Warning: Constant ABSPATH already defined in /home/public/wp-config.php on line 27

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/public/wp-config.php:27) in /home/public/wp-includes/feed-rss2-comments.php on line 8
Comments on: Happy Sales and Returns Day https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/ On-line Opinion Magazine...OK, it's a blog Tue, 23 Dec 2008 20:50:14 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3 By: Bryan https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/comment-page-1/#comment-32490 Fri, 28 Dec 2007 05:59:26 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/#comment-32490 Logically the urethane would reduce the ability of the wood to vibrate in the air column and deaden the sound, while the oil would preserve the joint but allow the fibers freedom to move. After while the assembly and disassembly is like sanding with a superfine grit sand paper. You can remove a finish with the ridges of your hands as is obvious on the faces of well-used guitars.

]]>
By: Steve Bates https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/comment-page-1/#comment-32489 Fri, 28 Dec 2007 04:44:39 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/#comment-32489 The consensus seems to be that bowed string instruments get better, while woodwinds get worse. The useful lifetime of a woodwind instrument seems to be about 50 years. Even if it hasn’t cracked sometime during that span, the surface of the bore, even if regularly oiled and swabbed out after each use, seems to develop microscopic distortions sufficient to spoil the tone the instrument had when it left the maker’s workshop.

When I was an active performer on recorders and baroque flutes, I was diligent about caring for the bores of the instruments. Now, about 10 years after I retired from frequent performance, the bore has probably dried out on most of those instruments. To use them again, one would have to go through the same break-in process as used with a brand-new instrument.

The exceptions are a couple of recorders I have in which the bores are permanently sealed with some sort of urethane-like varnish. One doesn’t have to oil those, and theoretically they never crack. To my ears, they sound a lot like plastic instruments, though better because of the quality control in their manufacture. After the first two, I no longer sought out instruments with this kind of bore.

]]>
By: Bryan https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/comment-page-1/#comment-32478 Fri, 28 Dec 2007 02:05:43 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/#comment-32478 Actually, many instruments sound better with age, while others fail. Having worked in old houses and with old furniture I’ve been amazed that the attempts to copy the Amati string instruments. We make instruments every bit as good, but they won’t be that way for a couple of centuries of aging in the same environment. Many materials change over time, and there is no way of speeding the processing. A brand new Stradivarius certainly didn’t sound like the examples that still exist.

Most music evolves over time by passing through the hands of various musicians. I don’t imagine that many tunes that are played today and attributed to early musicians have survived in their original form. Most probably benefited from the process with early errors being corrected, but some probably lost their originality as early musicians adapted for their weaknesses.

]]>
By: Steve Bates https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/comment-page-1/#comment-32477 Fri, 28 Dec 2007 00:35:57 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/#comment-32477 By the 13th century, notation was considerably advanced over the heighted neumes of about 100-200 years earlier, and there were people in the 16th century who understood how to transcribe that more advanced 13th-century notation… but I’ll bet you’re right: they did not make a literal transcription, but arranged the music to suit the current fashion.

Not until the 19th century, and especially in the 20th, did musical scholars see fit actually to want to perform music in the style of its origin, often with historically accurate replicas of period instruments. We had to relearn to build and to play the instruments well: just listen to some of the recordings of old music that were made in the 1950s.

I used to be an active practitioner of “historical performance,” on copies of original instruments (and in the case of 17th- and 18th-century music, occasionally actual historical instruments). I was something of a fanatic about performance practice. I am no longer a fanatic about that; I can enjoy 19th-century arrangements of, say, Handel’s Messiah as surely as the next person. But it feels important to me that we never forget how to do it the old way. Some things are too good to be lost to the whims of later fashion.

]]>
By: Bryan https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/comment-page-1/#comment-32470 Thu, 27 Dec 2007 17:21:41 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/#comment-32470 When Jimi fired up the Fender and played the Star Spangled Banner it was obviously adapted to fit the instrument and the player. Very few people have ever heard Bach played as he would have heard it, or even Beethoven.

Music evolves to fit the times in which it’s performed and the players.

I assume that the Swedish collection was transcribed from an actual performance as there were multiple notations systems, most weren’t designed to accommodate more than the basic tune for a very extended period, and were in the “key” of whoever was performing it.

Hildegard von Bingen would be rather shocked to hear her music as it has been recently recorded.

]]>
By: Steve Bates https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/comment-page-1/#comment-32469 Thu, 27 Dec 2007 15:27:30 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/#comment-32469 Bryan, you are correct about what it says at the linked site: in my sleepy fog, I misread the section Words as applying to the music. But the tune in the MIDI, which is the current familiar tune, is surely the 16th-century version, not the 13th-century version, and I’d guess the familiar harmonization is even later, though 16th-century is possible. Thirteenth-century music simply does not sound like that. Something happened to the music to GKW in the course of those three (or four, or five) centuries.

]]>
By: andante https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/comment-page-1/#comment-32467 Thu, 27 Dec 2007 13:16:07 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/#comment-32467 Well, there’s always “Of the Father’s Love Begotten”; less familiar but quite nice. Lyrics are fourth century, music 13th.

When any of my folks mourn the dearth of the “old” hymns, I immediately pull that one out.

]]>
By: Bryan https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/comment-page-1/#comment-32463 Thu, 27 Dec 2007 07:34:58 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/#comment-32463 Steve, at the top of the page it says “Music: Tem­pus Adest Flor­i­dum, a 13th Cen­tu­ry spring car­ol; first pub­lished in the Swed­ish Piae Can­ti­ones, 1582″

I assumed it was adapted, but the basic tune is simple enough for even beginners to play, although it would have been vocal only for most of its history.

]]>
By: Steve Bates https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/comment-page-1/#comment-32460 Thu, 27 Dec 2007 06:57:19 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/#comment-32460 (Jeez; that was abominably written! I need sleep… %-) )

]]>
By: Steve Bates https://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/comment-page-1/#comment-32459 Thu, 27 Dec 2007 06:56:08 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/2007/12/26/happy-sales-and-returns-day-2/#comment-32459 Sorry, Bryan; I agree you’ve got the scoop on the “good” “King” Wenceslas, but the music we know to GKW is most certainly not a 13th-century piece. It may be derivative of one, but the tune we all know is almost certainly a 19th-century tune, based on the tune and harmony alone. (Update: confirmed 19th-century origin, in the very link you provided.)

I’m trying to think of any 13th-century tune… and I know a couple… that survives unmodified in a present-day Christmas carol… and I cannot. A few come close, but conventions of later idioms, mostly 18th- and 19th-century, insert themselves into the versions we all know.

]]>