[NSP] Re: Pipes with continuo?
Hi Dave, in haste - we have a mad w/e coming up rehearsing like crazy - thanks greatly for this. I had a quick look it deserves a lot longer reading, which I'm going to enjoy later on. Best wishes, Richard. On 02/12/2010 21:52, Dave S wrote: Hi Richard, [1]http://books.google.lu/books?id=VoQXAQAAIAAJprintsec=frontcoverdq= %22essays+in+musicology%22source=blots=ITEFvN0Hiisig=iIvdnoOEE_CRl_u bQ_wRLOiSuyQhl=enei=cRD4TOSQMY2dOrX-kbkIsa=Xoi=book_resultct=resul tresnum=1ved=0CBEQ6AEwAA#v=onepageqf=false The link is on google books and is about hornpipes, but may help towards a part answer to your question, have a look at the book essays in musicology ---page 150 regards Dave Singleton On 11/25/2010 6:50 PM, Richard York wrote: I was listening recently to a trio playing 17th/18th Cent. divisions on La Folia on the radio, and was struck afresh by how similar are some of the things appearing in the nsp variations. (And yet different.)[Special aside for Round the Horn listeners :) ] Divisions on viols or recorders were normally played with at least a bass, and/or a harpsichord or whatever, and our variations/divisions must come out of the same culture in the first place, whether it's later a parallel or a parent-child type development to get to where Peacock's sets arrived. So, given that pipes are generally thought of as a solo instrument, (correct me if not!) do we know at what stage of development the divorce from the continuo or ground bass instrument actually happened? Assuming it did. Do the smallpipes with their variations repertoire first appear having already made the musical separation, or was there any practice of playing them over a ground? (Please note, this *is* on topic!) Best wishes, Richard. -- To get on or off this list see list information at [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - [3]www.avg.com Version: 9.0.872 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3276 - Release Date: 11/24/10 08:34:0 0 -- References 1. http://books.google.lu/books?id=VoQXAQAAIAAJprintsec=frontcoverdq=%22essays+in+musicology%22source=blots=ITEFvN0Hiisig=iIvdnoOEE_CRl_ubQ_wRLOiSuyQhl=enei=cRD4TOSQMY2dOrX-kbkIsa=Xoi=book_resultct=resultresnum=1ved=0CBEQ6AEwAA#v=onepageqf=false 2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html 3. http://www.avg.com/
[NSP] Re: Pipes with continuo?
Hi Richard, [1]http://books.google.lu/books?id=VoQXAQAAIAAJprintsec=frontcoverdq= %22essays+in+musicology%22source=blots=ITEFvN0Hiisig=iIvdnoOEE_CRl_u bQ_wRLOiSuyQhl=enei=cRD4TOSQMY2dOrX-kbkIsa=Xoi=book_resultct=resul tresnum=1ved=0CBEQ6AEwAA#v=onepageqf=false The link is on google books and is about hornpipes, but may help towards a part answer to your question, have a look at the book essays in musicology ---page 150 regards Dave Singleton On 11/25/2010 6:50 PM, Richard York wrote: I was listening recently to a trio playing 17th/18th Cent. divisions on La Folia on the radio, and was struck afresh by how similar are some of the things appearing in the nsp variations. (And yet different.)[Special aside for Round the Horn listeners :) ] Divisions on viols or recorders were normally played with at least a bass, and/or a harpsichord or whatever, and our variations/divisions must come out of the same culture in the first place, whether it's later a parallel or a parent-child type development to get to where Peacock's sets arrived. So, given that pipes are generally thought of as a solo instrument, (correct me if not!) do we know at what stage of development the divorce from the continuo or ground bass instrument actually happened? Assuming it did. Do the smallpipes with their variations repertoire first appear having already made the musical separation, or was there any practice of playing them over a ground? (Please note, this *is* on topic!) Best wishes, Richard. -- To get on or off this list see list information at [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - [3]www.avg.com Version: 9.0.872 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3276 - Release Date: 11/24/10 08:34:0 0 -- References 1. http://books.google.lu/books?id=VoQXAQAAIAAJprintsec=frontcoverdq=%22essays+in+musicology%22source=blots=ITEFvN0Hiisig=iIvdnoOEE_CRl_ubQ_wRLOiSuyQhl=enei=cRD4TOSQMY2dOrX-kbkIsa=Xoi=book_resultct=resultresnum=1ved=0CBEQ6AEwAA#v=onepageqf=false 2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html 3. http://www.avg.com/
[NSP] Re: Pipes with continuo?
Of course a drone instrument has its own bass. But the implicit ground either fits or doesn't fit with the drones. Hence the preference, from Dixon onwards, for grounds based on only 2 chords. More complex grounds don't work so well. But did Dixon play along with a cello or bassoon? Peacock certainly seems to have been playing solo when Bewick knew him. John From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Richard York [rich...@lizards.force9.co.uk] Sent: 25 November 2010 17:50 To: NSP group Subject: [NSP] Pipes with continuo? I was listening recently to a trio playing 17th/18th Cent. divisions on La Folia on the radio, and was struck afresh by how similar are some of the things appearing in the nsp variations. (And yet different.)[Special aside for Round the Horn listeners :) ] Divisions on viols or recorders were normally played with at least a bass, and/or a harpsichord or whatever, and our variations/divisions must come out of the same culture in the first place, whether it's later a parallel or a parent-child type development to get to where Peacock's sets arrived. So, given that pipes are generally thought of as a solo instrument, (correct me if not!) do we know at what stage of development the divorce from the continuo or ground bass instrument actually happened? Assuming it did. Do the smallpipes with their variations repertoire first appear having already made the musical separation, or was there any practice of playing them over a ground? (Please note, this *is* on topic!) Best wishes, Richard. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: Pipes with continuo?
Also is it not the case that when Highland pipers (including these students) pick up a set of Border pipes (as quite a few are doing nowadays though usually it's a set of 'Scottish Smallpipes' at first) the instrument is treated only as an ersatz Highland bagpipe? Yes now probably OT so maybe this conversation should take place in a different forum? Bill Still, what a shame that the pipers in that program only get an afternoon of something other than Highland music. I'm sure they get plenty more than that, John (they all take a second instrument), but only a tiny wee bit of it is Border piping. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.872 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3281 - Release Date: 11/26/10 07:34:00
[NSP] Re: Pipes with continuo?
Richard, not only is it on topic but it's a very live topic (for me at least). I was lecturing yesterday at Glasgow for the 3rd year Piping Degree students (as Highland pipers they are exposed to two hours of Border pipe music in three years...) and the Dixon variations - which predate Peacock, but share the same aesthetic - were my main focus. It's hard to get across to anyone in Scotland that music didn't start with the Gows, but it didn't, and the genius of the Scottish fiddle, John MacLachlan, flourished c. 1700, and his variation sets on Scots tunes set the gold standard. They mainly survive in lute transcriptions and there are a couple of good CDs around which feature them. Meanwhile in England we have the Lancashire hornpipes of Marsden et al, and the divisions of Playford somewhat earlier. It was in the air, the idiom that has been called the 'Native Baroque', and the Dixon-Peacock-Bewick-Clough line is part of this. The aesthetic distinction is that with drones, and tunes based mainly on two chords, you don't need continuo - drones are the ultimate continuo, and the musician who can hear what the tunes are doing hears the regular movement between consonance and dissonance with the drones. What we do now (frequently) is to play with chordal accompaniment, the modern equivalent of continuo, and for this to be worthwhile it has to do something more than state the obvious two-chord pattern without becoming totally irrelevant to it. A refined approach is needed. Back to your point, there is at least one example of the division repertoire directly entering the NSP repertoire - Johnny, Cock Thy Beaver gave rise to Newmarket Races / Fenwick O' Bywell. On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 5:50 PM, Richard York [1]rich...@lizards.force9.co.uk wrote: I was listening recently to a trio playing 17th/18th Cent. divisions on La Folia on the radio, and was struck afresh by how similar are some of the things appearing in the nsp variations. (And yet different.)[Special aside for Round the Horn listeners :) ] Divisions on viols or recorders were normally played with at least a bass, and/or a harpsichord or whatever, and our variations/divisions must come out of the same culture in the first place, whether it's later a parallel or a parent-child type development to get to where Peacock's sets arrived. So, given that pipes are generally thought of as a solo instrument, (correct me if not!) do we know at what stage of development the divorce from the continuo or ground bass instrument actually happened? Assuming it did. Do the smallpipes with their variations repertoire first appear having already made the musical separation, or was there any practice of playing them over a ground? (Please note, this *is* on topic!) Best wishes, Richard. -- To get on or off this list see list information at [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. mailto:rich...@lizards.force9.co.uk 2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[NSP] Re: Pipes with continuo?
It's hard to get across to anyone in Scotland that music didn't start with the Gows, but it didn't, and the genius of the Scottish fiddle, John MacLachlan, flourished c. 1700, and his variation sets on Scots tunes set the gold standard. They mainly survive in lute transcriptions and there are a couple of good CDs around which feature them. MacCrimmon? Sorry, OT I know, but I couldn't resist. Still, what a shame that the pipers in that program only get an afternoon of something other than Highland music. Highland piping is, perhaps, misoverstood. The aesthetic distinction is that with drones, and tunes based mainly on two chords, you don't need continuo - drones are the ultimate continuo, and the musician who can hear what the tunes are doing hears the regular movement between consonance and dissonance with the drones. Excellent! That which you put is very well writ. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
