John Dowland Lachrimae musicmarkup.info - Download as PDF File .pdf), Text File .txt) or read John Dowland - Fantasies Complete Edition Classical musicmarkup.info [PDF] + Video - Guitar solo (notes and tabs) - Renaissance * License: . Here's John Dowland's Lachrimae pavan in normal tuning. Renaissance and Baroque freak; classical guitars by Lester Backshall ().
|Language:||English, Spanish, Japanese|
|ePub File Size:||23.74 MB|
|PDF File Size:||10.62 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Sign up for free]|
Do not worry about this, it is this way to indicate the flow of the voices in the music . Lachrimae Pavan. John Dowland. Transcribed and edited by Selina Copley. PDF Downloads | Stafford Guitar John Dowland. Download Music. JS Bach. Cello Suite no J.S. Bach. Download Music. John Downland. Lachrimae Pavan. John Dowland, Lachrimae Pavan - Download as PDF File .pdf), Text File .txt) or read John Dowland - Fantasies Complete Edition Classical musicmarkup.info
Unfortunately matters are not so simple. With its time signature of four beats in the bar it is not a galliard a dance with three to the bar Thus the piece appears to be a pastiche whose composer is 20 unknown. Segovia certainly did not get it from Heseltine, who would have scorned it — as will become clear in Part 3.
In Part 3 I will explain what this piece is, and where it comes from. Another Dowland piece recorded by Segovia, albeit late in his career, was the Melancholy Galliard, which Heseltine transcribed and published in It is notable for the very large number of its alumni who have held high office in public life. The series was taken over by Oxford University Press. The editor of these letters, Barry Smith, surmises that the female lutenist referred to by Heseltine is Diana Poulton, who later became highly accomplished.
XXXI, February , p. As outlined in Part 1, this was based on the following principles: 1 The music needed to be made accessible to amateur performers, even if that meant adopting modern conventions of notation. I want to investigate how well these principles worked in practice.
I have chosen a piece that strikes me as particularly interesting from the point of view of editorial policy. Here I have transposed the lute part down a minor third, as usual when adapting renaissance lute music to the guitar. I have not made any other adaptation for the guitar. For the moment I simply want to retain the notes that Heseltine has transcribed, and his barring.
The original manuscript source does not follow modern barring conventions.
This point needs to be borne in mind during the following discussion. The second part, though, beginning on the fourth beat of bar 8, is nine bars long. Has something gone adrift? Also, can bar 12 really be right? Anyone playing the piece is likely to feel that the chord lasts too long. Heseltine, though, presumably thought this was plausible. From bar 12 to the end of this piece, in terms of modern barring principles, the note values in the source do not add up.
An extra beat is required if the final chord of the piece is to land on the first beat of the last bar. In the manuscript, this chord is one beat shorter. By extending the chord by a beat, Heseltine makes it a last a whole bar.
However, he says nothing about this modification in his edition. Other editors have taken a different approach. Poulton and Lam, unlike Heseltine, explain what they have done. Comparing bar 13 in the two versions, you can see that in Example 3 the chord on the third beat is twice the length of the equivalent chord in Example 2, where it falls on the fourth beat.
This matches the phrase structure of the preceding couple of phrases. Frederick Noad, in The Renaissance Guitar, sticks closer to the original and ducks out of providing a solution to the missing beat, although it is not clear whether this is an oversight or intentional. In this version bars 13, 14 and 15 certainly make much more musical sense than in the other versions.
The problem of the missing beat, though, is now transferred to bar 16, which in my ancient edition is only 3 beats long. The simplest option is probably to prolong the first two notes of the bar, as shown in Example 5.
Example 5 Amendment to Example 4 to rectify the beats in bar For lesser mortals, though, playing the piece at a moderate pace exposes only too clearly the lack of musical interest in the first half of bar 16 in Example 5. One feels the music marking time simply to fill up the bar, which, of course, is precisely the purpose of the prolongations. Here are some more remarks by Heseltine on the preparation of old music for the modern reader.
However, the question arises of whether, given the unreliability of some old manuscripts, correcting the text is entirely separable from fixing the composition. In the piece under discussion, there appears to be something amiss with the manuscript, but there is no way of creating a plausible version without engaging in re-composition.
Of course, this is a different issue from adapting a work to make it suit modern taste, which Heseltine especially objected to. Even so, judging whether a manuscript contains an error is likely to involve aesthetic judgements, and these can be highly contentious. No doubt this type of edition does deter many non-specialist readers. However, eschewing it means that anomalies can appear without comment, which might not serve the best interests of the composer.
It was all very well for Warlock to suggest, as he did in The English Ayre, that tablature notation was a guarantee of accuracy: he must have known perfectly well that errors in a printed tablature are even more likely than in staff notation. In fact, he made his own emendations from time to time; only, unlike Fellowes, he did not indicate them in a 8 preface.
The trouble is, with such variable source materials, reverence for Dowland and reverence for the surviving texts are two different, but overlapping matters. Heseltine seems to have conflated them. Actually, Heseltine did sometimes indicate emendations that he had made, as we will see in Part 3, but he appears to have been somewhat inconsistent in this.
However, any fix adopted for bar 16 needs to have more musical interest than the version in Example 5. I claim no compositional expertise, but I think a fix for bar 16 ought to continue the pattern of descending thirds on the first two beats of the bar.
Example 6 shows the whole piece amended in this way.
In bar 16 the descending third is between on beat 1 the E in the top part and on beat 2 the C sharp on the top part. I do not claim this is what Dowland would have written, but I do suggest it is musically coherent.
One of the attractions of the piece to me is the ease with which it lends itself to embellishment along the lines of Example 7. However, I would also suggest that the piece benefits from a few more discreet modifications, in addition to those discussed here.
For example, removing the octave doubling of notes within chords goes a long to improving its playability on the guitar. In this volume the piece is number Heseltine appears to have made some of this music — possibly a great deal of it — available to Segovia around , although it is not clear that Segovia made much use of it. All these elements come together in this final article of the series, where I resolve a puzzle surrounding one of the Dowland pieces recorded by Segovia.
Mention was made in Part 1 of the work of Canon E.
Fellowes, who began transcribing and publishing the lute songs of Dowland and other lutenists a few years before Heseltine.
Even these British editors, however, were not alone.
An early continental editor of Dowland was Dr Hans Dagobert Bruger, who also published an edition of the Bach lute suites. This slim volume contained four unnamed galliards, the Lachrimae pavan, two unnamed allemands, and a version of the pavan Semper Dowland Semper Dolens. Bruger, unlike Heseltine, did not go back to manuscripts or other authoritative sources for his edition.
For brevity I will refer to this from now on simply as the Lachrimae collection. The viol, which Heseltine refers to here, was a bowed string instrument with frets. Figure 1 shows a tenor viol, with a guitar for comparison. Viol consorts, with viols of various sizes, were popular chamber ensembles from around the time of Henry VIII.
Figure 1 Tenor viol and guitar for comparison. The viol was fretted, had six strings, and was played with a bow. Viol consorts comprised treble, tenor and bass instruments, often with multiple parts for each type of viol.
This piece is known in its song form as Flow My Tears, but is re-titled Lachrimae Antiquae in the collection. According to Heseltine, one of these pirates was Hove.
This could mean that lute, viols and violins were alternatives — an interpretation supported by the fact that the lute parts generally incorporated much of the music of the other parts, including, in most cases, the tune.
Nevertheless, the prevailing opinion nowadays is that the lute should play along with the five bowed-string parts, and that the lute parts were not intended as independent solos.
I have added the letters X and Y to clarify the following discussion. This Almain is one of those lute parts from Lachrimae that lacks the tune.
It is, however, definitely by Dowland. Instead he designated each part by its place in the musical texture. In a viol consort, the instrumentation would be, from top to bottom, treble viol, three tenor viols and a bass viol. It is not surprising, therefore, that the identity of the piece recorded by Segovia should have been so mysterious. Similarly, in both pieces, the stretch from the letter Y to the end is the same.
Heseltine, however, has suppressed it in his transcription to fix what he and other editors considered to be an error in the lute part. Anmerkungen John Dowland remains a shadowy figure, despite being one of the greatest song writers, lute players, and composers of instrumental music of the late Elizabethan and early Stuart eras. Our concept of his personality today is largely the result of his own self-fashioned image. It is true that his career suggests that he was, unusually for an Elizabethan musician, more attractive to continental employers than at home.
Before then, however, he had enjoyed something of a stellar career, with well-paid appointments at courts in Germany and Denmark. Dowland also made sure that his music was available in England through the relatively innovative medium of print.
Of his earlier career, we can catch only tantalising glimpses. We know nothing of his family background, upbringing, or musical training. We next hear of Dowland in , the year of the Spanish Armada, when he received the degree of Mus.
He decided instead to travel to Germany and Italy, seeking employment abroad but also aiming to learn the latest musical developments from the great madrigalist Luca Marenzio in Rome. Dowland visited Venice and Ferrara, both centres of the musical avant-garde in the s, and performed at the ducal court in Florence.
But he never got as far as Rome, since, as we learn from a long and at times rambling letter written to Sir Robert Cecil in , Dowland found himself in the company of a group of potentially treacherous English Catholics and was afraid he would be tainted by association. Although Dowland published no more after , his last years were not a period of retirement. He is documented taking part in performances at the Inns of Court and at the London house of the Earl of Devonshire.
His handwriting also appears in a lute manuscript owned by his student Margaret Board, which has been dated to the s.
But we should remember that rather than wallowing in self-pity, the expression of melancholy through music was seen as having a cathartic and healing effect.