On 07/09/2010 08:33, Martyn Hodgson wrote:
Well you may not read this Monica but someone might who can enlighten
us as to why Foscarini in particular uses two distinct notations for IN
THE SAME PIECE if they are to be played in precisely the same way! And
no, you haven't really explained this since the idea that flags do not
'indicate the rhythm' satisfactorily is simply not true.
This is quite a tortuous thread. I don't think we should get too cross
with each other for not meticulously reading other people's messages.
I've noticed in other discussions that some things I've written
obviously haven't been read by some other contributors. And when I write
something I often haven't meticulously read the relevant message I'm
replying too. (Like now!)
Martyn, are you talking about La Favorita on p.60? This:
(Surely Monica has given her response to this. She claims it's a result
of an evolving notation; mature 'mixed notation' hadn't been invented yet!)
Monica's interpretation of this piece - and discussion of the issues:
(page 36 - bit page 55 of the pdf)
Anyway, if it La Favorita, it's quite clear that it's not at all clear:
no bar lines, no indication that the first chord is,or is not, the first
beat of the bar etc. Monica's interpretation and transcription of this
piece seems very convincing. Here's a very rough and ready go at the
first section (16 bars, too!) on a very poor instrument (the single
notes don't shine out at all) and an instrument with bourdons.
Monica has made a tremendous effort in trying to make these pieces playable.
(I've been playing other instruments recently and I'd forgotten just
how difficult some of these guitar chords can be. (Especially Ms))
Anyway, Martyn, I think you are saying that some of these single notes,
notated with a strum (and/or rhythm sign) could or should be played
along with the preceding chord. I don't know how you would do that with
bar 1 (Monica's edition) but it would be easy to do at bar 6, 7 and 12.
But Monica says that Foscarini expressly says not to in one his rules
(mentioning La Favorita) and thereby establishing a principle.
Either way, it's not gong to make a huge difference, is it?
--- On Mon, 6/9/10, Monica Hall<mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
From: Monica Hall<mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Partial strums in Foscarini (was
To: "Martyn Hodgson"<hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk>
Date: Monday, 6 September, 2010, 16:29
I am afraid I am not prepared to waste any more time arguing about
this. If you think you know better than anyone else you can translate
the Italian into English yourself. The term he uses is "botte" which
I have already explained why he is inconsistent in his use of note
values. Corbetta also puts in note values as well as strokes. As do
many of the earlier books.
The reason why I lose my cool is because there are some people on this
list who are unable to admit that they are ever wrong and try to impose
their views regardless. What do you expect me to do? Turn round and
say "Oh yes - I think you are right" after having given the matter a
lot of thought and played
much of the music. I find that patronising.
I am not going to follow Lex and storm off the list but I am going to
take a break. I have better things to do with my time.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Martyn Hodgson"
To: "Monica Hall"<mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk>
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 4:00 PM
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Partial strums in Foscarini (was
> Well.... You've given the translation before (and I presume it is
> unequivocal in referring to the relevant slashes rather than flags
> their respective places in the piece on p 60?) and whilst I noted
> seems to be being said, the real problem remains that in some
> notates these 'single' notes in two different ways - as already
> mentioned in the Balletto Polacco page 19 for example.
> If the slash/stroke is to be applied so universally as you suggest
> he expects this specific rule to be applied generally in all his
> pieces) why does he bother to show 'single' note quavers in two
> distinct ways in the same piece? You say that just flags alone
> 'indicate the rhythm' and imply that the slashes/strokes do, but
> really perfectly clear with just flags above the system - in
> compare the opening of both first and second halves with their
> slashes with the single notes indicated by flags later on in the
> halves. It is very difficult to escape the view that the two
> ways of notating single note quavers do not imply some difference
> playing (in this piece the opening 'single' notated notes played
> partial strum/brush and the later plucked), but you'd have them
> exactly the same.
> Incidentally I don't see that a partial/discriminatory strum does
> allow 'a coherent melodic line' to be created; you might as well
> that, for example, 43 cadences in all guitar music should always
> plucked to ensure the melodic line is 'created'.
> --- On Mon, 6/9/10, Monica Hall<mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> From: Monica Hall<mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Partial strums in Foscarini (was
> To: "Martyn Hodgson"<hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk>
> Cc: "Vihuelalist"<vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu>
> Date: Monday, 6 September, 2010, 15:05
> If you are saying that as a general principal you might not always
> all 5 courses in a chord when repeating it on the upstroke then I
> problem with that. However when Foscarini puts a stroke mark
> single figure following a chord or in between two chords I
> think he has made it clear in Rule 4 that usually a single note
> played. To repeat what he says again...
> "These must be played singly; that is to say you must pluck neither
> less nor more strings than those which are shown. In this way the
> true effect of the ornamental notes will be felt and the parts
> follow clearly one after the other which is what I intend."
> His reasons for saying this are perfectly clear. It creates a
> coherent melodic line.
> The fact that he puts in the note values a well (although he
> always do so) is another matter. These are necessary to indicate
> What he is doing is combining two different practices. The
> practice of indicating the single notes between the chords with
> upstrokes whilst following the later practice of omitting stroke
> from more extended passages in lute style.
> Indicating single notes or longer passages only by means of note
> must have been a recent innovation - possibly even his idea.
> As far as the Corrente on p.60 is concerned he has specifically
> mentioned this piece as being one where the passing notes should be
> treated as single notes.
> The reason why in the first few lines there are up and down strokes
> probably because he is imposing on the piece the stroke pattern
> would be appropriate if the piece consisted solely of 5-part
> which are to be strummed.
> We are at least in complete agreement over the barre question. I
> afraid Lex does not know what he is talking about. Brizeno
> the equivalent of Chords G and H as well as other barre chords.
> Tyler has included a transcription from the Bologna manuscript -
> the earliest (1680s) with alfabeto and this calls for the use of
> G. There is a hidden agenda to all this. He wants to prove the
> guitar always had octave stringing on both the 4th and 5th courses.
> The idea that the 6th course wasn't added until quite late because
> guitar had a re-entrant tuning doesn't fit in with his theories.
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Martyn Hodgson"
> To: "Vihuelalist"<vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu>; "Monica Hall"
> Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 9:11 AM
> Subject: [VIHUELA] Partial strums in Foscarini (was
> > Dear Monica,
> > Yes, indeed, the passacaille on f72v if of Italian origin -
> > precisely why I choose it to demonstrate the point that having
> > notes both with flags above the stave AND single notes with
> > (strokes) on the stave showed that this source expected partial
> > ('discriminatory' as I prefer to call it) strumming when only
> > notes are shown after a chord.
> > I think the light it sheds on Foscarini is that some of the
> > slashes(strokes) on single notes after a chord in his works
> > equally well played with a partial strum as well as just single
> > which is, of course, my point from the outset. And, as you'll
> > Foscarini himself shows single note play both by slashes AND by
> > stave flags in the same piece (random search produces many -
> > is on p 19 of first book). It's pleasing that we seem to be
> > some measure of agreement over this.
> > I think some of the confusion may have been because you were
> > to Lex's somewhat different points at the same time as
> > mine.... Re communications with Lex, my only input into this
> > point out that, contrary to a stated view that the 'barre' only
> > widespread (especially in higher positions) with the advent of
> > string guitar, in fact early practice was to be very fluent
> > use of 'barre' in movable alfabeto chords and gave examples
> > Valdambrini's (1646) use even up to fret 11!
> > rgds
> > Martyn
> > --- On Sun, 5/9/10, Monica Hall<mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk>
> > From: Monica Hall<mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk>
> > Subject: Foscarini/Gallot
> > To: "Vihuelalist"<vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu>
> > Cc: "Martyn Hodgson"<hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk>
> > Date: Sunday, 5 September, 2010, 16:24
> > Sorry I only just got around to this. The passacaille on f72v
> > of the other pieces seem to have been copied by Gallot or his
> > Monnier from a source in Italian tab.and converted into
> French. In
> > this particular piece the alfabeto chords have been left in
> > rather than converted. But the Chaconne on f.78v most of
> > actually by Corbetta is all in French tab. Gallot seems to be
> > inconsistent in the way he notes the strums sometimes using the
> > way putting the note values on the stave with tails up or down,
> > others putting stroke marks down or up from the top line. He
> > fairly clearly put the note values above the stave when these
> > played as single notes. Clearly some of the strummed chords
> consist of
> > less than 5 courses.
> > There are places where auxiliary/passing notes are added and
> > over the same chord e.g. the cadence at the end ot the second
> > where a 4-3 suspension is added to Chord I . In the fourth
> > there is a b on the first line following Chord D which is a
> > note which could either be included in Chord D as it is
> (it is
> > just possible) or played as a single note. But he doesn't seem
> > this very often.
> > I am not sure that this really sheds any light on Foscarini as
> > doesn't always make a very clear distinction between chords to
> > strummed in full and single notes. He has clearly said that
> > like that in the Corrente on p.60 are to be played as single
> > If you are going to insist that because he has put in stroke
> > how or other the chords must be strummed then I don't really
> > There are other legitimate reasons why he has put in stroke
> marks. A
> > better example of this is the Aria di Firenze on p.16. To
> > Boye
> > "Here single notes are attached to upstrokes even though they
> to be
> > plucked not strummed. The use of the upstroke symbol can be
> > be the need for horizontal separation of the numbers".
> > The music would sometimes be unintelligible without the stroke
> > And there are lots of places where it does help to have
> > makes the music easier to read. The stroke marks may be used
> > purposes other than to indicate strumming.
> > Regards
> > Monica
> > You also ask 'What sort of evidence is there for this sort of
> > discriminatory play anyway?'. Which is rather begging the
> question -
> > if
> > it were crystal clear we'd not be joined in debate over this
> > issue.
> > As far as I'm concerned it is the original sources which are
> > starting point which is the start and a good source is the
> > MS. Numerous pieces intabulate chords followed by single
> > with
> > an up or down slash on the top line as in the Foscarini we
> > (a
> > down or up strum/brush I suggest) but in the same piece one
> > find a chord (with slash) followed by tablature with the
> > the
> > stave - whiich I suggest certainly does mean play this alone
> > single
> > notes. In short the same piece will often contain both
> > strummed/brushed single notes with accompanying chord and
> > notes
> > played alone. Numerous examples - eg Pasacaille on page 72.
> > As already said, Corbetta's stricture also indicates
> > such
> > passing notes with part of the accompanying chord was not
> > Martyn
> > --
> > To get on or off this list see list information at
> > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
> 8. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html