You do raise some interesting questions which will get to, but first,
in your characteristic fashion, you grossly and speciously exaggerate
for self-serving purpose.
Post by David Raleigh ArnoldHe's got a big problem with slurs. Probably stupid practice.
(Unlike my 'power slurs')
Yes, a couple of the ornaments in the first section did not come out
with clarity. There are different factors as to why that may occur in
any one performance, but basically, I am not a flawless technician.
I am forced to admit to being less than John Williams in that regard.
But by focusing on those instances and ignoring the others you are
making much out of little. There is no aspect of my technique in
which there is not room for improvement, slurs included, but I do not
have a "hig problem" with them. My practice of them has been much
more intelligent than would be afforded by your power slurs.
Not that there's anything inherently wrong with your slur routine,
the closest you have come to a pure technical exercise in your
technical set. It could do anybody some good, yet of the entire lot
of all exercizes you have come up with it is the one most woefully
inadequate in measuring up to the claim you inexorably make for
everything you do, of attaining to singularly complete and eclipsing
sufficiency to address the intended purpose- and its up against some
pretty stiff competition from your site for that distinction. You have
confined the entirety of your attention to the simple aspect of
strength for "pow" in slurs isolated from any technical context other
that of an entirely free hand, and only as executed by adjacent
fingers, and by sounding the first note of upward slurs with the right
hand only as an exercise for the upper finger of adjacent pairs. This
is ok for an extremely narrow purpose, and the energy aspect is
important to include in any actually adequate slur exercise, but your
recommendation of this only, as sufficient preparation for repertoire
contexts is like recommending weight training as sole preparation for
olympic gymnastics. Anyone who has relied upon this recommendation of
yours will quickly discover that it is quite a different proposition
from your exercise to execute a slur at one lateral extreme of the
fingerboard while the other fingers are holding a position at the
other, or while barring, or in the context of a reach out of
position. Anyone inculcated only in your slow, deliberate, string-
breaking fingerboard crushing half-step only routine will risk finding
themselves fingertied at any passage calling for a quick, light
negotiation through several succesive re-ordered fingerings in
different pairings for slurred and non-slurred notes within a context
including any variety of configurative combination. There is great
meaning in the preparation for such situations afforded by the left
hand combination exercises, that can be developed from the
formulations of your predecessors and betters, that you have so often
and erroneously decried in lieu of positive promulgation of your
ideas. .
Listen to the rest of the Recuerdos- or try this one:
http://boomp3.com/listen/aj04m27/recuerdos-de-la-alhambra
This is my recording of Recuerdos done on six string several years
earlier, done in one take unedited except for the very last chord
(recorded by an engineer who only had delay, not reverb, to work
with). You can slow it down and listen through every one of the
slurred ornaments in this performance and hear distinctly the three
note triplets.
More to the point, listen to the video of the Courante. There are
slurs in there executed within contexts for which your page alone
would provide hopelessly insufficient preparation- and this was
recorded at the end of the third day of playing nearly constantly from
morning to late afternoon. The reason I am able to do this is because
I deliberately inculcate relaxation into my technique, which is
another area in which absolutely nothing you have had to say has been
right.
Post by David Raleigh ArnoldReaching for low notes with his
thumb caused a little hesitation,
This you simply made up. Not once did this reach interrupt the
forward flow.
I have no problem admitting to actual deficiencies. There is plenty of
genuine opportunity in this performance for nitpicking and carping
which I'm surprised you didn't mention. You must not have noticed, I
don't think you practiced forbearance out of kindness. But, there is
more chance for this in the other Recuerdos, and in the Courante, if
you don't wish to address pacing, phrasing, overall arc of
performance, etc.
Now that fictional compalints have been disposed of,
Post by David Raleigh Arnoldand he wasn't always clean
down there.
That may be, but I don't think it was any lack of cleanness to which
you were responding. I've since refingered some of those spots. But
now we are getting to matter for more meritorious discussion, inherent
worthiness of concept apart from my execution of it.
Post by David Raleigh ArnoldWhy would anyone think that Tarrega required such
a heavier bass? It was heavy already with six strings.
I'm not surprised that _you_ responded in this fashion, but I am
that no one else has. I am gratified at the favorable commentary thus
far, but I also expected that more people would suggest that it was
superfluous, that Recuerdos is complete in its original state, etc.
You raise a legitimate question, and present a point of view which
should be considered.
In a way, to offer up something like this is to ask that question. The
"multi-string" field is increasing, and variegating, which I think is
in a phase of positive evolution at present, but I am also cognizant
of the precedent of development to extreme of the Baroque lute. I'm
not seeking validation as a determinant to whether or not I will
continue in this vein, but I am interested in how it is received.
Consider it a poll, if you will.
My answer to the way you put it in regard to this specific piece is
that Recuerdos "requires" it no more than any of us is "required" to
play original Recuerdos, or to play guitar at all. Its not that the
original composition overtly suffers for lack of having been written
without the low basses, but the addition of them does enhance the
profundity of gesture by allowing the bass some separation and
independence to define the tonal space- otherwise the whole tessitura
simply moves in parallel. One can denote on paper a quick sketch of a
bird in flight by drawing two horizontally conjoined shallow upward
curving arcs, resulting in a minimalist representative icon we all
recognize. But the sense of height and space is immediately made
more palpable when given the reference of some opposing arcs
underneath, overlapping so as to give the impression of the horizon of
a rolling landscape far below. This is what adding the basses in
Recuerdos does, I don't think the result is heaviness. If Recuerdos is
"heavy already with six strings" when you play it, then perhaps its
simply because you are playing it too heavily.
I am aware, though, of the potential pitfall of adding basses
everywhere in everything simply because they are available. The
merits and rational to doing so are different for each piece; often
there is no benefit to be derived, but it sometimes seems that in
making ones judgment a fine line must be discerned on the other side
of which is gratuitous indulgence. Recuerdos perhaps approaches this
line, but for reasons alluded to above I am comfortable with what I
have done and I don't think it crosses over. I've expanded a couple
of Milan pavans this way, but not others and have generally left his
fantasias alone; the bass line in the Scarlatti A maj. K. 322
definitely can be animated throughout in this way by relieving too
frequent repetition of notes at the same octave- rendered in notes
inegales style it becomes almost jazzy, with a walking bass - but the
Allemande and Bouree from Bachs first lute suite (even doing them up a
fourth in A) are fine left the way they are with only a couple of
additions. Certain of Sor's and Carcassi's etudes sound very nice
with low basses, and others don't There are are cadences in Legnani
and Giuliani which cry out for continuation to a low final tonic which
could not be written in, but would have had they been composed for
piano. Some Villa-Lobos and arrangements of Ravel sound wonderfuly
expansive with the availment of this resource, but the choros #1 is
best left as it is except for a couple of low B's.
Try listening to these, both arrangements of Bach pieces, but which
raise very different questions as to transcriptive philosophy:
http://www.boomp3.com/listen/f6c9ean/jesu
http://www.boomp3.com/listen/c4rhngf/gavottes-sixth-cello-suite
Post by David Raleigh ArnoldIAC it opens another can. The thing I don't like about guitars
of more than 7 strings (7th a low D) is lack of balance. Extending the
bass range without extending the treble range makes no sense to me.
To some extent I agree with you. But the reason for a multiplicty of
additions in the bass is that if any interval of increase downwards is
to be sufficiently available for use, then the notes within that range
also somehow have to be available when they can't be reached for
because of whatever else may be going on. I think Andrew can back me
up on how frequently at least that one string is needed within the
additional fourth. On the other hand, it can be like moving into a
larger apartment, or a woman getting a bigger purse. At first it
seems spacious, but before long it gets just as crowded with
essentials as before, and one wishes one had even more room for having
encountered constraint in what one wishes to do. Everyone has to set
their own design limits. .
Post by David Raleigh Arnold..the best idea would be to add a high A string and/or tune down a whole
step and add a G, and just admit that it's a renaissance tuned lute and
not a guitar.
Didn't you notice? Not very discerning of you- or perhaps you already
knew that one of the definitions of IAC in the online Internet Lingo
acronym dictionary is "I am confused". Thats exactly what I did. My
first string is an A. If you couldn't tell this from the ninth
measure when it goes into C, surely the mid neck location of the
penultimate chord should have clued you in. I do enjoy playing lute
music in the appropriate tuning afforded thereby, but your suggestion
that this somehow enforces an admittance as if in consequent removal
thereby from the focus of valid discussion as "lute and not a guitar"
is as completely nonsensical as those who insisted Bream played guitar
shaped like a lute. You're looking for stupidity? There it is.
Post by David Raleigh ArnoldI expect a torrent of abuse...
I think you crave abuse- thats why you yourself have so readily been
abusive in the past; its a milieu in which you seem comfortable and
seem to want to foster, and its more credible that you are simply
trying to elicit like response than that you actually believe some of
the things you say.
Post by David Raleigh Arnoldbut I wonder whether anyone agrees with me.
So would I- about issues such as the place for such instruments and
their use in the repertoire, and what meaning such endeovor can have
from various points of view..
Post by David Raleigh ArnoldDid you also hear the thing where he capoed up to accompany
his wife? Beautiful.
Thank you- sincerely. I'm glad you do find place for the expanded
resource. Assuming you are referring to "The Sally Gardens", I tried
to come up with an accompaniment that supported the vocal line without
simply replicating it, had some variety, but was unpretentious. The
same for "The Blue Handkerchief", though that arrangement owes a bit
more to what I heard Mary O'Hara playing on harp as she accompanied
herself on one of her records.