Triads were not new in the 17th century. They had certainly been around
a lot earlier than that, and were pretty well established by the 15th
century. Composers like Dufay made much use of them. You have only to
look at 15th-century pieces played on the lute with a plectrum to see
how a polyphonic texture was filled out here and there with triadic
chords.
I think you are taking everything I have said literally and out of context.
There is a
difference between consonances made up of the notes of a triad and a
recognization of the relationship between them. It is not that these things
are "new" in the sense that no-one had ever thought them before. Rather
there is a shift of emphasis with the emmergence of the seconda prattica.
It is obvious in the 4-course repertoire that there are the same chords
which are found in the 5-course repertoire but without the fifth course and
these may have been strummed. These are on the margins so to speak.
As far as strumming on the guitar is concerned, the actual notes played
cannot always be notated accurately, because a skilled strummer will not
strike all the strings of a chord every time. He may, for example,
choose to strike all the strings for a strong down-stroke, but catch
just the first few strings with a lighter strum on the up-stroke.
I have no problem at all with the idea that there would be different
strumming patterns to create a contrast in texture but I do not agree with
you or Lex that ensuring that the chords were in the correct inversions was
an issue. It is an entirely modern obsession.
Monica
-----Original Message-----
From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On
Behalf Of Monica Hall
Sent: 17 November 2010 17:14
To: Lex Eisenhardt
Cc: Vihuelalist
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Valdambrini's evidence
Our ready ear is very much influenced/spoiled by functional harmony,
I'm afraid. I suppose it went wrong so often (then) because the
trick
of finding the appropriate harmonies was to add 'middle voices' to a
bass and soprano.
I think you are mistaken here because throughout the 16th century
general
practice was to add contrapuntal parts to a tenor voice. The shift to
working from the bass took place at the beginning of the 17th century.
The
practice of basso continuo was new and not well established at the time
many
of these songs were composed. It started off as a way of creating a
keyboard accompaniment to mainly polyphonic works.
Underlying this discussion is the idea that it is somehow inferior or
amateurish to accompany the songs in this way. This in my view shows a
lack of historical insight and sensitivity to changes taking place at
the
time. A kind of 21st century superior and censorious attitude to what
people did in the past.
Triadic harmony was new, original, exciting and in tune with other
developments taking place at the time i.e. accompanied monody. The
guitar
was ideally suited to be part of this change and certainly contributed
to
developments in harmonic thinking. It is of its time.
It is not helpful to suggest that "the harmonic language of alfabeto is
somewhat one-dimensional." This is a bit like saying that Wagner's
music is
superior to that of Mozart because he used larger forces and more
complex
and colourful harmony. An evolutionary view of musical history which
went
out of fashion in England years ago.
If we are trying to figure out what was possibly done in the 1620s
and
30s, to reach an optimal performance of the most beautiful songs,
respecting the
ambience they were performed in, then we should not only think of
what
the general strumming public did.
No.. we should think about what writers at the time said about what they
were trying to achieve. I have already quoted Marini and Milanuzzi who
presumably prepared their own books for the press and indicate that they
thought it was necessary and satisfactory to suggest a different way of
accompanying on the guitar. Do you think they were writing for the
general strumming public - if indeed such a public existed.
That could of course also
be interesting information (for a gig in 17th c costume).
Your views seem to coloured by the need to please a 21st century
audience.
This is understandable but if we are trying to understand what these
songs
meant to people in the past and what gave them pleasure we should leave
our
personal prejudices at the door.
Monica
> Finally if you've ever performed Cesare Morelli's (Pepys guitar
teacher) arrangement of 'To be or not to be....' (an experience of
novelty rather than artistic merit I can tell you) from the later
17th
century you'd not rush to suggest strumming to songs was little
employed by then - little written down maybe. And Morelli,
supposedly
a 'professional' of sorts often gets the harmonisations
'wrong'........
No, but I've done Stairway to heaven, does that count?
Lex
--
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
