[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz
For these kinds of questions, the World Catalogue is always handy: http://www.worldcat.org/ Search under Gaspar Sanz to see all editions (there are many; filter using left column) See here for Zayas's edition. Includes facsimile acc. to description (scroll down): http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/18165067 AJN - Original Message - From: "Rockford Mjos" To: "Monica Hall" Cc: "Vihuelalist" Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 1:43 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Sanz De Zayas also published a transcription of Sanz (I can't remember how complete) over several issues of Guitar Review. Handwritten tablature and parallel transcription on single staff with noteheads both regular and square (indicating notes from the 4th and 5th courses and notated an octave higher than modern guitar tuning). The intent was to publish the complete works, issued intermittently. Guitar Review GR-40 (Winter 1976) contains introductory material then starts with Libro Primero [Part One] -- from "Passacalle" to "Passacalle sobre la D..Noviembre 1674". Guitar Review GR-42, continued with Part II -- with "Jacaras" and the D major "Canarios". I don't know if the project continued any further. -- R On Aug 6, 2012, at 9:19 AM, Peter Kooiman wrote: You are after the "Editorial Alpuerto" edition, facsimile + transcription by De Zayas. ISBN 8438100937 apparently. I do not have it myself, publisher's website is unhelpful. -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Monica Hall Sent: 06 August 2012 16:07 To: Vihuelalist Subject: [VIHUELA] Sanz Dear Collective Wisdom A couple of queries about Sanz. I have the facsimile published by the Instituto "Fernando el Catolico" in 1966. However there has been a more recent facsimile published. Can anyone give me the details of the publisher and date. It is actually on Amazon but they didn't seem to give the details. Also I believe Rodrigo de Zayas did a transcription of it. Does anyone have publication details of this. Thanks. Monica -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz
On 6 August 2012 21:23, Monica Hall wrote: > Incidentally - we have just beaten the Netherlands in some horse jumping > competition! I never jumped over a horse, fell off one once, though. David -- *** David van Ooijen davidvanooi...@gmail.com www.davidvanooijen.nl *** To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz
Thanks very much for the information and the offer - but I just wanted the reference for something I am writing. It seems that he did eventually get all of it published by Editorial Alpuerto - they also published his transcriptions of Ruiz de Ribayaz and Narvaez. Incidentally - we have just beaten the Netherlands in some horse jumping competition! Regards Monica - Original Message - From: "David van Ooijen" To: "Vihuelalist" Cc: "Monica Hall" Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 7:11 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Sanz On 6 August 2012 19:43, Rockford Mjos wrote: De Zayas also published a transcription of Sanz (I can't remember how with Libro Primero [Part One] -- from "Passacalle" to "Passacalle sobre la D..Noviembre 1674". Guitar Review GR-42, continued with Part II -- with "Jacaras" and the D major "Canarios". I have copies and can scan if you want. David -- *** David van Ooijen davidvanooi...@gmail.com www.davidvanooijen.nl *** To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz
On 6 August 2012 19:43, Rockford Mjos wrote: > De Zayas also published a transcription of Sanz (I can't remember how > with Libro Primero [Part One] -- from "Passacalle" to "Passacalle sobre la > D..Noviembre 1674". > Guitar Review GR-42, continued with Part II -- with "Jacaras" and the D > major "Canarios". I have copies and can scan if you want. David -- *** David van Ooijen davidvanooi...@gmail.com www.davidvanooijen.nl *** To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz
De Zayas also published a transcription of Sanz (I can't remember how complete) over several issues of Guitar Review. Handwritten tablature and parallel transcription on single staff with noteheads both regular and square (indicating notes from the 4th and 5th courses and notated an octave higher than modern guitar tuning). The intent was to publish the complete works, issued intermittently. Guitar Review GR-40 (Winter 1976) contains introductory material then starts with Libro Primero [Part One] -- from "Passacalle" to "Passacalle sobre la D..Noviembre 1674". Guitar Review GR-42, continued with Part II -- with "Jacaras" and the D major "Canarios". I don't know if the project continued any further. -- R On Aug 6, 2012, at 9:19 AM, Peter Kooiman wrote: You are after the "Editorial Alpuerto" edition, facsimile + transcription by De Zayas. ISBN 8438100937 apparently. I do not have it myself, publisher's website is unhelpful. -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Monica Hall Sent: 06 August 2012 16:07 To: Vihuelalist Subject: [VIHUELA] Sanz Dear Collective Wisdom A couple of queries about Sanz. I have the facsimile published by the Instituto "Fernando el Catolico" in 1966. However there has been a more recent facsimile published. Can anyone give me the details of the publisher and date. It is actually on Amazon but they didn't seem to give the details. Also I believe Rodrigo de Zayas did a transcription of it. Does anyone have publication details of this. Thanks. Monica -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz
You are after the "Editorial Alpuerto" edition, facsimile + transcription by De Zayas. ISBN 8438100937 apparently. I do not have it myself, publisher's website is unhelpful. -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Monica Hall Sent: 06 August 2012 16:07 To: Vihuelalist Subject: [VIHUELA] Sanz Dear Collective Wisdom A couple of queries about Sanz. I have the facsimile published by the Instituto "Fernando el Catolico" in 1966. However there has been a more recent facsimile published. Can anyone give me the details of the publisher and date. It is actually on Amazon but they didn't seem to give the details. Also I believe Rodrigo de Zayas did a transcription of it. Does anyone have publication details of this. Thanks. Monica -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz
I have the Minkoff of 1976 (Swiss francs ... ;-) David On 6 August 2012 16:06, Monica Hall wrote: >Dear Collective Wisdom > > > >A couple of queries about Sanz. > > > >I have the facsimile published by the Instituto "Fernando el Catolico" >in 1966. However there has been a more recent facsimile published. >Can anyone give me the details of the publisher and date. It is >actually on Amazon but they didn't seem to give the details. > > > >Also I believe Rodrigo de Zayas did a transcription of it. Does >anyone have publication details of this. > > > >Thanks. > > > >Monica > >-- > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- *** David van Ooijen davidvanooi...@gmail.com www.davidvanooijen.nl ***
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G
On Apr 26, 2008, at 2:08 AM, Rob MacKillop wrote: > and I imagine all manner of stringing, tuning and pitch was in use. It hardly requires imagination, since three stringing different configurations are known even before we start talking about high Gs, or guitars in nominal pitches other than E, which were evidently used in dance-band guitar consorts in the the 17th century. > I was trying to address whether a 'high g' was possible, and I > think it is if the general pitch is lowered. You mean lowered from 440? Since there are lots of historical lutes around with string lengths of, say, 67cm, and no reason to doubt that they were lutes in G with a first course at "high g," it's clear that high g on the guitar was possible. Whether it was common or not is another story. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G
Howard, I'm the guilty party re the statement that 'some say 460' for Roman pitch. I was quoting a harpsichord maker. But I agree that it is generally thought to be 392-ish, but string lengths on guitars seem to vary considerably, and I imagine all manner of stringing, tuning and pitch was in use. I was trying to address whether a 'high g' was possible, and I think it is if the general pitch is lowered. I have my guitar at 392. I do not use a gut high g on my own instrument, but did experiment with one on the French guitar in the Edinburgh University museum, with some success - no problem tuning and no breakage. So I hope to establish that it is not impossible to tune a guitar this way, especially if there are no bourdons, so no muddy bass to worry about. Whether Sanz or anyone else used this tuning, I cannot say. Rob -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G
Point taken about argument starting points. However, I'm not trying to establish a high 3rd on the guitar as a tuning definitely used by the Old Ones (or not): like the chimera of octave stringing on a theorbo's second course (a subject of an earlier thread and about which we disagree - I think), it may be possible but improbable (see Monica Hall's paper on guitar stringing which, I believe, summarises available evidence). In fact, a bit like Russell's celebrated conception of a flying saucer in orbit between the Earth and moon. MH PS Dear Howard, I'm having problems with emails through the list (= appearance of rogue =3D signs) - could you kindly let me know if your own c= opy suffers from similar problems. Ta. --- On Fri, 25/4/08, howard posner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&= gt; wrote: From: howard posner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G To: "Vihuela" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .dartmouth.edu> Date: Friday, 25 April, 2008, 7:49 PM On = Apr 25, 2008, at 7:16 AM, Martyn Hodgson wrote: > cannot we assume that, like with lutes, the first course of guitars = =20 > were pitched as high (or at least not too far off) as they co=3D =20 > uld reasonably bear. You can only assume this if you also assume the lack of a high octave =20 on the third course. Since the presence or lack of the high G is =20 what you're trying to establish, you have to assume your conclusion =20 in order to assume your premise. Someone in this thread (I saw it second-hand in Monica's post) =20 mentioned Roman pitch: > Some argue that Roman pitch was around > 392, others say it was nearer 460. I don't know anyone who argues that Roman pitch was ever higher than =20 A 415. Surviving 17th-century Roman organs are slightly lower than =20 392. Doni wrote in 1640 that the pitch of Roman organs had been =20 lowered a semitone in about (or since) 1600. Robert Smith wrote in =20 1749 that Roman organs in "about 1720" were pitched around 392. In =20 the early 18th century, Handel, Alessandro Scarlatti and Caldara =20 wrote the oboe parts for Roman performances that are written a whole-=20 tone below the other parts, which Bruce Haynes takes to mean the =20 oboes were at A 435 and everyone else was at A 384. See Haynes' A =20 History of Performing Pitch: the Story of "A" at pages 69-72, 167-168. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html =0A __ =0ASent from Yahoo! M= ail.=0A =0AA Smarter Email.
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G
On Apr 25, 2008, at 7:16 AM, Martyn Hodgson wrote: > cannot we assume that, like with lutes, the first course of guitars > were pitched as high (or at least not too far off) as they co= > uld reasonably bear. You can only assume this if you also assume the lack of a high octave on the third course. Since the presence or lack of the high G is what you're trying to establish, you have to assume your conclusion in order to assume your premise. Someone in this thread (I saw it second-hand in Monica's post) mentioned Roman pitch: > Some argue that Roman pitch was around > 392, others say it was nearer 460. I don't know anyone who argues that Roman pitch was ever higher than A 415. Surviving 17th-century Roman organs are slightly lower than 392. Doni wrote in 1640 that the pitch of Roman organs had been lowered a semitone in about (or since) 1600. Robert Smith wrote in 1749 that Roman organs in "about 1720" were pitched around 392. In the early 18th century, Handel, Alessandro Scarlatti and Caldara wrote the oboe parts for Roman performances that are written a whole- tone below the other parts, which Bruce Haynes takes to mean the oboes were at A 435 and everyone else was at A 384. See Haynes' A History of Performing Pitch: the Story of "A" at pages 69-72, 167-168. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G
Rob, I wasn't attacking Monica!. I was disagreeing with her. It's called debate. No offence taken I can assure you! Long may debate continue! Monica To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G
2008/4/25 Eugene C. Braig IV [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > I am fond of this position. > So am I... BTW, I've just uploaded Espanoletas: www.songoftherose.co.uk and included an Updates page for quick reference. I'd also like to publicly thank Alexander Batov for making such a great guitar! Rob -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G
At 07:33 AM 4/25/2008, Monica Hall wrote: >The reason why I get into scraps with people is because they think that >they can prove categorically that the way they want to play the music >themselves must be the way which the composer himself intended it to be >played - and that everyone who plays it differently is following the wrong >star. > >This is a falllacy from the start - it pre-supposes that composers >intended their music to be played in a very specific way, always played it >that way themselves, and would object to anyone playing it differently. > >This is certainly not the case in our own time, and it is unlikely that >it was the case in the 17th century. > >Enough for now (but thanks to those who seemed to support my position). I am fond of this position. Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G
Well I disagree with Monica. As she says quite openly, she is philosophising, and so it's not a question of her knowledge of just about everything there is to know about the Baroque guitar and its music. Just so - I wouldn't claim to know everything there is to know about the baroque guitar and its music! Or anything else. Monica's position is rather like mysterianism in the philosophy of mind. It's all just one big mystery: the stringing , the tuning, the performance practice of the seventeenth century guitarists- the existing evidence points anywhere and nowhere. No definitive conclusions (she philosophises) can ever be drawn. Why should that be a problem? There are no easy answers to any of these questions. The problem (to me) is that so many simplistic theories are put forward by people who don't seem to have the necessary skills to evaluate the evidence realistically. To quote just two - 1.because Sanz says that guitarists in Rome used the re-entrant tuning whilst in Spain it was customary to use octave stringing - all guitarists in Rome must have always used re-entrant tunings and all guitarists in Spain, octave stringing. Rome was a large city and he can't have met every guitarist residing there in the 1660s. Spain is a vast country, which consisted of several distinct provinces. Sanz can't possibly have known what every guitarist in Spain did. They are very general observations based on his own experience. He doesn't even say that his music shold be played with any specific method of stringing. 2.The "French" tuning isn't mentioned before 1670 - therefore it was "new" in 1670 - which is bollocks. Let me quote something else which Ray Nurse says which seems to me to be very significant. "Musicology is a historical science and has ends which are quite different from those of performers, however useful that science may be to performers." So if the seventeenth century guitarists are hidden away in their world, it's no surprise that Monica thinks that: "we can only play the music in a way that makes sense to us today" Now this is either a harmless truism or a trenchantly radical position. No wonder she gets into scraps with people! The reason why I get into scraps with people is because they think that they can prove categorically that the way they want to play the music themselves must be the way which the composer himself intended it to be played - and that everyone who plays it differently is following the wrong star. This is a falllacy from the start - it pre-supposes that composers intended their music to be played in a very specific way, always played it that way themselves, and would object to anyone playing it differently. This is certainly not the case in our own time, and it is unlikely that it was the case in the 17th century. Enough for now (but thanks to those who seemed to support my position). Monica Stuart 2008/4/24 Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Well There is some doubt as to whether it would have been practical to put a high octave string on the 3rd course - tuned a minor 3rd above the 1st - with the kind of gut strings available in the 17th century. And without doing a detailed analysis - I guess you could make an equally strong case for octave stringing on the 4th and 5th courses in this piece. Indeed someone has done in the past. I would say that whichever method of stringing you use there are idiocyncracies of one sort or another which it is impossible to resolve. That is the attraction of the instrument. I have just been reading Ed Durbrow's interview with Ray Nurse in LSA quarterly and I particularly liked the bit where he say "Their performance situation was different (from ours) they ate different food and smelled worse than we do, they burnt heretics and believed that the earth was the centre of the universe!" (and a lot of other things that seem totally illogical to us today judging by the programmes on the "Medieval Mind" currently showing on BBC4 over here. Their world was certainly different from ours and they had fewer choices than we have. But don't let my philosophizing deter you from playing the music with any method of stringing you fancy. We can only play the music in a way that makes sense to us today. Monica - Original Message - From: "Rob MacKillop" < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Vihuela" Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 8:19 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Sanz and the High G Here are two versions of Gaspar Sanz's Fuga 1: a) no bourdons and unison third course: http://www.songoftherose.co.uk/mp3/bg/sanz/RobMacKillopSanzFuga1.mp3 b) no bourdons and high octave third course - the highest octave on the thumb side: http://www.rmguitar.info/mp3s/Rfuga.mp3 (on an original instrument, mid-17thC) Now, Sanz stipulates (Cf http://www.monicahall.co.uk/) bourdons for strummed music and no bourdons for plucked music. Nowhere does he say 'use a high o
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G
Sorry, two corrections: 1. The guitar is from mid-18th not 17th century - at least according to the catalogue 2. I do know how to spell anonymous! Rob 2008/4/25 Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi Martyn, > > A 'deliterious effect in the bass', maybe, but there is no bass below the > g, at least in Sanz's specified tuning. So, no, Martyn, I did not use modern > bass strings. Another important factor is that Sanz does not mention pitch > - we have no idea what pitch he used. Some argue that Roman pitch was around > 392, others say it was nearer 460. We don't know his string length. We don't > know if he used different sizes and pitches of guitars. We cannot assume > that all his works are for the same instrument. All we have to go on is the > music, and what we can read into it. > The recording with the high octave g was done 5 years or so ago on an > original anonimous guitar from mid-17thC France (it is thought) with a short > string length (can't recall the exact length). It was entirely strung in > gut, tuned to around 392, no bourdons, therefore no bass. The high g did not > break, and although unplayed is still, I believe, on the instrument. It is > housed in the collection of Edinburgh University. > > So, at a lower pitch and no bass register, it might well be possible to > have a high octave on the third. How long it would last when regularly > played has not been tested by me. > > However, I don't want to be seen to be advocating the tuning as I am not > one who thinks that Sanz only makes sense with it. I repeat that I am happy > playing works which leap up and down octaves, and see it as part of the > charm and uniqueness of the instrument. But it is worth mentioning that a) > the tuning with a high ''g'' is possible (nominal g, of course), and b) that > the particular piece 'fuga 1' seems to be 'happiest' (if you will allow me > that term) with this tuning. But mainly my stance is that 'I don't know'. > > Rob > -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G
Hi Martyn, A 'deliterious effect in the bass', maybe, but there is no bass below the g, at least in Sanz's specified tuning. So, no, Martyn, I did not use modern bass strings. Another important factor is that Sanz does not mention pitch - we have no idea what pitch he used. Some argue that Roman pitch was around 392, others say it was nearer 460. We don't know his string length. We don't know if he used different sizes and pitches of guitars. We cannot assume that all his works are for the same instrument. All we have to go on is the music, and what we can read into it. The recording with the high octave g was done 5 years or so ago on an original anonimous guitar from mid-17thC France (it is thought) with a short string length (can't recall the exact length). It was entirely strung in gut, tuned to around 392, no bourdons, therefore no bass. The high g did not break, and although unplayed is still, I believe, on the instrument. It is housed in the collection of Edinburgh University. So, at a lower pitch and no bass register, it might well be possible to have a high octave on the third. How long it would last when regularly played has not been tested by me. However, I don't want to be seen to be advocating the tuning as I am not one who thinks that Sanz only makes sense with it. I repeat that I am happy playing works which leap up and down octaves, and see it as part of the charm and uniqueness of the instrument. But it is worth mentioning that a) the tuning with a high ''g'' is possible (nominal g, of course), and b) that the particular piece 'fuga 1' seems to be 'happiest' (if you will allow me that term) with this tuning. But mainly my stance is that 'I don't know'. Rob -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G
Dear Rob, How exactly is your guitar strung?. Presumably you are obliged to lower = the general pitch of the instrument (say a minor third or so) to avoi= d frequent string breakages of a high third course. A gene= ral lowering of pitch will have a deliterious effect in the 'bass' register= which might not be to everyone's taste. This, of course, assumes you= 're using just gut throughout: with wound strings in the basses or mo= dern high tensile strings on the high third course, all sorts of things bec= ome possible. In practice, I've found that whatever tuning is used there's always some= thoeretical anomaly in the continuity of the 'bass' line - this is surely = a particular characteristic and, indeed, charm of the instrument. Martyn --- On Thu, 24/4/08, Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ooglemail.com> wrote: From: Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>= ; Subject: [VIHUELA] Sanz and the High G To: "Vihuela" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .dartmouth.edu> Date: Thursday, 24 April, 2008, 8:19 PM H= ere are two versions of Gaspar Sanz's Fuga 1: a) no bourdons and unison third course: http://www.songoftherose.co.uk/mp3/bg/sanz/RobMacKillopSanzFuga1.mp3 b) no bourdons and high octave third course - the highest octave on the thumb side: http://www.rmguitar.info/mp3s/Rfuga.mp3 (on an original instrument, mid-17thC) Now, Sanz stipulates (Cf http://www.monicahall.co.uk/) bourdons for strumme= d music and no bourdons for plucked music. Nowhere does he say 'use a high octave pairing on the third course'. We've had a few debates on this list about bourdons and high ocatves, and I've always accepted that Sanz should be played with unison third course and no bourdons, but this fuga makes me wonder. In the vast majority of Sanz's music we meet moments where lines leap about in octaves, and it never bothers me - I quite like it, in fact; it seems to be part of the charm of the instrument. However, when it comes to this fuga...almost every line makes musical sense, EVERY line, with the high octave on the third, but not so with unison third: this really stretches the bounds of musicality, not just to our own aestehtics, but to what was around Sanz at the time. Someone like Sanz would have had many different guitars - different stringing arrangements, different construction, even different pitches. Is it not reasonable to suggest that one of these guitars might have had a hig= h g, but the guitar he used most for punteado style had a unison g? This fuga sits perfectly on a guitar with a high octave third course. Cue Monica... Rob PS Monica - I agree with everything you say on the subject of stringing, bu= t this particular piece... -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html =0A __ =0ASent from Yaho= o! Mail.=0A =0AA Smarter Email.
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G
2008/4/24 howard posner [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > > To be fair, I think Monica was trying to avoid one here by not > reiterating her position on the high G octave string. > I agree, Howard. I'm sorry Stuart used my light-hearted bantering as a platform for raising an attack on Monica. I actually agree with her. Rob -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G
On Apr 24, 2008, at 3:36 PM, Stuart Walsh wrote: > Monica's position is rather like mysterianism in the philosophy > of mind. It's all just one big mystery: the stringing , the > tuning, the performance practice of the seventeenth century > guitarists- the existing evidence points anywhere and nowhere. No > definitive conclusions (she philosophises) can ever be drawn. > > So if the seventeenth century guitarists are hidden away in their > world, it's no surprise that Monica thinks that: > > "we can only play the music in a way that makes sense to us today" > > Now this is either a harmless truism or a trenchantly radical > position. No wonder she gets into scraps with people! To be fair, I think Monica was trying to avoid one here by not reiterating her position on the high G octave string. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz and the High G
Phew! I got off lightly there, Monica. ;-) I'd better back out now... Rob PS I still agree with you 2008/4/24 Monica Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Well > > There is some doubt as to whether it would have been practical to put a > high octave string on the 3rd course - tuned a minor 3rd above the 1st - > with the kind of gut strings available in the 17th century. > > And without doing a detailed analysis - I guess you could make an equally > strong case for octave stringing on the 4th and 5th courses in this piece. > Indeed someone has done in the past. > > I would say that whichever method of stringing you use there are > idiocyncracies of one sort or another which it is impossible to resolve. > That is the attraction of the instrument. > > I have just been reading Ed Durbrow's interview with Ray Nurse in LSA > quarterly and I particularly liked the bit where he say > > "Their performance situation was different (from ours) they ate different > food and smelled worse than we do, they burnt heretics and believed that the > earth was the centre of the universe!" (and a lot of other things that > seem totally illogical to us today judging by the programmes on the > "Medieval Mind" currently showing on BBC4 over here. > > Their world was certainly different from ours and they had fewer choices > than we have. > > But don't let my philosophizing deter you from playing the music with any > method of stringing you fancy. We can only play the music in a way that > makes sense to us today. > > Monica > > > > > - Original Message - From: "Rob MacKillop" < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Vihuela" > Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 8:19 PM > Subject: [VIHUELA] Sanz and the High G > > > Here are two versions of Gaspar Sanz's Fuga 1: >> >> a) no bourdons and unison third course: >> http://www.songoftherose.co.uk/mp3/bg/sanz/RobMacKillopSanzFuga1.mp3 >> >> b) no bourdons and high octave third course - the highest octave on the >> thumb side: http://www.rmguitar.info/mp3s/Rfuga.mp3 (on an original >> instrument, mid-17thC) >> >> Now, Sanz stipulates (Cf http://www.monicahall.co.uk/) bourdons for >> strummed >> music and no bourdons for plucked music. Nowhere does he say 'use a high >> octave pairing on the third course'. We've had a few debates on this list >> about bourdons and high ocatves, and I've always accepted that Sanz should >> be played with unison third course and no bourdons, but this fuga makes me >> wonder. In the vast majority of Sanz's music we meet moments where lines >> leap about in octaves, and it never bothers me - I quite like it, in fact; >> it seems to be part of the charm of the instrument. However, when it comes >> to this fuga...almost every line makes musical sense, EVERY line, with the >> high octave on the third, but not so with unison third: this really >> stretches the bounds of musicality, not just to our own aestehtics, but to >> what was around Sanz at the time. >> >> Someone like Sanz would have had many different guitars - different >> stringing arrangements, different construction, even different pitches. Is >> it not reasonable to suggest that one of these guitars might have had a >> high >> g, but the guitar he used most for punteado style had a unison g? This >> fuga >> sits perfectly on a guitar with a high octave third course. >> >> Cue Monica... >> Rob >> PS Monica - I agree with everything you say on the subject of stringing, >> but >> this particular piece... >> >> -- >> >> To get on or off this list see list information at >> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >> > > --
[VIHUELA] Re: sanz on charango
I don't know about charangos - but Sanz has made it into the top ten in Classic FM's Hall of Fame, played by Xavier Diaz Latorre - using the re-entrant tuning too. Evidently listeners who vote for these things don't find the absence of a bass line a problem. Monica - Original Message - From: "bill kilpatrick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 12:28 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] sanz on charango > from robert quiggle: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9imB3lhGmlM > > http://billkilpatrickhaiku.blogspot.com/ > > > ___ > Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Try > it > now. > http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/ > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz uploads
I would like to hear that, Arto. Rob -Original Message- From: Arto Wikla [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 04 November 2005 21:57 To: Rob MacKillop Cc: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Sanz uploads Dear Rob, you wrote among other matters: > Your comment about the bray harp (see below) is an interesting one. > For those who are unaware, the 'bray' refers to a bit of wood on the > soundboard of a Renaissance harp which touched the string gently. As > the string was struck it would buzz as it hit against the block. This > was the standard . > So far I have not heard of one lute player who has tried to recreate > this sound - does anyone know someone who has? Many years ago I recorded a CD with the ensemble Poor Knights, where I played some solo pieces. In one of the "Branles of Village" by Besardus I put a piece of paper touching gently on the bass strings to create just this "bray" effect of renaissance harp. The bass of the piece is just a jumping borduna. And "buzzes" well. :) I guess the CD is not anymore available, but I could try to make a file of the CD track, if you are interested. (Well, how to make that? :) All the best, Arto To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz uploads
Dear Rob, you wrote among other matters: > Your comment about the bray harp (see below) is an interesting one. For > those who are unaware, the 'bray' refers to a bit of wood on the soundboard > of a Renaissance harp which touched the string gently. As the string was > struck it would buzz as it hit against the block. This was the standard .. > So far I have not heard of one lute player who has tried to > recreate this sound - does anyone know someone who has? Many years ago I recorded a CD with the ensemble Poor Knights, where I played some solo pieces. In one of the "Branles of Village" by Besardus I put a piece of paper touching gently on the bass strings to create just this "bray" effect of renaissance harp. The bass of the piece is just a jumping borduna. And "buzzes" well. :) I guess the CD is not anymore available, but I could try to make a file of the CD track, if you are interested. (Well, how to make that? :) All the best, Arto To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz uploads
Eugene, Your comment about the bray harp (see below) is an interesting one. For those who are unaware, the 'bray' refers to a bit of wood on the soundboard of a Renaissance harp which touched the string gently. As the string was struck it would buzz as it hit against the block. This was the standard sound of the harp during the Renaissance period, although you wouldn't guess that from all the mellifluous-sounding harps we usually hear. I was fortunate enough to have a duo with William Taylor, one of the very few specialists in bray harp playing. The point of all this has nothing to do with vihuelas or baroque guitars, but it is thought by some scholars that the lute was set up in a similar fashion - Francesco and Capirola spring to mind - either with a very low action or with 'pins' touching the string at the bridge. The reasoning behind this sound was so that the notes would cut through in ensemble playing. So far I have not heard of one lute player who has tried to recreate this sound - does anyone know someone who has? So maybe the buzzing baroque guitar of my recordings is not too far off the path? Maybe someone will send this email to the lute list?! Rob -Original Message- From: Eugene C. Braig IV [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] and the guitar doubles as a bray harp. Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz uploads
That was an experiment with a high g octave on the 3rd course and no bourdons anywhere. I would not use a high g again, despite having fun with it. I've never had a baroque guitar. I had to practice the piece on a classical guitar, and only got to play that instrument on the day of the recording. Crazy. It was a disc for Edinburgh University Collection of Historic Instruments. I had one week to choose and learn all the repertoire and only two hours to practice five instruments. The Sanz is the 'best of' that recording, which I don't encourage anyone to buy... Rob -Original Message- From: Eugene C. Braig IV [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Very nice playing, and the guitar doubles as a bray harp. How did you tune: sans octave? (Please pardon the semi-French semi-pun.) Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Sanz uploads
At 03:20 AM 11/4/2005, Rob MacKillop wrote: >I've uploaded some Gaspar Sanz MP3 files to www.musicintime.co.uk/sounds.htm >- scroll to the bottom of the poage. They were played on an original 5c >guitar, possibly by Santo Seraphin (?). The guitar was in a bad state. No >attempt was made to correct its problems, especially the far too low action. >Lots of buzzes. You have been warned. Very nice playing, and the guitar doubles as a bray harp. How did you tune: sans octave? (Please pardon the semi-French semi-pun.) Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
