Sor head !

Classical Guitar technique: studies, scales, arpeggios, theory
Forum rules
IV Laws governing the quotation/citation of music


For discussion of studies, scales, arpeggios and theory.
User avatar
geoff-bristol
Amateur luthier
Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 6:31 pm
Location: Bristol - UK

Sor head !

Post by geoff-bristol » Thu May 11, 2017 9:51 pm

from Delcamp book 002 - Sor exercise. Common time.

This is confusing me - are we talking three voices here ? - ie bar 6 has a whole note bass - then the doubled up b and f ?
This would explain bar 7 - which makes litle sense !

Some of these little pieces make both brain and fingers hurt :D


sor-book2-53.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Paul Janssen
Posts: 1269
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 2:05 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Sor head !

Post by Paul Janssen » Thu May 11, 2017 10:11 pm

Hi Geoff,

I'm not 100% clear on what you are asking here. I assume you are referring to the last two bars in the example you have listed above (bars 9 & 10 in the original score). If so, these bars are instructing us to hold the bass note for the entire bar. They also tell us to hold the highest note for 2 beats or half the bar.

In reality, this piece is played by letting the notes ring. So if we look at these two bars again, in the second last Bar you will play the B and hold it for the whole bar, then play the rest of the arpeggio and let the notes ring. In this case it will form a G7 Chord. The same applies in the last Bar where you will hold the Bass C for the entire measure and let the rest of the notes Ring too. This will form a C chord.

If I am completely off track let me know.

-Paul

User avatar
pogmoor
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 8609
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 10:55 am
Location: Oxfordshire, UK

Re: Sor head !

Post by pogmoor » Thu May 11, 2017 10:34 pm

geoff-bristol wrote:
Thu May 11, 2017 9:51 pm
This is confusing me - are we talking three voices here ? - ie bar 6 has a whole note bass - then the doubled up b and f ?
This would explain bar 7 - which makes litle sense
Correct - there are three voices.
Eric from GuitarLoot
Renaissance and Baroque freak; classical guitars by Lester Backshall (2008) and Paul Fischer (1995)
Yamaha SLG 130NW silent classical guitar (2014)

OldPotter
Posts: 1690
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:31 pm
Location: Channel Islands

Re: Sor head !

Post by OldPotter » Fri May 12, 2017 8:18 am

My possibly incorrect take on this, is that bar 7 is meant to be played at the same rhythm as the other bars, but to let the notes sustain as crotchets (quarter notes). Apart from the last C, a quaver, (eighth note). Mathematically it doesn't add up, its not a copying mistake as its in other versions of this. I think its intended to make you think a bit????
"When I was younger, I could remember almost everything, whether it happened or not." Mark Twain

DaveLeeNC
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 3:31 pm
Location: Pinehurst, NC, USA

Re: Sor head !

Post by DaveLeeNC » Sat May 13, 2017 1:37 pm

OldPotter wrote:
Fri May 12, 2017 8:18 am
My possibly incorrect take on this, is that bar 7 is meant to be played at the same rhythm as the other bars, but to let the notes sustain as crotchets (quarter notes). Apart from the last C, a quaver, (eighth note). Mathematically it doesn't add up, its not a copying mistake as its in other versions of this. I think its intended to make you think a bit????
Where is the math mistake here? It looks to me like there are 8 notes in measure 7 to be played serially "one-and-two-and-three-and-four-and" (with notes held for one or two full beats except for the last note). Is someone seeing this some other way?

dave
1984 Jesus Marzal cedar CG
1971 Sherry-Brener (Cedar) Garcia No. 1 CG
1975 Gibson ES-175D Achtop Electric
2016 Eastman AR905CE-BD Carved Archtop Electric

OldPotter
Posts: 1690
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:31 pm
Location: Channel Islands

Re: Sor head !

Post by OldPotter » Sat May 13, 2017 3:45 pm

Where is the math mistake here?
Only that, if you look at it literally, it looks as if its intended to be played as crotchets. Its only when you play them as quavers and hold the note that it makes sense, as you say. I think that was what the OP was getting at. Perhaps it had not crossed the minds of those musically better educated, to look at it that way. Of the couple of hundred pieces that I have tried to learn, I can't recall seeing arpeggios written as crotchets. I am not known for having a good memory.
"When I was younger, I could remember almost everything, whether it happened or not." Mark Twain

Rasputin
Posts: 176
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 12:25 pm

Re: Sor head !

Post by Rasputin » Sun May 14, 2017 4:17 pm

There still isn't a mistake though, as far as I can see - they are crotchets. I know many people say it is best practice to write crotchets as tied quavers where they straddle a beat, to make it easier to see where the beat is. Are you taking this to mean that a note can only be a crotchet if it starts on a beat? If so I would disagree - I think it is just for clarity.

astro64
Posts: 568
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2016 7:43 pm
Location: American Southwest

Re: Sor head !

Post by astro64 » Sun May 14, 2017 5:43 pm

A mistake, if there were one, might be suggested by the rest in bar 7 above the open 4th string D. The rest suggests the C needs to be dampened and if so it would only sound for half of a quarter note (as indicated for the last C). But if you take the rest to mean to dampen the top E, the C can ring on and take on the full quarter note value and then it all works out.

Rasputin
Posts: 176
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 12:25 pm

Re: Sor head !

Post by Rasputin » Sun May 14, 2017 6:32 pm

Oh I see, yes. It would be clearer if that rest was higher, but then again it can only apply to the top voice for the reason you give.

User avatar
Tom Poore
Posts: 1003
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 4:00 pm
Location: South Euclid, Ohio, USA

Re: Sor head !

Post by Tom Poore » Sun May 14, 2017 10:13 pm

There’s no mistake in either measure 6 or 7. As pointed out by others, this is a three voice piece. The quarter rests in both measures are part of the top melody line—if you add them to the notes with upward stems, they add up to four beats. The eighth rests in these measures belong to the middle voice—add them to the downward stemmed eighth and quarter notes, they also add up to four beats. There are no rests in the bass line.

Fernando Sor usually was very precise in notating multiple voices.

Tom Poore
South Euclid, OH
USA

Luis_Br
Posts: 2193
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 2:50 pm
Location: Brazil

Re: Sor head !

Post by Luis_Br » Wed May 17, 2017 11:52 pm

I think the point is why did he chose those different notations. I think the question is actually:
Should we mute the g's and d from measure 6, to contrast with longer g of measure 7?
Most players would let g's from measure 6 ringing freely, and it is a common practice both for playing and for easier notation.
But this would result in the same final effect which is written in measure 7 in another way.
So does measure 7 imply we should keep exact note timing for the other measures through muting them accordingly?

Rasputin
Posts: 176
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 12:25 pm

Re: Sor head !

Post by Rasputin » Sat May 20, 2017 10:53 am

Yes, he could have written each half of m. 7 the same way as the first half of m. 8.

I get the idea that the E and the F# only belong to the top voice, unlike the corresponding notes of the other measures - but I don't know how to get that across in playing. If you have not let ring in the earlier measures, you could do it by doing so in m. 7, but I don't think the notation of m. 8 can mean not to let ring in the earlier measures. Surely there would be a clearer indication if that was the idea.

If you have let ring in the earlier measures, I have no clue how you can convey that the E and F# only belong to the top voice.

I can't see any technical reason for writing it like that - it's not a voice-leading thing because there is no change of harmony between the notes in question and the next notes of the middle voice.

It could just be a random inconsistency, I suppose, but I prefer to think there is some reason - beats me what it is though.

mainterm
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 6:36 pm

Re: Sor head !

Post by mainterm » Fri Jun 23, 2017 12:30 am

I think Tom Poore has given a nice, simple and correct explanation of what is going on with the rhythmic interpretation.

One thing I might add would be to think about how Sor may have conceived the three different voices - their functions. Bass, top melody and middle accompaniment. Odd seeming notation choices often stem from musical considerations, especially with legit sources like Sor.

davekear
Posts: 172
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 1:12 am
Location: California

Re: Sor head !

Post by davekear » Fri Jun 23, 2017 1:07 am

I see only 5 bars there. From what's there, this is all just simple arpeggios. It's how arpeggios are written, played legato. If taken literally (each 8th note only ringing for just that), then it would be a bit staccato, don't you think? These are basically 8 8th notes per measure (1& 2& 3& 4&) with of course letting the bass ring through. You basically got an arpeggio of G7, D7, C and G (with a B in the bass, G/B)

Return to “Classical Guitar technique”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], Reggie and 5 guests