These two links landed me on some Gould page. But I know how it sounds on the keyboard, I have the Gould CD, and in fact I played some of the inventions myself when I was a kid. That is, actually, the reason I'm so curious about a guitar transcription, 'cause they don't seem the kind of music that, shall we say, lends itself to transcribing for guitar.NewModder wrote:http://www.deezer.com/listen-547035
Looks where, on Gould records? He plays a lot of them too fast (for example, the A minor one)... but yeah, in general, that, like I said, was my point: they should be very hard to play on guitar because of two completely independent voices.It looks really difficult.
This is a bad URL. I guess it's one of those cases where our dear hosts don't like something about the site... we will not get into it though . Could you PM me this url?
Was it at the extirpated link? Where is this struggling guitarist you're talking about?Hmm. It sounds like the guitarist have some great difficults (and a poor sound). Yet it may works, even if the .mp3 of the hardiest inventions are in fact .midi files..
?edit : uh ? use "quote" to see the url.
Ha! Got it. What a great site, thanks a lot, NewModder.NewModder wrote:It's the second link when you type "sayage bach transcription" in google.us. The url ends with .../photos.html.
Yeah, I hear you. But with those pictures one can see just how "freely" it is compared with the originals. A good find, very helpul. Thanks again!Sorry for the disgression with Gould, it's just that they seemed to be unplayable, and the words "freely transcribed" frightened me.
Hi, Jeff, thanks for the info. Yeah, I think I know this book -- it's Ariel Publications, isn't it? I have their Bach Lute Suites. Pretty good book, the publisher looks solid. I remember buying this book in a store about... well, yeah, it's gotta be about 20 years ago! Scary. But back to Inventions: yes, for two guitars this will work fine (Bach's Inventions are two-voice compositions). But to play them on one guitar must be a huge challenge ('cause these voices aren't really close to each other and on guitar you have half the number of hands compared with piano ).Jeff Kross wrote:Not quite answering the original question, but some 25-plus years ago I got a volume called "Bach Inventions for Guitar Duet," edited and fingered by Jerry Willard
Mad Hatter wrote: ('cause these voices aren't really close to each other and on guitar you have half the number of hands compared with piano ).
OK, I forgive you! Go and sin no more.Jeff Kross wrote: [...] But forgive me: as an attorney, I'm only trained to read the fine print, and thus overlooked those big honking letters that clearly stated 'FOR SOLO GUITAR"! [...]
Yeah. I checked this guy's site where he lets you download MP3s of those pieces, and what do you think? I thought he played his transcriptions, but he actually concocted midi versions! Well, they're very fluid of course , except he's not playing them on the guitar... so, yes, you're quite right -- at least some of those pieces look impossible. Take, for example, the No.13 (A min): two lines, equally motoric and totally concurrent, not a chordal piece. Well, how would you play two concurrent fluid parts? The problem is not that they're too far apart, but that on the piano you have two near identical hands. On guitar you don't. So you'd play the top line with imac, but what about the formerly left hand? You'd have to do with your thumb what the rest of your fingers do, and that would have to be magically fast plucking, even if you play it at a half of Gould's speed -- and that's just the right hand... btw, his transcription (for that piece) keeps the key. Well, A min is nothing evil for quitar.WenatcheeTheHatchet wrote:Two independent lines (that are not even always that independent) would be tough
What do you mean? Why B flat? Only one of them is in B flat, out of what, fifteen? Or do you mean you'd like them in B flat? Are you gonna play it on a horn of some sort? I saw some people blowing two saxophones at the same time; looks ridiculous... but probably preferable to guitar as far as the inventions go, 'cause again, you'll have two independent hands .Yours truly would prefer a two-part invention in actual B flat but
Oh I see. Where is it, in the sheet-music section somewhere?WenatcheeTheHatchet wrote:I posted a three-voiced fugue in B flat for solo guitaron Delcamp. That's partly what I meant.
No argument here, but the important qualification here is for the guitar. Bach didn't write for the guitar; this particular set was written expressly for a clavier and is quite idiomatic to it. I have no personal experience, but I would imagine that this collection should be quite hard to realise on the guitar, at least some of it.I also believe contrapuntal writing for the guitar is more practical than a lot of people seem to believe it is.
Very interesting, I never knew that.crossing voices is not forbidden because it sounds bad, but because it can confuse linear development and your singers go out of tune.
WenatcheeTheHatchet wrote:Octave displacement solves a lot of problems in contrapuntal adaptation. The other big solution that is a big no-no in serious counterpoint is voice-crossing. At the keyboard or for choral literature this cheat isn't usually necessary but crossing voices is not forbidden because it sounds bad, but because it can confuse linear development and your singers go out of tune. On the guitar, however, crossing voices is virtually inevitable.
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], harmox and 25 guests