On Sat, 28 Nov 1998, Alexander Lingas wrote:
[cut]
> ...the held
> note in all the styles described as "basilica" certainly fits the standard
> definition of an "ison," which in the received Byzantine tradition can move
> around to reflect a change in tetrachord.
Does anyone know (or can anyone perceive from the recording)
whether Peres's drones reflect the change in tetrachords strictly, or does
he apply them willy-nilly? Is he using an established practice
(Byzantine isons), or is he creating something entirely new, or is he
adapting early rules on organum? For example, on the 'Old Roman Chant'
recording, the start of the Introit (sorry can't remember the title) is
with a prolonged oscillation between a note and the semitone above, which
is quite striking in its contextual ambiguity (Are we on the final of the
mode? What mode is this? etc.). Then the drone comes in a fifth below
this, rationising the whole thing into a disappointingly 'mundane' dorian
sonority. The fact that the drone is a fifth (or a minor sixth if you
count the upper semitone) away makes me wonder how it reflects the
tetrachord anyway...
[cut]
> ...think about all the held-note styles of early
> Western polyphony, to say nothing of instruments around the world with
> drones....
>
> Alexander Lingas
This rather tempts us to speculate on whether organum evolved from drones
or vice-versa, or whether they actually have nothing to do with each other
at all.
The arguments against Peres's drones are based on the fact that
they are not found documented in practice until much later, and then only
in the East. We know that organum was practiced considerably earlier (at
least by the 9th century), and we cannot say for sure that it was only a
Northern European innovation. Unless we postulate that drones
actually evolved from organum (eg. the Notre Dame stuff or the cadential
held-tones of Guidonian organum) which would be odd, it would seem
likely that they predate organum anyway (as the plethora of ancient drone
instruments in Europe indicates - as well as other parts of the world
which have less significance here).
So my problem is not the fact of drones, but rather HOW they are
used. Much of the 'Old Roman Chant' sounds far too much like Notre Dame
organum duplum (with choir on top rather than one soloist) for my taste.
The drones seem to mould the chant, rather than vice-versa.
And speaking of Notre Dame organa, why does Peres insist on
doubling the tenor line (like the drones in the Roman Chant) an octave
beneath? Because it makes his great basso profundo singer sound
Russian orthodox (with all the 'mystique' that conjurs up)???!
Rob Howe.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|