Re: Dedillo/redobles
bill kilpatrick wrote: > is dedillo the same as redobles - fast, single line > passage(s)? No. Dedillo is a way of playing passages of that sort using only the index finger, presumably in the manner of a plectrum. It's occasionally marked in vihuela sources. HP To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Dedillo/redobles
is dedillo the same as redobles - fast, single line passage(s)? one could work up a good sized blister on the end of your finger doing this - real quick. a pick is so much better. - bill --- James A Stimson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Dear Ed, Rob and All: > Isn't all Indian sitar playing dedillo? That is, I > believe the strings are > plucked exclusively with the right-hand index > finger, onto which is fitted > a pointed wire loop, which serves as a plectrum. > (Shades of Francesco's > silver thimbles!) There must be somebody out there > who knows more about > this than I do > My point is not that there is any connection > between the art forms, only > that the great Indian musicians have demonstrated > that it is possible to > produce virtuoso music with this technique, albeit > with a plectrum of > sorts. > Cheers, > Jim > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > ___ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: Dedillo
Dear Ed, Rob and All: Isn't all Indian sitar playing dedillo? That is, I believe the strings are plucked exclusively with the right-hand index finger, onto which is fitted a pointed wire loop, which serves as a plectrum. (Shades of Francesco's silver thimbles!) There must be somebody out there who knows more about this than I do My point is not that there is any connection between the art forms, only that the great Indian musicians have demonstrated that it is possible to produce virtuoso music with this technique, albeit with a plectrum of sorts. Cheers, Jim To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Dedillo
This is an interesting point. I have never heard anyone perform the dedillo successfully, with the exception of Ronn McFarlane, who (if my memory serves me correctly) used it on some Milan pieces in an older solo CD of his. Other than that, I know of nobody who now uses it. ed At 09:49 PM 6/8/2005 +0100, Rob MacKillop wrote: >Martyn sent me this: > >To get back to the Vihuela, - do you know anyone who plays dedillo (I think >that's the term)? ie running passages played with index alone: I've tried, > >and failed - dismally. > >Thanks and rgds > >Martyn > >I sympathise with Martyn. Dedillo can sound awful, and I have to say I try >it every once in a while but always with the same results. Not to my liking. >I think it works best if the nail is a little bit long. I have seen a few >folk guitar players use the technique, but it sounds pretty lousy to my >ears, although it doesn't 'jump out' as it does when I use it. I guess that >is because the tone they produce generally is pretty rough. I imagine there >was a great variety amongst players in the 16th century regarding tone >production. Most of us arrive at vihuela via lute or classical guitar, where >we have spent years trying to 'improve' our tone. Dedillo seems like a step >backwards. But maybe I just can't do it properly! > >Anyone out there had success with this technique? > >Rob >www.rmguitar.co.uk > > > > >To get on or off this list see list information at >http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html Edward Martin 2817 East 2nd Street Duluth, Minnesota 55812 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice: (218) 728-1202
RE: Dedillo
never heard of it before - thanks a lot. just tried it - as described by dante - on the charango and it worked very nicely in conjunction with rasgueo. sort of an acoustic reverb. - bill --- Dante Rosati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi- > > my theory is that dedillo was used first because it > is what you do when you > are used to playing with a plectrum and decide to > try fingers. That way, the > thumb is held against the index finger as if you are > holding a pick, but > then you use the index finger tip instead of the > pick that could be held > there with the same hand position. I know a very > good jazz guitarist who > dabbles in flamenco and classical and when a scale > needs to be played, he > plays it that way, refusing to practice alternation > with i and m. > > Having said that, I have experimented with dedillo, > mostly on the Milan > fantasies that call for it, on both vihuela and > guitar and never got very > satisfactory speed or sound. It sort of feels like > if you spent hours a day > practicing it, you could get it to work, but I never > spent that much time on > it to see if it was worth the time and effort. Since > the back-and-forth pick > action sound also happens with p-i alternation, the > only difference with > dedillo would be the inconsistent tone of flesh > alternating with back of > nail. > > So I think it was a temporary historical technique > as plectrum players > started to become finger players and before they > discovered alternation with > two fingers for scale passages, p-i and then later > i-m (which Fuenllana > thought most perfect). > > Dante > > >-Original Message- > >From: Rob MacKillop [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 4:49 PM > >To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu > >Subject: Dedillo > > > > > >Martyn sent me this: > > > >To get back to the Vihuela, - do you know anyone > who plays dedillo > >(I think > >that's the term)? ie running passages played with > index alone: > >I've tried, > > > >and failed - dismally. > > > >Thanks and rgds > > > >Martyn > > > >I sympathise with Martyn. Dedillo can sound awful, > and I have to say I try > >it every once in a while but always with the same > results. Not to > >my liking. > >I think it works best if the nail is a little bit > long. I have seen a few > >folk guitar players use the technique, but it > sounds pretty lousy to my > >ears, although it doesn't 'jump out' as it does > when I use it. I guess that > >is because the tone they produce generally is > pretty rough. I imagine there > >was a great variety amongst players in the 16th > century regarding tone > >production. Most of us arrive at vihuela via lute > or classical > >guitar, where > >we have spent years trying to 'improve' our tone. > Dedillo seems like a step > >backwards. But maybe I just can't do it properly! > > > >Anyone out there had success with this technique? > > > >Rob > >www.rmguitar.co.uk > > > > > > > > > >To get on or off this list see list information at > >http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > > > ___ How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com
RE: Dedillo
Interesting topic! So you want to know how to play dedillo? >:) If you live in the U.S., just go to a good Mexican restaurant with a good Mariachi band. I was in a local restaurant a few months ago and the duo who was serenading the patrons had stopped at our table. I observed that the one player was executing all sorts of scale type divisions while using only his index finger. He was very good. He apparently teaches as well. I briefly thought about a few lessons for dedillo, but I think I would just end up playing poorly both thumb under and dedillo. Ironically, I asked the duo if they could play "Guardame las Vacas" and received blank stares. My Spanish pronunciation isn't that bad At any rate, dedillo apparently is a thriving technique among certain factions of the Mariachi crowd. I don't know how viable looking up Mariachi groups in the UK would be. On another ( my current favorite ) topic: Does anyone have tempo suggestions for the Paez "Bacas" ? I know the current fashion is to play at light speed, but there are some nice, delicate cadences in there that might get lost! And lastly, I know that "Guardame las Vacas" is a Romanesca, but does anyone know if there actually was a folk tune of that name? I know I've asked this over the years, but I've never gotten a definitive answer. Did it originally have lyrics? Garry -Original Message- From: Rob MacKillop [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 4:49 PM To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: Dedillo Martyn sent me this: To get back to the Vihuela, - do you know anyone who plays dedillo (I think that's the term)? ie running passages played with index alone: I've tried, and failed - dismally. Thanks and rgds Martyn I sympathise with Martyn. Dedillo can sound awful, and I have to say I try it every once in a while but always with the same results. Not to my liking. I think it works best if the nail is a little bit long. I have seen a few folk guitar players use the technique, but it sounds pretty lousy to my ears, although it doesn't 'jump out' as it does when I use it. I guess that is because the tone they produce generally is pretty rough. I imagine there was a great variety amongst players in the 16th century regarding tone production. Most of us arrive at vihuela via lute or classical guitar, where we have spent years trying to 'improve' our tone. Dedillo seems like a step backwards. But maybe I just can't do it properly! Anyone out there had success with this technique? Rob www.rmguitar.co.uk To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Royal College Dias
Dear all, I fully support Ed's view, which is the view of a practioner (is there such a word in english?). I also understand Martyn's point. While it's of no importance for a player if the instrument is "historically correct" (if the repertoire is appropriatly reproduceable on it). On the other hand: from a scientific point of view it is very important what reasons we have to prefer this model over another. I enjoy the discussions on both levels - there are surely weak points in Alexander's argumentation postulating the Diaz-guitar would be a vihuela which doesn't have anything to do with the practical use of his replica as appropriate instruments for the vihuela repertoire. An inconsistance? I don't think so. The vihuela is special. We don't have any surviving "certified" instruments and I don't know of any instrument in discussion on which no objections exist. So I think there is a certain freedom for builders and in this case any argument and practical experiment will bring us closer what could have been the original sound of the instrument. Just my 2 cent on this Best wishes Thomas Am Mittwoch, 8. Juni 2005 17:12 schrieben Sie: > Dear Rob and Martyn, > > Yes, I agree. This vihuela list has not been argumentative, but in the > past there has been some heated discussion of appropriate instrumentation > for vihuelas. > > One could compare this to lutes. I have heard some fantastic lutes, > that were not exact replicas of an original instrument, and to me, it does > not really matter all that much. What matters is if the instrument plays > and sounds well. > > I have heard your instrument, Rob, on your web site, and I must say, it > sounds fabulous. I have a vaulted back vihuela that also sounds wonderful, > and I could care less if it is an authentic reproduction. By any accounts, > it is a successful instrument. > > So, for the Dias, I do not think it is critical whether or not if it had > been a guitar or vihuela. If it is successful, that is what counts. > > ed > > At 11:36 AM 6/8/2005 +0100, Martyn Hodgson wrote: > >Rob, > > > >Thank you for this. I do, however, think you misunderstand the debate: it > >is not about criticism or attempting to impose any uniformity; it is > >merely scholarly questioning and suggesting other possibilities which may, > >or may not, have some validity. Much less is it about being 'angry and > >argumentative' - where do you get this from? If serious debate is > >quashed by fear of seeming 'argumentative' we'll never get anywhere. > > > >Finally, I'm pleased you like Alexander's very fine instruments but what > >precise relevance is this to the particular debate? > > > >regards, > > > >Martyn > > > > > > > > Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I am not a maker or an organologist, so... > > > >It appears to be a unsatisfactory situation for all concerned. There are > >quite a number of images of what we assume are vihuelas - and no two of > > them are the same in all relevant details. We also have a few surviving > > instruments which we assume are vihuelas (not everyone agrees). Not only > > do none of these surviving instruments look like any of the others, but > > they also look unlike the iconographic images. What conclusions can we > > draw from this state of affairs? > > > >It seems to me obvious that there were as many interpretations then about > >what a vihuela was as there are now over the modern acoustic guitar. Each > >maker did 'his own thing', adapting, experimenting, etc. I find this a > >wholly positive thing! Why some people get angry and argumentative over > > all this, seems to me crazy. There is no one vihuela which we must all > > copy and play. > > > >The bottom line is that any roughly guitar or viola-shaped instrument with > >six courses, tuned like a lute (pitch varies) is suitable for the printed > >repertoire. Some people in the 16th century played this stuff on a > >lute...The Dias is a perfectly good base model. > > > >For what it's worth: I play one of Alexander's vihuelas for one good > > reason: it is a great musical instrument, suitable for the repertoire. > > > >Rob > > > > > > > > > >To get on or off this list see list information at > >http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > > > >- > >Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PCcalling worldwide with > > voicemail -- > > Edward Martin > 2817 East 2nd Street > Duluth, Minnesota 55812 > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > voice: (218) 728-1202 -- Thomas Schall Niederhofheimer Weg 3 D-65843 Sulzbach 06196/74519 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lautenist.de http://www.lautenist.de/bduo/ http://www.lautenist.de/gitarre/ http://www.tslaute.de/weiss/
RE: Dedillo
Hi- my theory is that dedillo was used first because it is what you do when you are used to playing with a plectrum and decide to try fingers. That way, the thumb is held against the index finger as if you are holding a pick, but then you use the index finger tip instead of the pick that could be held there with the same hand position. I know a very good jazz guitarist who dabbles in flamenco and classical and when a scale needs to be played, he plays it that way, refusing to practice alternation with i and m. Having said that, I have experimented with dedillo, mostly on the Milan fantasies that call for it, on both vihuela and guitar and never got very satisfactory speed or sound. It sort of feels like if you spent hours a day practicing it, you could get it to work, but I never spent that much time on it to see if it was worth the time and effort. Since the back-and-forth pick action sound also happens with p-i alternation, the only difference with dedillo would be the inconsistent tone of flesh alternating with back of nail. So I think it was a temporary historical technique as plectrum players started to become finger players and before they discovered alternation with two fingers for scale passages, p-i and then later i-m (which Fuenllana thought most perfect). Dante >-Original Message- >From: Rob MacKillop [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 4:49 PM >To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu >Subject: Dedillo > > >Martyn sent me this: > >To get back to the Vihuela, - do you know anyone who plays dedillo >(I think >that's the term)? ie running passages played with index alone: >I've tried, > >and failed - dismally. > >Thanks and rgds > >Martyn > >I sympathise with Martyn. Dedillo can sound awful, and I have to say I try >it every once in a while but always with the same results. Not to >my liking. >I think it works best if the nail is a little bit long. I have seen a few >folk guitar players use the technique, but it sounds pretty lousy to my >ears, although it doesn't 'jump out' as it does when I use it. I guess that >is because the tone they produce generally is pretty rough. I imagine there >was a great variety amongst players in the 16th century regarding tone >production. Most of us arrive at vihuela via lute or classical >guitar, where >we have spent years trying to 'improve' our tone. Dedillo seems like a step >backwards. But maybe I just can't do it properly! > >Anyone out there had success with this technique? > >Rob >www.rmguitar.co.uk > > > > >To get on or off this list see list information at >http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >
Dedillo
Martyn sent me this: To get back to the Vihuela, - do you know anyone who plays dedillo (I think that's the term)? ie running passages played with index alone: I've tried, and failed - dismally. Thanks and rgds Martyn I sympathise with Martyn. Dedillo can sound awful, and I have to say I try it every once in a while but always with the same results. Not to my liking. I think it works best if the nail is a little bit long. I have seen a few folk guitar players use the technique, but it sounds pretty lousy to my ears, although it doesn't 'jump out' as it does when I use it. I guess that is because the tone they produce generally is pretty rough. I imagine there was a great variety amongst players in the 16th century regarding tone production. Most of us arrive at vihuela via lute or classical guitar, where we have spent years trying to 'improve' our tone. Dedillo seems like a step backwards. But maybe I just can't do it properly! Anyone out there had success with this technique? Rob www.rmguitar.co.uk To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
FW: Royal College Dias
This just arrived. Now you all know what I mean. Nuff said. Rob -Original Message- From: Stephen Barber & Sandi Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 08 June 2005 18:11 To: Rob MacKillop Subject: RE: Royal College Dias Rob, whilst I'm sure you're having enormous fun with all of this, your very own pet 'vihuela list', it's Sandi Harris' website also - don't be so damn sexist. And 'Corona' has a first name, as you very well know - Antonio; attempting to dismiss a scholar of his standing as you do so flippantly doesn't exactly make you look good. Sure, we were angry that our moulds were stolen, and certainly argumentative where charlatans and people making false and ludicrous claims are concerned. Stephen. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
RE: Royal College Dias
Dear Rob and Martyn, Yes, I agree. This vihuela list has not been argumentative, but in the past there has been some heated discussion of appropriate instrumentation for vihuelas. One could compare this to lutes. I have heard some fantastic lutes, that were not exact replicas of an original instrument, and to me, it does not really matter all that much. What matters is if the instrument plays and sounds well. I have heard your instrument, Rob, on your web site, and I must say, it sounds fabulous. I have a vaulted back vihuela that also sounds wonderful, and I could care less if it is an authentic reproduction. By any accounts, it is a successful instrument. So, for the Dias, I do not think it is critical whether or not if it had been a guitar or vihuela. If it is successful, that is what counts. ed At 11:36 AM 6/8/2005 +0100, Martyn Hodgson wrote: >Rob, > >Thank you for this. I do, however, think you misunderstand the debate: it >is not about criticism or attempting to impose any uniformity; it is >merely scholarly questioning and suggesting other possibilities which may, >or may not, have some validity. Much less is it about being 'angry and >argumentative' - where do you get this from? If serious debate is >quashed by fear of seeming 'argumentative' we'll never get anywhere. > >Finally, I'm pleased you like Alexander's very fine instruments but what >precise relevance is this to the particular debate? > >regards, > >Martyn > > > > Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I am not a maker or an organologist, so... > >It appears to be a unsatisfactory situation for all concerned. There are >quite a number of images of what we assume are vihuelas - and no two of them >are the same in all relevant details. We also have a few surviving >instruments which we assume are vihuelas (not everyone agrees). Not only do >none of these surviving instruments look like any of the others, but they >also look unlike the iconographic images. What conclusions can we draw from >this state of affairs? > >It seems to me obvious that there were as many interpretations then about >what a vihuela was as there are now over the modern acoustic guitar. Each >maker did 'his own thing', adapting, experimenting, etc. I find this a >wholly positive thing! Why some people get angry and argumentative over all >this, seems to me crazy. There is no one vihuela which we must all copy and >play. > >The bottom line is that any roughly guitar or viola-shaped instrument with >six courses, tuned like a lute (pitch varies) is suitable for the printed >repertoire. Some people in the 16th century played this stuff on a >lute...The Dias is a perfectly good base model. > >For what it's worth: I play one of Alexander's vihuelas for one good reason: >it is a great musical instrument, suitable for the repertoire. > >Rob > > > > >To get on or off this list see list information at >http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > >- >Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PCcalling worldwide with voicemail >-- Edward Martin 2817 East 2nd Street Duluth, Minnesota 55812 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice: (218) 728-1202
RE: Royal College Dias
Hi Martin, I admit that my comments had nothing to do with your current debate. And the 'angry and argumentative' part was not directed at you. Just take a look at Stephen Barber's website for an example of what I was referring to. Ditto Corona's comments on the lute list. Nor was I trying to defend Alexander, who seems more than capable of doing that himself. I guess I was just wanting to enthuse a bit. Not much of that goes on here... Rob _ From: Martyn Hodgson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 08 June 2005 11:37 To: Rob MacKillop; Vihuela Net Cc: Vihuela Net Subject: RE: Royal College Dias Rob, Thank you for this. I do, however, think you misunderstand the debate: it is not about criticism or attempting to impose any uniformity; it is merely scholarly questioning and suggesting other possibilities which may, or may not, have some validity. Much less is it about being 'angry and argumentative' - where do you get this from? If serious debate is quashed by fear of seeming 'argumentative' we'll never get anywhere. Finally, I'm pleased you like Alexander's very fine instruments but what precise relevance is this to the particular debate? regards, Martyn -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Re: Royal College Dias
Martyn Hodgson wrote (Tuesday, June 07, 2005 1:39 PM): >Further to this, I forgot to mention that I do so agree with you that was clearly a continuum of instruments between the 'classical' 16thC vihuela (whatever that was - will we ever know in view of the irritating lack of Spanish iconography) and the 17thC 5 course guitar. In particular, as you say, the Dias is a very good shape to base an instrument on. Perhaps you have your own explanation of the evolution of musical instruments ... something like the Big Bang theory. I can't see a continuum between, say, the classical Oud (whatever that was) and the Chinese pi-pa but at least I can explain why, well ... because I don't know very much about it. But if the available iconography and all the passages (often mentioned on this list) from Bermudo, Covarrubias, vihuelistas' books and the historical accounts (two of them are quoted at the beginning of my last article) are not enough for you to get an idea of the continuum it is simply beyond my reason to understand your point. So maybe next time when I see 17th century hapsichord converted in the mid-18th century into hammered clavier I will just pretend that it was in fact originally a harp with the soundboard attached horisontally ... >Regarding arched/fluted back vihuelas, I recall there's a passage in, I think Bermudo, where he says the depth of a vihuela is 2 or three fingers ie very shallow - has this anything to tell us - perhaps not arched/fluted? Or perhaps his fingers too fat? ... > Finally, I'm still not convinced that the Chambure instrument is such a good model: even if it was a vihuela its very odd body shape must surely make it attypical. However unconvinced you are, important thing to remember though is that the maker of the Chambure knew what he was doing. Regards, Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
RE: Royal College Dias
Rob, Thank you for this. I do, however, think you misunderstand the debate: it is not about criticism or attempting to impose any uniformity; it is merely scholarly questioning and suggesting other possibilities which may, or may not, have some validity. Much less is it about being 'angry and argumentative' - where do you get this from? If serious debate is quashed by fear of seeming 'argumentative' we'll never get anywhere. Finally, I'm pleased you like Alexander's very fine instruments but what precise relevance is this to the particular debate? regards, Martyn Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I am not a maker or an organologist, so... It appears to be a unsatisfactory situation for all concerned. There are quite a number of images of what we assume are vihuelas - and no two of them are the same in all relevant details. We also have a few surviving instruments which we assume are vihuelas (not everyone agrees). Not only do none of these surviving instruments look like any of the others, but they also look unlike the iconographic images. What conclusions can we draw from this state of affairs? It seems to me obvious that there were as many interpretations then about what a vihuela was as there are now over the modern acoustic guitar. Each maker did 'his own thing', adapting, experimenting, etc. I find this a wholly positive thing! Why some people get angry and argumentative over all this, seems to me crazy. There is no one vihuela which we must all copy and play. The bottom line is that any roughly guitar or viola-shaped instrument with six courses, tuned like a lute (pitch varies) is suitable for the printed repertoire. Some people in the 16th century played this stuff on a lute...The Dias is a perfectly good base model. For what it's worth: I play one of Alexander's vihuelas for one good reason: it is a great musical instrument, suitable for the repertoire. Rob To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PCcalling worldwide with voicemail --
