Talk:Eton Choirbook: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
m (one, but CPDL should classify it as 6vv instead of 5vv →Davy Salve Regina - one or two?) |
||
Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
Also, I'm pretty sure I've seen elsewhere that there were only 93 items in the Eton Choirbook. The addition of the 6-part Davy would make 94.}} | Also, I'm pretty sure I've seen elsewhere that there were only 93 items in the Eton Choirbook. The addition of the 6-part Davy would make 94.}} | ||
:Chuck, with relation to the list layout, I would suggest to make it in a tabular format as is in other Music Publications, with columns for the original index number, title, composer and # of voices, what do you think? —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [{{carlos}} {{mail}}] 18:42, 23 June 2009 (UTC) | :That's exactly the reason for my confusion. E.g. [http://www.edition-mp.com/editions.html?score=Q0763 this edition]. Frank's book classified it as 5, but it appears to need 6 voices simultaneously. Some gymels allow one of the other parts to cover a line, keeping it to 5 voices at all times, but in this case it would require 6. I think CPDL should index it based on the minimum number of independent voices needed to perform the piece. --[[User:Vaarky|Vaarky]] 18:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
== new layout == | |||
Chuck, with relation to the list layout, I would suggest to make it in a tabular format as is in other Music Publications, with columns for the original index number, title, composer and # of voices, what do you think? —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [{{carlos}} {{mail}}] 18:42, 23 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
: the new layout in tabular format looks great! --[[User:Vaarky|Vaarky]] 18:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 18:02, 25 June 2009
thanks for creating this page
| Help |
Thank you for creating this page--so nice to see what's available all in one place, and see progress on these. |
Medieval versus Renaissance music
Some of the works in this list were set as Medieval and some as Renaissance music. If we base exclusively on the date in which the book was compiled, we could state that it contains Renaissance works, but I found a differing opinion, when reading "Music in Medieval Britain" () by Frank Llewellyn Harrison. I'd like to quote two passages from it that relate to the Eton choirbook:
- "Both in liturgy and music the end of the Latin rite marks the close of the medieval period, for English music was intimately bound up with the ritual tradition and held to its established styles and functions as long as the medieval liturgy remained. Though Renaissance features began to appear in English music, particularly in its secular forms, in the early sixteenth century, the transition from medieval to Renaissance concepts of structure and style, which took place on the continent in the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, was not fully accomplished in England until after the mid-sixteenth century. This is not the division between the Middle Ages and Renaissance usually adopted by musical historians, but I believe it to be justified in the case of the English ecclesiastical arts, both visual and musical, in which medieval styles showed no fundamental change until the new religious ideas became established."
- "Eton College is the only foundation of the period which has managed to preserve its own late medieval choirbook, which is listed in a chapel inventory of c. 1531 as "a grete ledger of prick song ii folio tum cuncta", a description which identifies it with the large manuscript of polyphonic antiphons and Magnificats now in the college library. Though about half of its pages have unfortunately been lost, the Eton choirbook is outstanding among the surviving manuscripts of medieval music in Britain in the value of its contents and the beauty of its writing and illumination."
Do others agree with him? —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] ] 15:54, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
|
|
- Thanks for your considerations, Vaarky and Chuck, and also for the author name correction; it was abbreviated as "Ll." and I imagined it could only stand for "Lloyd". —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] ] 17:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Davy Salve Regina - one or two?
Help | |
I'm mystified by the appearance of two settings by Davy of Salve Regina - in particular, the one claiming to be a 6-part setting. The 5-voice setting (as in Harrison) is basically 5-parts, but there are some treble gymels (gemells) at the beginning and later in the work - a gymel is a splitting of the part into two parts. These are annotated in the treble part in the Eton Choirbook. The fact that the work begins with treble gymells makes a modern edition look like it is a 6-part work (and I suppose, in some sense, it is). I'm wondering if the 6-part setting listed (and requested) is actually a confusion with the 5-part setting (which is the only Davy setting I'm aware of). Also, I'm pretty sure I've seen elsewhere that there were only 93 items in the Eton Choirbook. The addition of the 6-part Davy would make 94. |
- That's exactly the reason for my confusion. E.g. this edition. Frank's book classified it as 5, but it appears to need 6 voices simultaneously. Some gymels allow one of the other parts to cover a line, keeping it to 5 voices at all times, but in this case it would require 6. I think CPDL should index it based on the minimum number of independent voices needed to perform the piece. --Vaarky 18:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
new layout
Chuck, with relation to the list layout, I would suggest to make it in a tabular format as is in other Music Publications, with columns for the original index number, title, composer and # of voices, what do you think? —Carlos [[[:Template:Carlos]] ] 18:42, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
- the new layout in tabular format looks great! --Vaarky 18:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC)