Dear Monica,

   Further to my last I've now got round to reading the rest of yr email.
   And can thus respond to the matters you raised

   Firsly when you wrote

   "it In the first bar of the Balletto Polacco on p.19 it is physically
   impossible to include the 5 following G3 in the chord as you repeat
   it and it is impossible to play a trill on Chord G anyway.   It is
   just possible to include the 8 in chord M5 using a 4th finger hinge
   barre
   if you really must.  The 8 following Chord H5 is to be included in
   the first chord and resolved in the second. I think Fosco does have
   some logic to his notation and is clearly    indicating the way his
   music should be played.   But it is quite different from Martyn's"

   REPLY:

   1. It's only physically impossible if you think all 5 courses must
   ALWAYS be strummed/brushed - surely other sources tell us this was not
   always the case: Bartolotti for example who, whilst of course being
   later, describes partial chords and this MAY have been an earlier
   assumed practice. Thus to play the 5 with the G chord you use the
   fourth finger to stop the 5 and just upstroke the highest 3 courses
   (what I call 'partial' or 'discriminatory' play).   BUT I agree the
   trill On 5 couldn't be played this way so I'm quite happy to agree this
   single note is plucked!

   2. Your other examples do indeed show how possible it is to play this
   with strums. And, yes, of course we assume the 43 cadence on H5 -
   strummed is good here.

   3. The general point in introducing this particular piece as an example
   was to illustrate that Foscarini was quite able to notate single notes
   with just flags without recourse to additional unecessary notation (the
   strokes/slashes). It continues to intrigue me.....see below

   Following on from 3, your other comment is " When the passing notes are
   between strummed alfabeto chords like this he puts in stroke marks to
   separate the single notes from the chords."

   REPLY

   4. In response to this let me draw your attention to another passage I
   mentioned earlier: the sequence at the beginning of the penultimate
   line of the Balletto starting with the + chord. Here he seems quite
   able to accurately notate a single plucked note inbetween alfabeto
   chords without this additional (redundant) slash.  Your comment above
   would have required him to insert another stroke/slash for the single
   note.....

   All good stuff - I'm enjoying playing him

   Martyn
   --- On Wed, 8/9/10, Martyn Hodgson <hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

     From: Martyn Hodgson <hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk>
     Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: [Vihuela]Foscarini's notation
     To: "Vihuelalist" <vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu>, "Monica Hall"
     <mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk>
     Date: Wednesday, 8 September, 2010, 7:57

      Good to hear you again Monica.
      As you'll not be surprised to know, I suggest there is a fourth
   option
      to the list of possible reasons for F writing strokes/slashes:
         1.    He intends the notes to be played alternating thumb and
   finger
         2.    He intends them to be played "dedillo"
         3.    He is simply imposing the stroke pattern on the notes which
      would
         be appropriate if the alfabeto chord were simply to be repeated
      without
         passing notes.
         4.   He intends a partial (discriminatory) strum - if not in La
      Favorita then in other pieces in the collection and as found in
   other
      sources (such as the de Gallot looked at earlier).
      regards
      Martyn
      --- On Tue, 7/9/10, Monica Hall <[1]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
        From: Monica Hall <[2]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk>
        Subject: [VIHUELA] [Vihuela]Foscarini's notation
        To: "Vihuelalist" <[3]vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu>
        Date: Tuesday, 7 September, 2010, 17:32
         As I have in fact received some of these message off the list it
      seems
         inevitable that I should rejoin to put the record straight as I
      think
         you are barking up the wrong tree.
         In the first bar of the Balletto Polacco on p.19 it is physically
         impossible to include the 5 following G3 in the chord as you
   repeat
      it
         and it is impossible to play a trill on Chord G anyway.   It is
   just
         possible to include the 8 in chord M5 using a 4th finger hinge
   barre
      if
         you really must.  The 8 following Chord H5 is to be included in
   the
         first chord and resolved in the second.
         I think Fosco does have some logic to his notation and is clearly
         indicating the way his music should be played.   But it is quite
         different from Martyn's.  When the passing notes are between
      strummed
         alfabeto chords like this he puts in stroke marks to separate
         the single notes from the chords.  This is also necessary because
   he
         needs to distinguish between what appear to be single notes which
      are
         to be included in the chord like the 8 following the H5 and those
      which
         are not to be inserted.  This is how music entirely in alfabeto
   is
         notated.   Otherwise  he would need to put a note value above the
      stave
         for each alternate single  note.
         This dual system is not because Foscarini does not know how to
   use
      his
         tablature.   Rather he is combining two different types of
         tablature logically  in music which is in mixed style at a very
      early
         stage in its development.
         In the corrente on p.60 it is impossible to include the passing
      notes
         in the chords in at least two places.  There are at least three
      reasons
         why Fosco may have put in up and down strokes on the first line
      which
         have nothing to do with strumming the chords.
         1.    He intends the notes to be played alternating thumb and
   finger
         2.    He intends them to be played "dedillo"
         3.    He is simply imposing the stroke pattern on the notes which
      would
         be appropriate if the alfabeto chord were simply to be repeated
      without
         passing notes.
         I think the last is the most likely.
         Finally the main reason for wanting to drop out of the discussion
   at
         this point is because it is a constant distraction to keep
   receiving
         E-mails which need to be responded to fairly promptly if the
      discussion
         is to follow a logical course.  This often involves checking
   sources
         and other files for information and spending a great deal of time
         trying to explain very complex issues without the aid of
      illustrations
         or musical examples.   I prefer to deal with my E-mails once a
   day
      so
         don't expect to hear from me again until tomorrow.
         A complete translation of Fosco's introduction with illustrations
      etc.
         is on my webpage - [1]www.monicahall.co.uk  which makes it all
   the
      more
         pointless to go over it again.   I am currently working on the
         introduction to Corbetta's 1639 book which sheds a lot more light
   on
         how guitar notation developed.  I have temporarily put  on my
   page
      at
         [2]www.earlyguitar.ning.com the passage which deals with the same
         situations which you find in Foscarini with examples of
   Corbetta's
         notation.  It is in the section for Scores - at the top of the
   list.
         Finally in one of my previous messages I refered to the Bologna
         manuscript which includes some alfabeto songs and gave the date
   as
         1680s. It should of course have been 1580s.
         Monica
         ----- Original Message -----
         From: [3]Martyn Hodgson
         To: [4]Stuart Walsh
         Cc: [5]Monica Hall ; [6]Vihuelalist
         Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 12:26 PM
         Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Why two notations for the same play?
         Thanks for this Stuart.
         I was rather surprised by Monica; particularly since I've
   frequently
         praised her work and we were, so I thought, simply seeking a
      scholarly
         explanation to fit all the principal evidence. As you say,
         misunderstandings can easily arise during a long thread by not
      reading
         everything written.
         The problem still remains as summarised below and best seen by
      looking
         at the Balletto Pollaca on p.19 (moved on from La Favorita)
   where
         'single' note passages are notated in two distinct ways which I
      suggest
         may indicate different ways of playing and Monica believes are
      always
         meant to be played exactly the same (if I understand her aright).
      I'm
         not at all convinced that the use of different notation to
   achieve
      an
         identical outcome is a result of Foscarini not understanding how
   to
         write his tablature.
         Also note particularly in the Balletto Pollaca that both halves
      start
         off with strummed chords with some single passing notes with
   these
         slashes/strokes and then half way through each half we have
   passages
      of
         quavers notated by ordinary tablature flags.  Foscarini also
   seems
         quite able to make other subtle distinctions in his tablature
      elsewhere
         in this (and other) pieces. For example, look at the penultimate
      line:
         we get a sequence from the + chord (down/quaver up strum) plucked
         quaver open 4th course etc,  but after the D chord the first
   quaver
      is
         plucked not strummed. In short I think this sort of
   sophistication
         indicates he knew what he was doing and why I believe we still
   need
      to
         understand why he notates  some passages differently from others
   if
         they were to be executed in exactly the same way.
         regards
         --
      References
         1. [1][4]http://www.monicahall.co.uk/
         2. [2][5]http://www.earlyguitar.ning.com/
         3. mailto:[3][6]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
         4. mailto:[4][7]s.wa...@ntlworld.com
         5. mailto:[5][8]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
         6. mailto:[6][9]vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu
      To get on or off this list see list information at
      [7][10]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
      --
   References
      1. [11]http://www.monicahall.co.uk/
      2. [12]http://www.earlyguitar.ning.com/
      3.
   [13]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co
   .uk
      4.
   [14]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=s.wa...@ntlworld.com
      5.
   [15]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
      6.
   [16]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=vihu...@cs.dartmouth.e
   du
      7. [17]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   --

References

   1. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
   2. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
   3. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu
   4. http://www.monicahall.co.uk/
   5. http://www.earlyguitar.ning.com/
   6. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
   7. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=s.wa...@ntlworld.com
   8. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
   9. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu
  10. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
  11. http://www.monicahall.co.uk/
  12. http://www.earlyguitar.ning.com/
  13. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
  14. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=s.wa...@ntlworld.com
  15. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk
  16. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu
  17. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

Reply via email to