From: mgresham@dscatl.UUCP (Mark Gresham)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Brumel review
Date: 25 Jan 93 15:11:18 GMT
Reply-To: mgresham@dscatl.UUCP (Mark Gresham)
Organization: Digital Systems Co,  Atlanta, Ga

In article <=4l3rnh@rpi.edu> mccomt@aix.rpi.edu (Todd Michel McComb) writes:
}In article <1275@dscatl.UUCP> Mark Gresham writes:
}>While is sounds like the argument is about classification of parts
}>would you both concede the possibilty that the composer was
}>explicitly writing for the particular group singers he had
}>at his disposal, regardless of the classifications, et al.?
}>  Therefore, if you must classify the voices, wouldn't it be
}>most practical, even in modern performance practice, to examine
}>the ranges and tessituras and select singers accordingly?  Assuming
}>that a modern ensemble also has a practical limitation on their own
}>resources, they'd have to make certain compromises in this regard
}>or simply not program the piece.  Simply stated: we do those kinds
}>of things all the time as conductors and vocal ensembles.  I would
}>not doubt that Brumel did too.
}
}It seems plausible that the lines in question were notated as tenors,
}but that the written ranges differ from high to low among those parts.
}In our ignorance of the source material, we don't know what else to say.
}
}You bring up two interesting points, though.  First, what is the history
}of the classification of voices into discrete groups?  How well developed
}was it at this time?  Second, it seems unlikely to me that Brumel's
}position in one of the most powerful and musically-oriented courts in
}Europe would entail much in the way of practical limitation in obtaining
}singers.  However, one wonders how voice classes would affect the matter.

I'm thinking more s specifically than the general, overall
resources available; rather, what singers was Brumel anticipating
having available, scheduled to sing for that day?  Even without
general limitations, he may have known the specific voices
to be "on duty" for the time the work was written.
  Granted, what I'm trying to get at is much broader than this
particular work and this particular composer; even within a single
"classification" of voice, you're going to have a wide possible
spectrum of capabilities, somewhat controlled by the presence of a
common "school" of singing and the degree of selectivity one may
be afforded when hiring singers.
  For a more concrete, modern example: there are amateur choruses
which I can be assured to have "corn-fed" altos that have
goodly range below middle C and can make damn good use of it; I
can write with that range and color in mind in that instance, and
also know that the conductor can modify the sound of the tenor
section (in both volume and color) by swinging a few of those
altos down in certain phrases, etc.  Yet, if I try the same piece
with a professional group (like the Gregg Smith Singers) whose
alto section is basically made of mezzos, in terms of singing
range, then what worked with the amateur chorus may well be
difficult for the pro alto section to handle simply because of the
difference in what nature of voices are classified as "alto" in
either case.  (The example is a true story, BTW.)
  So, on the one hand, you can make some generalizations about
vocal classifications as a rule of thumb...but when it comes to
final, practical applications, particularly with one voice on a
part, you have to consider the actual voices involved.  Brumel had
it easier than a modern director: He knew who he was writing for,
no matter how extensive or limited his resources; the modern
ensemble director has to find voices that fit the parts OR find
some way of making it possible for a pre-existing ensemble to
do a credible job of presenting the work in question.
  Think of all the ghastly cartwheels and gymnastics that some
publishers have gone through to produce and edition of music
"suitable for standard modern SATB choruses" and often with
less-than-desirable results.  I'm thinking of a particular edition
of Josquin's Missa "A6e Maris Stella" where the results are
clearly absurd in this regard.  Square peg in a round hole.
  Thankfully, what we're doing now is finally asking "who do we
need to sing this" instead of buying the publishers' line of "most
marketable voicing."
  This is not limited to publication of "early" works: There's an
arrangement by Alice Parker that I've used, which comes from the
publisher SATB; I'd known that something "didn't really work
right" and knew that that was atypical of Alice.  She shed light
on the subject: it was written for SSAA; the publisher insisted on
publishing SATB; Alice says "it doesn't really work that way, and
I'd prefer it not be done that way."  And when you look at it as
an SSAA piece, all the things that are problematic in the SATB
disappear.

Cheers,

--Mark Gresham
=====