda. So Donnington was right I am afraid ( the  
 citation was from
 his 1990 edition) and most things we can find in his book are  
 still valid.
 The whole mess with Pavan - Galliard proportions comes from our  
 modern
 thinking in uni-proportional system. In multi-proportional system  
 which was
 commonly used in renaissance this problem wouldn't exist because  
 proportion
 for this set of dances was very clear and easy; modus imperfectus  
 equals
 modus perfectus. This is why I said the pulse remains the same  
 only dancers
 change their steps.
 All the best

 Jaroslaw

 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://poirierjm.free.fr
 06-02-2008


 To get on or off this list see list information at
 http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
 - 
 --
 Orange vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par l'anti- 
 virus mail.
 Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.



 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://poirierjm.free.fr
 06-02-2008
 To get on or off this list see list information at
 http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html


---
Orange vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail. 
Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://poirierjm.free.fr
06-02-2008 
N¶è®ß¶¬+-±ç¥Ëbú+«b¢vÛiÿü0ÁË

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

2008-02-06 Thread Mathias Rösel

Was Proportio sesquialtera (3/2) already mentioned?

For reference cf
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mensuralnotation#Wei.C3.9Fe_Mensuralnotation_.28ca._1430-1600.29
(German)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mensural_notation#Proportions_and_colorations

Mathias

Jean-Marie Poirier [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Sorry, Jaroslaw, the list doesn't seem to take attachments... :-(
JM

=== 06-02-2008 13:33:01 ===

Jaroslaw,

I think it's right ! I have attached two examples : the first strain of the
Pavane La Bataille in Phalèse, Chorearum Molliorum, 1583, and the eqivalent
first strain of the adjoining Gaillarde. What I tried to explain is apparent
here and the tactus inequalis applies perfectly. I was probaly confused
and confusing too in my attempt to explain.

The Pavan has a regular tactus , one breve down, one breve up.
The Gaillard keeps the same breve down,( i.e. 2 semibreves) and the up beat
is inequalis, that is unequal, so the hand goes up with one semibreve of
the Gaillarde instead of one breve in the Pavan.

The interesting point is you keep the same tactus for the down beat, and
thus it is very easy to return to duple time and keep a proper equivalence.

How this applies to the lute litterature is a quite different story
altogether... Actually, the transcriptions from polyphonic music to
tablature are not always consistent and you can observe variations in the
equivalence adopted between score and tablature. Musical flair and good
sense have to come to the rescue I'm afraid... Some will split the dance
(Pavan) into half measures, which then become whole measures in the tab,
some will stick to the original format...
So where do we stand ? That's the critical moment when the structure of the
piece has to be thoroughly dismantled and analysed to try and understand the
better possible solution, in terms of rhythm, phrasing and, possibly, steps.

As for Elizbethan dance movements such as Pavan etc., I think we have to be
very careful before deciding if theyhave to be danceable or if they are
stylised forms. Both cases coexist in the repertoire, and here again nothing
is clearly indicated in the sources. Only a very close analysis and a good
dose of musical sense will help you come to an acceptable solution.

If you think of Chopin's Waltzes for the piano, you can hear very different
versions of them, some more dance like than others. IMHO it may be the same
with early baroque dance forms and I put a good deal of the Elizabethan lute
music in that category.

Best,

Jean-Marie
=== 06-02-2008 12:29:10 ===

Peter,
I am afraid this is not correct. I've just took the first manuscript from my
shelf with Italian renaissance music without any particular digging for
something special and what I can see? This is a facsimile edition of
Intabolatura de lauto by Antonio Rotta edited in Venetia 1546. If we turn
the title page we have the first piece which is Passamezzo with two flags
(crotchets using contemporary system of notation) per bar. The next piece is
Gagliarda with three flags per bar (of the same value). If we play both
pieces it becomes quite clear that one bar from Passamezzo equals one bar
from Gagliarda. So Donnington was right I am afraid ( the citation was from
his 1990 edition) and most things we can find in his book are still valid.
The whole mess with Pavan - Galliard proportions comes from our modern
thinking in uni-proportional system. In multi-proportional system which was
commonly used in renaissance this problem wouldn't exist because proportion
for this set of dances was very clear and easy; modus imperfectus equals
modus perfectus. This is why I said the pulse remains the same only dancers
change their steps.
All the best

Jaroslaw

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://poirierjm.free.fr
06-02-2008

To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
---
Orange vous informe que cet e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail.
Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://poirierjm.free.fr
06-02-2008
N¶è®ß¶¬+-±ç¥Ëbú+«b¢vÛiÿü0ÁËj»f¢ëayÛ¿Á·?ë^iÙ¢ø§uìa

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time (linking)

Oops ! I forgot about those accents in French - on Phalèse  - that IE refuses 
to accept !
It should be OK now.

Jean-Marie

=== 06-02-2008 14:25:16 ===

there seems to be a path error!

 So, Jaroslaw and all those interested, my music examples are here :
 http://adueliuti.free.fr/examples.htm

the pictures don't appear.

best wishes
Bernd
---
Orange vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail. 
Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.



= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://poirierjm.free.fr
06-02-2008

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

1/It depends what you mean by pulse, but in this case I count one in a
measure for practical reasons (not theoretical). 
2/No, I am afraid there is no proportio sign at the beginning of the
galliarda.
3/Word modus was also used for the time-signature
4/If you think that suddenly in 1550 al musicians abandoned
multi-proportional system,  then my question is what had happened that year?
And even if it wasn't already so popular people didn't start to think a new
way just in one day.
Best wishes

Jaroslaw


. 

That would mean : the flags in the passamezzo have two thirds of
the speed of the flags in the gagliarda..

In this case the pulse (=tactus?) would have to be a whole measure?
 modus perfectus. This is why I said the pulse remains the same only
dancers
 change their steps.

Is there no proportio sign at the beginnig of the gagliarda?

I think that modus is not the best term here. (It refers to the division
of
the longa in two or three brevis.)


In multi-proportional system which was
commonly used in renaissance this problem wouldn't exist because proportion
for this set of dances was very clear and easy; 

Somehow I ask myself  whether the multi-proportional system was not outdated

for instrumental music around 1550. The values used (minima, semiminima,
fusa, semifusa)
are only divided in two...


Best wishes
Bernd 







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

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

Jean-Marie,

Actually I haven't said I don't agree with what you wrote. I just reacted to
Peter's email in which he said:
we seem to have arrived at one bar of galliard = half a bar of pavan
Which in my opinion is not correct because it depends what you mean by bar.
If you use modern notation and play from contemporary transcriptions than
yes it is true, but if we use original manuscripts then very often it won't
be so. And this is exactly what you write later in your email.
The whole discussion started after my citation from Donnington. Actually I
feel respect to his work and wouldn't be so keen to negate everything he
wrote only on the basis that it was some time ago.
For me as a active musician the problem Pavan - Galliard doesn't exist
because when I accompany dancers the pulse is so obvious that I don't need
to analyze all the history of these dances. What I only wanted to say
originally was that Galliard was not as fast a dance as some may think.
As I said in my previous email Galliards by Dowland particularly have to be
dealt with care because they are mostly solo instrumental pieces not suited
for dancing.
Best wishes

Jaroslaw

-Original Message-
From: Jean-Marie Poirier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:33 PM
To: lute
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Playing in time

Jaroslaw,

I think it's right ! I have attached two examples : the first strain of the
Pavane La Bataille in Phalčse, Chorearum Molliorum, 1583, and the eqivalent
first strain of the adjoining Gaillarde. What I tried to explain is apparent
here  and the tactus inequalis applies perfectly. I was probaly confused
and confusing too in my attempt to explain. 

The Pavan has a regular tactus , one breve down, one breve up.
The Gaillard keeps the same breve down,( i.e. 2 semibreves) and the up beat
is inequalis, that is unequal, so the hand goes up with one semibreve of
the Gaillarde instead of one breve in the Pavan. 

The interesting point is you keep the same tactus for the down beat, and
thus it is very easy to return to duple time and keep a proper equivalence.

How this applies to the lute litterature is a quite different story
altogether... Actually, the transcriptions from polyphonic music to
tablature are not always consistent and you can observe variations in the
equivalence adopted between score and tablature. Musical flair and good
sense have to come to the rescue I'm afraid... Some will split the dance
(Pavan) into half measures, which then become whole measures in the tab,
some will stick to the original format... 
So where do we stand ? That's the critical moment when the structure of the
piece has to be thoroughly dismantled and analysed to try and understand the
better possible solution, in terms of rhythm, phrasing and, possibly, steps.

As for Elizbethan dance movements such as Pavan etc., I think we have to be
very careful before deciding if theyhave to be danceable or if they are
stylised forms. Both cases coexist in the repertoire, and here again nothing
is clearly indicated in the sources. Only a very close analysis and a good
dose of musical sense will help you come to an acceptable solution. 

If you think of Chopin's Waltzes for the piano, you can hear very different
versions of them, some more dance like than others. IMHO it may be the same
with early baroque dance forms and I put a good deal of the Elizabethan lute
music in that category.

Best,

Jean-Marie 
=== 06-02-2008 12:29:10 ===

Peter,
I am afraid this is not correct. I've just took the first manuscript from
my
shelf with Italian renaissance music without any particular digging for
something special and what I can see? This is a facsimile edition of
Intabolatura de lauto by Antonio Rotta edited in Venetia 1546. If we turn
the title page we have the first piece which is Passamezzo with two flags
(crotchets using contemporary system of notation) per bar. The next piece
is
Gagliarda with three flags per bar (of the same value). If we play both
pieces it becomes quite clear that one bar from Passamezzo equals one bar
from Gagliarda. So Donnington was right I am afraid ( the citation was from
his 1990 edition) and most things we can find in his book are still valid.
The whole mess with Pavan - Galliard proportions comes from our modern
thinking in uni-proportional system. In multi-proportional system which was
commonly used in renaissance this problem wouldn't exist because proportion
for this set of dances was very clear and easy; modus imperfectus equals
modus perfectus. This is why I said the pulse remains the same only dancers
change their steps.
All the best

Jaroslaw
  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://poirierjm.free.fr
06-02-2008 


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

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

Jaroslaw,

I'm afraid missed your point altogether :-(( !   Sorry about that. 
I totally agree with what you say in this last mail, of course...

All the best,

Jean-Marie


=== 06-02-2008 15:17:10 ===

Jean-Marie,

Actually I haven't said I don't agree with what you wrote. I just reacted to
Peter's email in which he said:
we seem to have arrived at one bar of galliard = half a bar of pavan
Which in my opinion is not correct because it depends what you mean by bar.
If you use modern notation and play from contemporary transcriptions than
yes it is true, but if we use original manuscripts then very often it won't
be so. And this is exactly what you write later in your email.
The whole discussion started after my citation from Donnington. Actually I
feel respect to his work and wouldn't be so keen to negate everything he
wrote only on the basis that it was some time ago.
For me as a active musician the problem Pavan - Galliard doesn't exist
because when I accompany dancers the pulse is so obvious that I don't need
to analyze all the history of these dances. What I only wanted to say
originally was that Galliard was not as fast a dance as some may think.
As I said in my previous email Galliards by Dowland particularly have to be
dealt with care because they are mostly solo instrumental pieces not suited
for dancing.
Best wishes

Jaroslaw

  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://poirierjm.free.fr
06-02-2008 




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

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

2008-02-06 Thread David Rastall

On Feb 6, 2008, at 8:15 AM, Mathias R=F6sel wrote:

 Was Proportio sesquialtera (3/2) already mentioned?

Would that be like the two bar passage in Dowland's Fancy numbered  
5 in Poulton where in bars 26 and 27 the meter changes from common  
time to 12/8 and there is a marking that calls for the quarter note  
to become a dotted quarter (when it goes back into common time  
starting at bar 28, the quarter note once again gets the beat)?

David R
[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: Playing in time

2008-02-06 Thread Mathias Rösel

 Was Proportio sesquialtera (3/2) already mentioned?

 Would that be like the two bar passage in Dowland's
 Fancy numbered 5 in Poulton where in bars 26 and 27
 the meter changes from common time to 12/8 and there
 is a marking that calls for the quarter note to
 become a dotted quarter (when it goes back into
 common time starting at bar 28, the quarter note once
 again gets the beat)?


Not exactly, but the effect is very similar. Sesquialtera literally
means one and a half. Proportio sesquialtera is the name of that case
when there is a change from tempus perfectum (a brevis is divided into
three) to tempus imperfectum (a brevis is divided into two) and vice
versa, with the pulse of the brevis continuing to be the same. The usual
sign for this is 3/2 which in terms of maths equals one and a half
(sesquialtera). It was common usage until, say, 1600.
-- 
Mathias



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

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

Thank you Mathias - this is the word I was looking for :-)
All the best

Jaroslaw

-Original Message-
From: Mathias Rösel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 10:10 PM
To: David Rastall
Cc: lute
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Playing in time

 Was Proportio sesquialtera (3/2) already mentioned?

 Would that be like the two bar passage in Dowland's
 Fancy numbered 5 in Poulton where in bars 26 and 27
 the meter changes from common time to 12/8 and there
 is a marking that calls for the quarter note to
 become a dotted quarter (when it goes back into
 common time starting at bar 28, the quarter note once
 again gets the beat)?

Not exactly, but the effect is very similar. Sesquialtera literally
means one and a half. Proportio sesquialtera is the name of that case
when there is a change from tempus perfectum (a brevis is divided into
three) to tempus imperfectum (a brevis is divided into two) and vice
versa, with the pulse of the brevis continuing to be the same. The usual
sign for this is 3/2 which in terms of maths equals one and a half
(sesquialtera). It was common usage until, say, 1600.
-- 
Mathias

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

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

2008-02-05 Thread Jarosław Lipski

Peter

 Obviously I meant tempo - four time-units in one bar of the Pavan is
similar to the three time-units in one bar of the Galliard. This gives an
impression that the pulse keeps almost unchanged in triple time. However the
steps of the Galliard are much more vigorous. It depends on the dancers, but
some of them may show big virtuosity in elaborating their display. We can't
give exact metronomic values to denote Galliard's tempo because it varied
depending on time and country, but the proportions between Pavan and
Galliard remained almost the same.  As I said before I doubt very much if
Dowland's Galliards served anybody for dancing ever. And for the same reason
the proportion between his Pavan and Galliard doesn't need to be observed so
rigorously. These were purely instrumental pieces. The  dance form remake
was popularly used in the history of music. The music literature abounds
with such examples up to our times. For instance nobody would dance Chopin
Mazurkas. But earlier writers mentioned similar practices. Ch. Burney in
Music in Germany, London,1773, p.162 writes:

The Polish nobleman would gladly give me a specimen of the violin music of
his country, as it depended so much on the coup d'archet, that seeing it on
paper, without hearing it performed, would afford but a very imperfect idea
of it. The Pole added that the kind of music which we call Polonaise, is
played quicker for dancing than at other times

Best regards

 

Jaroslaw

 

  _  

From: Peter Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 8:40 AM
To: Jaros'aw Lipski
Cc: Lute
Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Playing in time

 

Do you really mean this?  Dowland galliards played at the same pulse as his
pavans are going to seem VERY slow.

 

P



 

On 04/02/2008, Jaros'aw Lipski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 

Now, back to Melancholy Galliard. There is a misconception concerning this
dance saying that when it goes with its pair - Pavan- the later is slow and
the former brisk and rapid. In fact the pulse of both is exactly the same
with the only difference that Pavan goes in rhythm of four in a bar which
equals three in a bar of Galliard. However the dancers change from stately
movements of Pavin to very fast steps of a Galliard and this is the reason
why people describe it as the fast dance.

 

 

 

-- 
Peter Martin
Belle Serre
La Caulie
81100 Castres
France
tel: 0033 5 63 35 68 46
e: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web: www.silvius.co.uk
http://absolute81.blogspot.com/
www.myspace.com/sambuca999
www.myspace.com/chuckerbutty 


--

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

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

2008-02-05 Thread Arthur Ness

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/dihtml/divideos.html

Especially Clips 29, 30 and 39.  (Not quite same date, though.)
=AJN (Boston, Mass.)=
*  Free Download of the Week from Classical Music Library:

*Strauss' _ Don Juan, Op. 20_

Performed by the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra;
Sir Charles Mackerras, conductor.
Go to my web page and click on Alexander Street Press link:

http://mysite.verizon.net/arthurjness/

For some free scores, go to:
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzepq31c/arthurjnesslutescores/
===

- Original Message - 
From: Jaroslaw Lipski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Lute' lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 4:37 AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Playing in time


| Peter
|
| Obviously I meant tempo - four time-units in one bar of the
Pavan is
| similar to the three time-units in one bar of the Galliard.
This gives an
| impression that the pulse keeps almost unchanged in triple
time. However the
| steps of the Galliard are much more vigorous. It depends on the
dancers, but
| some of them may show big virtuosity in elaborating their
display. We can't
| give exact metronomic values to denote Galliard's tempo because
it varied
| depending on time and country, but the proportions between
Pavan and
| Galliard remained almost the same.  As I said before I doubt
very much if
| Dowland's Galliards served anybody for dancing ever. And for
the same reason
| the proportion between his Pavan and Galliard doesn't need to
be observed so
| rigorously. These were purely instrumental pieces. The  dance
form remake
| was popularly used in the history of music. The music
literature abounds
| with such examples up to our times. For instance nobody would
dance Chopin
| Mazurkas. But earlier writers mentioned similar practices. Ch.
Burney in
| Music in Germany, London,1773, p.162 writes:
|
| The Polish nobleman would gladly give me a specimen of the
violin music of
| his country, as it depended so much on the coup d'archet, that
seeing it on
| paper, without hearing it performed, would afford but a very
imperfect idea
| of it. The Pole added that the kind of music which we call
Polonaise, is
| played quicker for dancing than at other times
|
| Best regards
|
|
|
| Jaroslaw
|
|
|
|  _
|
| From: Peter Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 8:40 AM
| To: Jaros'aw Lipski
| Cc: Lute
| Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Playing in time
|
|
|
| Do you really mean this?  Dowland galliards played at the same
pulse as his
| pavans are going to seem VERY slow.
|
|
|
| P
|
|
|
|
|
| On 04/02/2008, Jaros'aw Lipski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|
| Now, back to Melancholy Galliard. There is a misconception
concerning this
| dance saying that when it goes with its pair - Pavan- the later
is slow and
| the former brisk and rapid. In fact the pulse of both is
exactly the same
| with the only difference that Pavan goes in rhythm of four in a
bar which
| equals three in a bar of Galliard. However the dancers change
from stately
| movements of Pavin to very fast steps of a Galliard and this is
the reason
| why people describe it as the fast dance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| -- 
| Peter Martin
| Belle Serre
| La Caulie
| 81100 Castres
| France
| tel: 0033 5 63 35 68 46
| e: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| web: www.silvius.co.uk
| http://absolute81.blogspot.com/
| www.myspace.com/sambuca999
| www.myspace.com/chuckerbutty
|
|
| --
|
| To get on or off this list see list information at
| http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
|

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time



On 2008-02-05, at 15:15, Arthur Ness wrote:


http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/dihtml/divideos.html


Thank you, Arthur,
Then it is 1 galliard measure = 1/4 of a pavan measure.

In mensural notation (not modern, often changing values) it might be:
3 half notes of a galliard (one measure) = 1 half note in a pavan  
(1/4 of a measure).


Forgive improper terminology, if that's important.
In art music, that is for playing or listening, those proportions  
loose sense of course.


However there are Lute-Listers better then me in Renaissance theory.
Jurek
__




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

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

Exactly Jerzy. 

I think that's what theoreticians call tactus inequalis : 1 tactus in a 
binary measure (= normally a half measure in modern transcriptions ) is 
equivalent to 1 tactus in triple time ( one measure in modern transcrition). In 
other words if you beat time with a regular tactus in duple  time - hand 
touching down for each breve duration, as you see in some paintings with 
singers - , not considering the modern concept of bar, as there were no bars 
then as you know, and if this tactus remains the same for a triple time 
measure, it means you keep the same tactus all the time with a clear 
proportion, so it's quite easy to shift from duple time to triple and back, if 
necessary.  Usually a breve, with two demi-breves, in duple time becomes a 
breve in triple with three semi-breves to it. 
Try it and you'll see it works almost all the time ! It works all the time for 
Pavan-Galliard proportion.  So, take care, you have to consider what speed your 
triple time breve will be like to choose a correct tempo for the Pavan, [and be 
able to keep it ;-)]...

Best,

Jean-Marie

=== 05-02-2008 17:27:26 ===


On 2008-02-05, at 15:15, Arthur Ness wrote:

 http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/dihtml/divideos.html

Thank you, Arthur,
Then it is 1 galliard measure = 1/4 of a pavan measure.

In mensural notation (not modern, often changing values) it might be:
3 half notes of a galliard (one measure) = 1 half note in a pavan  
(1/4 of a measure).

Forgive improper terminology, if that's important.
In art music, that is for playing or listening, those proportions  
loose sense of course.

However there are Lute-Listers better then me in Renaissance theory.
Jurek
__




To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
---
Orange vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail. 
Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.



= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://poirierjm.free.fr
05-02-2008

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time



On 2008-02-05, at 17:33, LGS-Europe wrote:


Recorder and viol players are often shocked at the slowness of  
speeds requested by lutenists for broken consort music (Morley 1599  
et al), and a compromise has to be reached.




One of the top lute players once confessed to me why he is no longer  
playing with his broken ensemble (we were talkng about the English  
repertoire), becouse the other parts, beside of the lute, are so  
boring, mostly in very long notes, that nobody really wants to play  
it with him.
It is undertandable then, every flute or viola player tends to play  
all the whole and half notes faster. Of course hard to finde a  
compromise. Easy-dificult music and only one has fun.


Jurek
__



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

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

2008-02-05 Thread Guy Smith

Likewise. I've played most of the Morely consort lessons (I was on cittern,
since I've got the only one in town) and we all had a great time.
Unfortunately, the consort drifted apart after about a year due to too many
conflicting schedules and priorities. I'm hoping to get into another one
some day.

Guy

-Original Message-
From: Jean-Marie Poirier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 9:30 AM
To: lute
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Playing in time

I don't quite agree on that one ! I've been playing a lot of the English
broken consort repertoire and my colleagues always had fun too, believe me.
This music usually leaves a lot of space for divisions of other instruments
than the lute and it depends on how much the other musicians like to
improvise or to ornament their own part. 
In some cases (e.g. Go from my window) you don't even have to bother to
elaborate, everything is already there..Not really my idea of easy music
anyway, especially if you don't want to make it sound like music from the
museum !

Jean-Marie (another lefty on the list ;-)  

=== 05-02-2008 18:07:48 ===


On 2008-02-05, at 17:33, LGS-Europe wrote:

 Recorder and viol players are often shocked at the slowness of  
 speeds requested by lutenists for broken consort music (Morley 1599  
 et al), and a compromise has to be reached.
 

One of the top lute players once confessed to me why he is no longer  
playing with his broken ensemble (we were talkng about the English  
repertoire), becouse the other parts, beside of the lute, are so  
boring, mostly in very long notes, that nobody really wants to play  
it with him.
It is undertandable then, every flute or viola player tends to play  
all the whole and half notes faster. Of course hard to finde a  
compromise. Easy-dificult music and only one has fun.

Jurek
__



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

Orange vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail. 
Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.



= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://poirierjm.free.fr
05-02-2008

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

It is correct, Jurek, as far as I know...

Jean-Marie

PS : sorry I used a wrong name in my first post; I had not paid enough 
attention to your signature :-(

=== 05-02-2008 18:30:48 ===

Thank you Jean-Marie,

After reading you and looking again to the Arthur's exemples, I  
should have written:
1 galliard measure (one beat) = 1/2 of a pavan measure (one beat)

and in an original mensural notation would be:
3 half notes of a galliard (one beat to a measure) = 1 whole note of  
a pavan (one beat or half of the measure)

Is it correct?
Jurek
__

 1 galliard measure = 1/4 of a pavan measure.

 In mensural notation (not modern, often changing values) it might be:
 3 half notes of a galliard (one measure) = 1 half note in a pavan
 (1/4 of a measure).

On 2008-02-05, at 17:49, Jean-Marie Poirier wrote:

 Exactly Jerzy.

 I think that's what theoreticians call tactus inequalis : 1  
 tactus in a binary measure (= normally a half measure in modern  
 transcriptions ) is equivalent to 1 tactus in triple time ( one  
 measure in modern transcrition). In other words if you beat time  
 with a regular tactus in duple  time - hand touching down for each  
 breve duration, as you see in some paintings with singers - , not  
 considering the modern concept of bar, as there were no bars then  
 as you know, and if this tactus remains the same for a triple time  
 measure, it means you keep the same tactus all the time with a  
 clear proportion, so it's quite easy to shift from duple time to  
 triple and back, if necessary.  Usually a breve, with two demi- 
 breves, in duple time becomes a breve in triple with three semi- 
 breves to it.
 Try it and you'll see it works almost all the time ! It works all  
 the time for Pavan-Galliard proportion.  So, take care, you have to  
 consider what speed your triple time breve will be like to choose a  
 correct tempo for the Pavan, [and be able to keep it ;-)]...

 Best,

 Jean-Marie

 === 05-02-2008 17:27:26 ===


 On 2008-02-05, at 15:15, Arthur Ness wrote:

 http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/dihtml/divideos.html

 Thank you, Arthur,
 Then it is 1 galliard measure = 1/4 of a pavan measure.

 In mensural notation (not modern, often changing values) it might be:
 3 half notes of a galliard (one measure) = 1 half note in a pavan
 (1/4 of a measure).

 Forgive improper terminology, if that's important.
 In art music, that is for playing or listening, those proportions
 loose sense of course.

 However there are Lute-Listers better then me in Renaissance theory.
 Jurek
 __




To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
---
Orange vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail. 
Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.



= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://poirierjm.free.fr
05-02-2008

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

I don't quite agree on that one ! I've been playing a lot of the English broken 
consort repertoire and my colleagues always had fun too, believe me. This music 
usually leaves a lot of space for divisions of other instruments than the lute 
and it depends on how much the other musicians like to improvise or to ornament 
their own part. 
In some cases (e.g. Go from my window) you don't even have to bother to 
elaborate, everything is already there..Not really my idea of easy music 
anyway, especially if you don't want to make it sound like music from the 
museum !

Jean-Marie (another lefty on the list ;-)  

=== 05-02-2008 18:07:48 ===


On 2008-02-05, at 17:33, LGS-Europe wrote:

 Recorder and viol players are often shocked at the slowness of  
 speeds requested by lutenists for broken consort music (Morley 1599  
 et al), and a compromise has to be reached.
 

One of the top lute players once confessed to me why he is no longer  
playing with his broken ensemble (we were talkng about the English  
repertoire), becouse the other parts, beside of the lute, are so  
boring, mostly in very long notes, that nobody really wants to play  
it with him.
It is undertandable then, every flute or viola player tends to play  
all the whole and half notes faster. Of course hard to finde a  
compromise. Easy-dificult music and only one has fun.

Jurek
__



To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
---
Orange vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail. 
Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.



= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://poirierjm.free.fr
05-02-2008

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time


Thank you Jean-Marie,

After reading you and looking again to the Arthur's exemples, I  
should have written:

1 galliard measure (one beat) = 1/2 of a pavan measure (one beat)

and in an original mensural notation would be:
3 half notes of a galliard (one beat to a measure) = 1 whole note of  
a pavan (one beat or half of the measure)


Is it correct?
Jurek
__


1 galliard measure = 1/4 of a pavan measure.

In mensural notation (not modern, often changing values) it might be:
3 half notes of a galliard (one measure) = 1 half note in a pavan
(1/4 of a measure).


On 2008-02-05, at 17:49, Jean-Marie Poirier wrote:


Exactly Jerzy.

I think that's what theoreticians call tactus inequalis : 1  
tactus in a binary measure (= normally a half measure in modern  
transcriptions ) is equivalent to 1 tactus in triple time ( one  
measure in modern transcrition). In other words if you beat time  
with a regular tactus in duple  time - hand touching down for each  
breve duration, as you see in some paintings with singers - , not  
considering the modern concept of bar, as there were no bars then  
as you know, and if this tactus remains the same for a triple time  
measure, it means you keep the same tactus all the time with a  
clear proportion, so it's quite easy to shift from duple time to  
triple and back, if necessary.  Usually a breve, with two demi- 
breves, in duple time becomes a breve in triple with three semi- 
breves to it.
Try it and you'll see it works almost all the time ! It works all  
the time for Pavan-Galliard proportion.  So, take care, you have to  
consider what speed your triple time breve will be like to choose a  
correct tempo for the Pavan, [and be able to keep it ;-)]...


Best,

Jean-Marie

=== 05-02-2008 17:27:26 ===



On 2008-02-05, at 15:15, Arthur Ness wrote:


http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/dihtml/divideos.html


Thank you, Arthur,
Then it is 1 galliard measure = 1/4 of a pavan measure.

In mensural notation (not modern, often changing values) it might be:
3 half notes of a galliard (one measure) = 1 half note in a pavan
(1/4 of a measure).

Forgive improper terminology, if that's important.
In art music, that is for playing or listening, those proportions
loose sense of course.

However there are Lute-Listers better then me in Renaissance theory.
Jurek
__





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

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

Merci Bernd !!! 

Everything's OK then, Jerzy !

Best ,

Jean-MArie

=== 05-02-2008 18:51:39 ===






 PS : sorry I used a wrong name in my first post; I had not paid enough 
 attention to your 
 signature :-(


Jurek, c'est le terme d'affection de Jerzy.

:-)

bonne soirée!

B. 

---
Orange vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail. 
Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.



= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://poirierjm.free.fr
05-02-2008

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

2008-02-05 Thread Jarosław Lipski

Jurek,

It got complicated a little bit, but in fact is very simple. If you start
taping your foot (I don't advice taping foot at all, but one can do it
virtually) when playing Pavan, don't stop it when the Galliard comes, and
everything will be fine :)
I played with the dancers several times and generally they don't like fast
tempos of the Galliard for the simple reason they have many complicated
steps (the steps shown on American video are very basic).
I absolutely agree with Steward that Galliard was slowing down with time
passing because of more and more complicated steps. If we presume that in
XVI c. Italy it was a lively dance, probably in the end of Dowland's life it
was not. No wonder that when Mace was writing about Galliard, everybody was
so bored already with Galliards and inventing new attractive steps in
general. So probably this is why he describes it as a slow, grave and sober
dance.

Jaroslaw

-Original Message-
From: Jerzy Zak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 6:31 PM
To: lute
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Playing in time

Thank you Jean-Marie,

After reading you and looking again to the Arthur's exemples, I  
should have written:
1 galliard measure (one beat) = 1/2 of a pavan measure (one beat)

and in an original mensural notation would be:
3 half notes of a galliard (one beat to a measure) = 1 whole note of  
a pavan (one beat or half of the measure)

Is it correct?
Jurek
__

 1 galliard measure = 1/4 of a pavan measure.

 In mensural notation (not modern, often changing values) it might be:
 3 half notes of a galliard (one measure) = 1 half note in a pavan
 (1/4 of a measure).

On 2008-02-05, at 17:49, Jean-Marie Poirier wrote:

 Exactly Jerzy.

 I think that's what theoreticians call tactus inequalis : 1  
 tactus in a binary measure (= normally a half measure in modern  
 transcriptions ) is equivalent to 1 tactus in triple time ( one  
 measure in modern transcrition). In other words if you beat time  
 with a regular tactus in duple  time - hand touching down for each  
 breve duration, as you see in some paintings with singers - , not  
 considering the modern concept of bar, as there were no bars then  
 as you know, and if this tactus remains the same for a triple time  
 measure, it means you keep the same tactus all the time with a  
 clear proportion, so it's quite easy to shift from duple time to  
 triple and back, if necessary.  Usually a breve, with two demi- 
 breves, in duple time becomes a breve in triple with three semi- 
 breves to it.
 Try it and you'll see it works almost all the time ! It works all  
 the time for Pavan-Galliard proportion.  So, take care, you have to  
 consider what speed your triple time breve will be like to choose a  
 correct tempo for the Pavan, [and be able to keep it ;-)]...

 Best,

 Jean-Marie

 === 05-02-2008 17:27:26 ===


 On 2008-02-05, at 15:15, Arthur Ness wrote:

 http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/dihtml/divideos.html

 Thank you, Arthur,
 Then it is 1 galliard measure = 1/4 of a pavan measure.

 In mensural notation (not modern, often changing values) it might be:
 3 half notes of a galliard (one measure) = 1 half note in a pavan
 (1/4 of a measure).

 Forgive improper terminology, if that's important.
 In art music, that is for playing or listening, those proportions
 loose sense of course.

 However there are Lute-Listers better then me in Renaissance theory.
 Jurek
 __




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

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time


Jarek,

On 2008-02-05, at 20:33, Jarosław Lipski wrote:

Jurek,
It got complicated a little bit, but in fact is very simple. If you  
start

taping your foot (I don't advice taping foot at all, but one can do it
virtually) when playing Pavan, don't stop it when the Galliard  
comes, and

everything will be fine :)


The same is Jean-Marie reminding and everybody agree to it. The  
problem appeares which time values of each dance equals. That is in  
what containes one galliarde beat and one pavane beat.


I played with the dancers several times and generally they don't  
like fast
tempos of the Galliard for the simple reason they have many  
complicated

steps (the steps shown on American video are very basic).
I absolutely agree with Steward that Galliard was slowing down with  
time

passing because of more and more complicated steps.


The same with pavan, the same with almain/allemande, with sarabande,  
etc.



If we presume that in
XVI c. Italy it was a lively dance,


as well as the pavan not so slow, too.


probably in the end of Dowland's life it
was not. No wonder that when Mace was writing about Galliard,  
everybody was

so bored already with Galliards and inventing new attractive steps in
general. So probably this is why he describes it as a slow, grave  
and sober

dance.


In his time both the pavan and the galliard were for old fogies. In  
my feeling the Dowland pavans and galliard situates somwhere between  
the tipical XVIth c. Italian lively prototypes and Mace, but were  
already in a stage of decadence. But first of all Dowland is not for  
dancing - try to convince someone to dance to his Lacrime Pavan. Of  
course under the academic roof you can do it, but would you like to  
take part in that experiment?




Jaroslaw

-Original Message-
From: Jerzy Zak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 6:31 PM
To: lute
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Playing in time

Thank you Jean-Marie,

After reading you and looking again to the Arthur's exemples, I
should have written:
1 galliard measure (one beat) = 1/2 of a pavan measure (one beat)

and in an original mensural notation would be:
3 half notes of a galliard (one beat to a measure) = 1 whole note of
a pavan (one beat or half of the measure)

Is it correct?
Jurek
__


1 galliard measure = 1/4 of a pavan measure.

In mensural notation (not modern, often changing values) it might  
be:

3 half notes of a galliard (one measure) = 1 half note in a pavan
(1/4 of a measure).


On 2008-02-05, at 17:49, Jean-Marie Poirier wrote:


Exactly Jerzy.

I think that's what theoreticians call tactus inequalis : 1
tactus in a binary measure (= normally a half measure in modern
transcriptions ) is equivalent to 1 tactus in triple time ( one
measure in modern transcrition). In other words if you beat time
with a regular tactus in duple  time - hand touching down for each
breve duration, as you see in some paintings with singers - , not
considering the modern concept of bar, as there were no bars then
as you know, and if this tactus remains the same for a triple time
measure, it means you keep the same tactus all the time with a
clear proportion, so it's quite easy to shift from duple time to
triple and back, if necessary.  Usually a breve, with two demi-
breves, in duple time becomes a breve in triple with three semi-
breves to it.
Try it and you'll see it works almost all the time ! It works all
the time for Pavan-Galliard proportion.  So, take care, you have to
consider what speed your triple time breve will be like to choose a
correct tempo for the Pavan, [and be able to keep it ;-)]...

Best,

Jean-Marie

=== 05-02-2008 17:27:26 ===



On 2008-02-05, at 15:15, Arthur Ness wrote:


http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/dihtml/divideos.html


Thank you, Arthur,
Then it is 1 galliard measure = 1/4 of a pavan measure.

In mensural notation (not modern, often changing values) it might  
be:

3 half notes of a galliard (one measure) = 1 half note in a pavan
(1/4 of a measure).

Forgive improper terminology, if that's important.
In art music, that is for playing or listening, those proportions
loose sense of course.

However there are Lute-Listers better then me in Renaissance theory.
Jurek
__







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

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time

There is no such obvious equivalence really, but keep in mind the equivalence 
of one breve with two beats (Pavan) and one breve with three beats (Galliard). 
The augmentation of the number of notes to a beat -  three for two - gives the 
feeling of an acceleration sufficient to differentiate the two dances. At least 
that's how I usually find my way around in this particular matter and it works 
fine, even with dancers...

Hope it helps ! 

All the best,

Jean-Marie

=== 05-02-2008 21:: ===
The same is Jean-Marie reminding and everybody agree to it. The  
problem appeares which time values of each dance equals. That is in  
what containes one galliarde beat and one pavane beat.

 After reading you and looking again to the Arthur's exemples, I
 should have written:
 1 galliard measure (one beat) = 1/2 of a pavan measure (one beat)

 and in an original mensural notation would be:
 3 half notes of a galliard (one beat to a measure) = 1 whole note of
 a pavan (one beat or half of the measure)

 Is it correct?
 Jurek
 __

 1 galliard measure = 1/4 of a pavan measure.

 In mensural notation (not modern, often changing values) it might  
 be:
 3 half notes of a galliard (one measure) = 1 half note in a pavan
 (1/4 of a measure).

 On 2008-02-05, at 17:49, Jean-Marie Poirier wrote:

 Exactly Jerzy.

 I think that's what theoreticians call tactus inequalis : 1
 tactus in a binary measure (= normally a half measure in modern
 transcriptions ) is equivalent to 1 tactus in triple time ( one
 measure in modern transcrition). In other words if you beat time
 with a regular tactus in duple  time - hand touching down for each
 breve duration, as you see in some paintings with singers - , not
 considering the modern concept of bar, as there were no bars then
 as you know, and if this tactus remains the same for a triple time
 measure, it means you keep the same tactus all the time with a
 clear proportion, so it's quite easy to shift from duple time to
 triple and back, if necessary.  Usually a breve, with two demi-
 breves, in duple time becomes a breve in triple with three semi-
 breves to it.
 Try it and you'll see it works almost all the time ! It works all
 the time for Pavan-Galliard proportion.  So, take care, you have to
 consider what speed your triple time breve will be like to choose a
 correct tempo for the Pavan, [and be able to keep it ;-)]...

 Best,

 Jean-Marie

 === 05-02-2008 17:27:26 ===


 On 2008-02-05, at 15:15, Arthur Ness wrote:

 http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/dihtml/divideos.html

 Thank you, Arthur,
 Then it is 1 galliard measure = 1/4 of a pavan measure.

 In mensural notation (not modern, often changing values) it might  
 be:
 3 half notes of a galliard (one measure) = 1 half note in a pavan
 (1/4 of a measure).

 Forgive improper terminology, if that's important.
 In art music, that is for playing or listening, those proportions
 loose sense of course.

 However there are Lute-Listers better then me in Renaissance theory.
 Jurek
 __





To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
---
Orange vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail. 
Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://poirierjm.free.fr
05-02-2008

[LUTE] Re: Playing in time