![]() ![]() the lute) where there is no ambiguity about the pitch of the notes - at least, so long as it is clear what tuning system was being used! ![]() One valuable source is contemporary transcriptions made for instruments that used tablature notation (e.g. ![]() ![]() Since modern performers have inevitably heard a lot of tonal music written after this period, it can often be hard to decide what pitches the composer originally intended. In some early notation, it was generally assumed that in scale passages in minor keys, the "melodic minor" was intended when no accidentals were written - so the notes E F G A G F E with no accidentals might mean E F# G# A G-natural F-natural E. from the previous B natural to B sharp, which clearly doesn't make any musical sense) so they didn't really have a style of notation that matches the modern style of writing accidentals. B flat), and writing another sharp could have mean raising the pitch by another semitone (i.e. In your example, it was probably "obvious" to Palestrina's contemporaries that the second B in the word "mun-di" should be the same pitch as the first one, and they didn't bother to notate things that were obvious! In fact, writing a natural before the second B could have been read as returning to the pitch in the key signature (i.e. So the sharp in front of a B flat would actually mean "B natural".Īlso, the rule that "accidentals remain in force to the end of the current bar" was not strictly followed - especially since at this period, bar lines were often placed in an irregular pattern and the modern concept of "time signatures" did not yet exist. In Palestrina's time, the "rules" for writing accidentals were different from the current conventions.Įven as late as CPE Bach, sharps and flats were sometimes used to change the pitch of a note by a semitone up or down, not to indicate the absolute pitch as they are today. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |