[CITTERN] Re: Edvard Storm Ms.
Secondly, you guys are a tough audience! ! My apologies for that comment -- I must have been feeling vulnerable the day I wrote it. I have appreciated the feedback, ideas, debate, and suggestions made both on- and off-list. -- Rocky To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[CITTERN] Re: Edvard Storm Ms.
Mjos Larson wrote: Secondly, you guys are a tough audience! My apologies for that comment -- I must have been feeling vulnerable the day I wrote it. No need to apologise to me. If anything I should apologise to you. I got Fichte's triad (thesis+antithesis=synthesis) so well drummed into me at high school, it's become second nature to me. It is an extremely useful scientific and artistic tool but it can be tough on people at times and sometimes I forget that. --- In this case it's my turn to eat my own words: Mjos Larson also wrote: Regarding number of courses, I wonder why the writer would bother with writing his fretting examples on page 3 with seven definite entries and two distinct notations (after the fifth course) if the 6th and 7th course were tuned the same. I completely overlooked that page! Seven courses it is then. My comment about 2nd inversion chords was based on the assumption that the slashed letters signified seventh course and the un-slashed sixth course. Switch the order and those chords at least makes much more sense. The two page 3 tuning charts only indicate tuning for six courses. What does this mean? The seventh was variably tuned? Now it's getting really messy. The sixth course in the tuning charts are not slashed which is how the *seventh* course are notated in the fretting examples on the same page. The only explanation I can think of is that the tuning charts are copied from a different source than the rest of the ms and intended for a six course instrument. Overall, a C still makes more harmonic sense (to me), as it is often in a place where I would expect a dominant harmony). Now that I've had a closer look at the music I agree. C is the only tuning that would consistently fit all the pieces with no need for retuning or correcting any bass notes. There are also passage (6 and 14) where the baseline seems to be displaced an octave (if the 7th is read as a C). How about a re-entrant tuning: c'-f-bb-d'-f'-a'-d'' There are plenty of historical references to such a practice to add extra bass strings to facilitate the playing of certain notes rather than to expand the instrument's range although I have to admit I don't know of any close to Storm in time and location. Such a tuning would solve another problem that's been bothering me about the manuscript: the range of the seven course instrument seems far to wide for the string materials available at that time. Anon Egeland's suggestion of a 7th tuned to B-flat doesn't work to my ears. He's a fiddle/violin player so may have relied on information from a plucked string player. As far as I know Egeland got the tuning from Storm's own written playing instructions. I may have misunderstood though. We really need to get a look at the manuscript as a whole, not just the pages with cittern music! --- Does anyone have other thoughts about the ornaments? No idea. Sorry. Frank Nordberg http://www.musicaviva.com http://stores.ebay.com/Nordbergs-Music-Store?refid=store To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[CITTERN] Re: Edvard Storm Ms.
Frank, First of all, thank you for sharing the Ms pages and writing posting the background information on instruments and suggestiion that the Ms. could be viewed as part of the Danish or German tradition. Secondly, you guys are a tough audience! ! I started this post a few days ago so I may be behind the discussion by now. I have uploaded a revised PDF of the cittern pieces at: http://earlyguitar.ning.com/profile/RockyMjos I have reset the tab in the 5-line form of the original and decided to alter more bass notes to better please my ear. I have also added numbers to help keep track of pieces. The transcriptions offer one possibility for the ornaments. Does anyone have other thoughts about the ornaments? Farstad's examples didn't seem completely same to me (they always followed the note to be ornamented). In Storm these signs are on staff between the upper note(s) and bass note. The two vertical lines in Storm are rather short strokes and might be almost viewed as two long dots. The Storm cross is a longer vertical stroke with a shorter horizontal stroke (t-like). Regarding number of courses, I wonder why the writer would bother with writing his fretting examples on page 3 with seven definite entries and two distinct notations (after the fifth course) if the 6th and 7th course were tuned the same. I think the tablature definitely shows seven courses, as each fretting example on page 3 has tablature letters on each of the 5 staff lines (starting at the first course) then next a tablature letter with a slash, followed by a tablature letter without a slash. This happens for each fret -- 7 for the open strings, 7 for the first fret, etc. The two page 3 tuning charts only indicate tuning for six courses. What does this mean? The seventh was variably tuned? (If one believes this music is for a 7-c instrument.) I would agree that in many places in the music where the indicated 7th note would sound the pitch for the 6th would sound better. You will see that I have gone further in my new version in altering bass notes to a better (to my ear) choice. Overall, a C still makes more harmonic sense (to me), as it is often in a place where I would expect a dominant harmony). There are also passage (6 and 14) where the baseline seems to be displaced an octave (if the 7th is read as a C). There are many pieces which do not use a seventh course: 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, and 15. In the rest of the pieces I always thought a C was better than an F (except for 10, and the second half of 12 where F would be better -- I viewed them as a possible mistake). I also tried a G and that also seemed to work OK, but I still think C better. Anon Egeland's suggestion of a 7th tuned to B-flat doesn't work to my ears. He's a fiddle/violin player so may have relied on information from a plucked string player. -- Rocky To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[CITTERN] Re: Edvard Storm Ms.
Thanks for posting the sound file, Stuart. Nicely played! I thought the first section has some similarities to Van Eyck's Wat zalmen op den avond doen. Ruth van Braak Griffioen list a number of cognates, including German versions (Was wölln wir auf den Abend thun). Lute versions in German manuscripts include Hainhofer, Fabricius, Stobaeus, Adriaenssen and Thysius (Slaepen gaan), etc -- R On Nov 11, 2008, at 3:32 PM, Stuart Walsh wrote: Arthur Ness wrote: Stuart and Rob, I thought Rocky did a nice job, too. What do you make of the Wusch Englisch or Vush English tune? Do you recognized the tune? = wash or in dialect wish (Wunsch). Here's a simple rendition of the tune (I'm an amateur). It's played on a very humble, factory-made seven-string Russian guitar but tuned in the correct way. There's a strum on the open strings at the start to show the tuning - very soupy! I put a capo on (somewhat arbitrarily) to raise the pitch a bit, on the supposition that the intended instrument would have been smaller than a Russian guitar. Hope it gives some indication of the piece: http://www.pluckedturkeys.co.uk/Wusch_Englisch.mp3 Doesn't sound familiar at all. Doesn't sound particularly English. Almost Balcarres? Stuart To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[CITTERN] Re: Edvard Storm Ms.
Stuart Walsh wrote: Frank, it did appear on the vihuela list. Good. Apparently neither your original post nor my reply appeared on the cittern list though, so I suppose everybody here are a bit confused what it's all about right now. ;-) Quick summary: After I mentioned the Storm ms. here about a month ago (the 18th German Cittern Tuning thread - 29-09-08), Rocky Mjos contacted me for more info about it. I sent him scans of the cittern related pages I have copies of (all the music but none of the pages with playing instructions) and he took the job of transcribing the music, posting it at the earlyguitar ning: http://earlyguitar.ning.com/profile/RockyMjos At the moment there are still a few unanswered (and possibly unanswerable) questions about the music: what kind of cittern it was written for, how many courses it had, how it was tuned, what cittern tradition it belongs to etc. Stuart Walsh wrote: So what size instrument are we talking about? A small bell cittern or something bigger? We don't know if it was a bell cittern at all. The tuning intervals seems to suggest that but it still may have been any kind of European 18th C. cittern. Rocky gives a tuning with a top d'' which implies a small thing. Good point. Rocky's info is from an article describing the manuscript (sorry, can't remember the author at the moment). It's quite possible either that article of Storm himself got it an octave wrong. Ages ago you (Frank,or was it Are) said that Bellman had two citterns: a bell cittern from his grandfather and a smaller (!) instrument. Oh no, Bellman's second instrument was larger than his first with a bunch of extra theorbo style bass strings. We have absolutely no clue as to how Bellman tuned either of his citterns though (or maybe we have - let me think about this). In any case there doesn't seem to be any strong connection between Bellman and Storm so it may not be relevant. So there were larger bell citterns? I'm beginning to realise I know absolutely nothing about the Hamburger citrinchen. I've always thought of it as a kind of fancy shaped English guittar and never understood how small it really is. There was an 18th century bell cittern at least as big as a modern waldzither (probably close to a portuguese guitar in size) and at least sometimes with one or two extra bass strings in addition to the five double courses. It was known in Hamburg and in various places in Scandinavia. Is that news? I always thought that was the size of the Hamburger citrinchen. Here is a well-known painting of Carl Michael Bellman with his old bell cittern: http://hem.passagen.se/iblis/bellman.jpg Even allowing for the inexact propotions of a painting, this certainly isn't a small instrument. I wrote in an earlier post: Bellman played a six course bell cittern he had inherited from his grandfather through most of his career. Woops, seems it had *seven* courses! Sorry! And the Storm MS cittern is obviously for fingerstyle play but evidently the existing tablatures for the bell cittern imply plectrum technique (tiny pluckies usually do). Perhaps then the Storm MS is for a larger instrument? Good point. You will notice from the painting that Bellman too seems to have played with his fingers. In the Storm MS the instrument is described as 'zitter' but don't Norwegians use the term 'sister'? Sister is a fairly modern term, introduced to distinguish it from the alpine zither that appeared during the 19th century. I seem to remember that Germans called their cittern, the 'zitter' (but I can't find where I got this idea from.) Maybe cyster, sister,sittra, zitter, zither are just as interchangeable as guitar, guittar, cetra, citra etc in Britain. Yes. Does the tablature unambiguously show seven courses? .. Mm..interesting. So perhaps a fruitful and intriguing difference of opinion between your interpretation of the MS and Rocky's? Probably. Unfortunately the only way to answer the question properly is to locate Storm's cittern or the original he copied the music from. Unfortunately there's very little chance that'll happen. Rocky has interpreted the two different ways of notating bass notes as signifying two different bass strings. This is certainly what a transcriber should do - adding a note about the issue and leaving the decision to the interpreter. The problem is that this doesn't really seem to fit musically. Some bass notes are clearly wrong when played on a seventh rather than the sixth course. On the occasions where seventh course bass notes do fit the harmonies, they invariably lead to 2nd inversion chords that don't seem to fit any musical style that may be relevant in this context. Storm wasn't a professional musician but his piano compositions and arrangements show that he had a fairly good understanding of the basis harmonisation principles of his time. He certainly knew about chord inversions and wouldn't
