UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATIRhythmic Alteration in Baroque Music Notes Inégales and Overdotting Rania H Al-Ejeilat 12/11/2012 Submitted as the final assignment for MLIT6031001: Interpretation and Performance of Baroque Music Fall semester, 2012 Supervised by Dr Vivian Montgomery, DMA Student Number: M04951188 Rhythmic alteration in Baroque Music Rhythmic alteration, as the term suggests, is any performance practice that renders note values different from those which are written on the page. The term was introduced by Arnold Dolmetsch in his book The Interpretation of the Music of the XVIIth and XVIIIth Centuries (1915), which awakened a 20th century revival of interest in Early Music and the development of the so-called “authentic performance”. Rhythmic alteration comprises two main types: inequality, or “notes inégales” (literally “unequal notes”), and overdotting. Other types may be included under the term, including the assimilation of clashing rhythms, including triple to duple or quadruple units (Byrt 2007). The focus of the present paper will be the first two types, notes inégales and overdotting, as they have been a topic of continued research and controversy in the twentieth and well into the twenty-first centuries. Notes Inégales The French term “notes inégales” literally translates into “unequal notes”. In its simplest definition, inequality is the “uneven performance of evenly written note values” (Fuller n.d.). This practice was prominent in France from the mid sixteenth century to the late eighteenth and may have spread to surrounding European countries including Italy, the Netherlands and Germany. The practice of playing equal notes unequally may well be traced to the Ambrosian chant of the Middle Ages, but it was first explicitly mentioned by French composer and theorist Louis Bourgeois (1550). In his writing, “notes inégales” are described as a way of embellishing diminutions, to add more grace and liveliness to the music (“A cause aussi qu'elles ont meilleure grace à les chanter”) (Borrel 1931). Hence the main purpose of inégales was ornamental. In 1696, Loulié distinguishes between three ways of playing divisions which are all notated equally (Borrel 1931): 1. Equalizing, which he called “detacher les notes” (detaching the notes), for music (“chants”) whose notes proceed in interrupted degrees (disjunct). 2. Playing the first note a little longer, which he called “lourer”, for music whose notes succeed one another in uninterrupted degrees (conjunct). 3. Playing the first much longer than the second, but the first must have a dot. This he called “piquer” or “pointer”. This relates to overdotting, discussed in the next section. Muffat gives the following explanation of executing inegales in 16th-note divisions: Figure 1: inequality in an example by Muffat. Left: written. Right: executed (Borrel 1931) 1 Monteclair further shows their application in different meters: Figure 2: Monteclair's explanation of notes inegales in different meters (Borrel 1931) (exécutez: execute) Other writes who discussed notes inégales include Saint-Lambert, La Chapelle and Rousseau, to name but a few. Over 85 French treatises written between 1550 and 1810 suggest that the practice of inégales was an essential component of music pedagogy in France, “as basic as counting rhythms and reading pitches” (Hefling 1993) as well as a common performance practice. Application of Notes Inégales Rules for applying inégales were slow to evolve and began to crystallize at the beginning of the 18th century. Treatises listed what notes values were equal or unequal in different time signatures, showing that the application of inequality was regulated by a meter-note relationship. In general, the notes involved had to be binary, not ternary, and were always subdivisions of the beat, never the beat itself (F. Neumann, The Notes Inegales Revisited 1988). Borrel provides the following table for which notes to unequalize in what time signatures: Unequal notes Meter Half notes Quarter notes or white eighth notes1 Eighth notes Sixteenth notes 32nd notes (Borrel 1931) Generally, for duple meters, notes of the value of a quarter of the denominator were unequal (e.g. sixteenth notes in 4/4); for triple or compound meters, it was applied to notes whose value was half of the denominator (thus, eighth notes in 3/4). The signature ‘3/4’ was associated at first with 1 See figure 4 for an example 2 Italian style with ‘3’ used as the French triple meter, and therefore ¾ could be taken to exclude inequality, but as the use of ‘3’ was abandoned ‘3/4’ gradually lost this connotation (Fuller n.d.). The rule of descending inequality held the principal unit of melodic movement in a piece corresponds to the theoretically unequal one for that meter. If there were smaller values, they became unequal (Fuller n.d.). This insures that only those notes that are likely to be the fastest in the piece, and therefore also likely to be ornamental in character, will be subject to rhythmic modulation (F. Neumann, The Notes Inegales Revisited 1988). Inequality was mostly associated with stepwise motion and legato playing, usually when the notes are paired by slurs (F. Neumann, The Notes Inegales Revisited 1988). Although there are no rules as to when not to apply inequality, some known contra-indications to its use include disjunct motion, walking basses in Andante tempi (the term “Andante” was in fact less a tempo designation in the 18th century and more an instruction for clear performance of the running bass and a warning not to play inégale (Fallows n.d.), batteries (arpeggios, broken-chord figures, rapid repeated notes), alberti basses and similar keyboard accompaniments, accompanying parts in general (Borrel 1931), very fast motion (e.g. figurations by Rameau and some of his followers), very slow motion, syncopated notes, slurs over more than two notes, ternary groups (triples, quavers in 6/8) (Fuller n.d.). Writing the Unwritable When conditions were right, inequality was expected unless canceled by terms such as marqué, detaché, notes égales, croches égales. A few composers used dots over notes to indicate equality, which F. Neumann calls “equality dots”. In figure 3 below, an excerpt from deMars’ Pieces de Clavecin, the composer writes dots over the notes to distinguish their equal execution from those slurred in pairs. In 1730 Cappus remarked that “it would be desirable if all composers took this trouble” (Fuller n.d.). Oftentimes, to suggest mild inequality, composers such as Couperin would use dots with the second note in the pair not shortened in compensation (Fuller n.d.). Inequality was also occasionally indicated with terms such pointé, piqué (interpreted by some writers to mean sharp overdotting, explained below under “overdotting”), passer les croches (lit “execute the quavers”), and louré. Other composers explicitly used dots to indicate inequality. Although there is disagreement as to whether written dotting falls under inequality, it is understood by some as a way of warning against the omission of dots, especially outside of France, where spontaneously altering written rhythms was not common practice, or, as La Chapelle points out in 1736, as an indication of a greater degree of inequality than usual (Fuller n.d.). Figure 3: Chalres De Mars, Courante from “Pieces de Clavecin” 3 Figure 5: a Couperin gavotte from his “Concerts Royaux” in which Figure 4: Opening measures of Couperin’s second “Concert he indicates to be played equally ("notes egales et couless") Royal” Why not resolve doubt and always indicate inequality? Bacily (1668) writes that “dotting was left unwritten for fear of tempting the singer to an excessively jerky delivery, in the manner of the old method of singing that would be very disagreeable today” (Borrel 1931). However, some composers did use dots, including George Muffat, Hotteterre and La Chapelle. The degree of inequality In 1702 Saint-Lambert writes: “When one must unequalize notes, it is taste that determines if they should be little or very unequal.” (Borrel 1931) The degree of inequality is the ratio between the length of the long and short notes of each pairs. It varied from barely perceptible, very subtle 9:7 ratios (e.g. in Engramelle, 1775) through “almost dotted” to the 3:1 ratio of true dotting. This is never indicated by depends on the affect of the music and the taste of the performer. According to this degree, some authors distinguish between lilting inequality, mild inequality that adds more grace and elegance to the music, and vigorous inequality, more or less like dotted notes, resulting in a relentless, nervous energy (Donington 1967). Inequality appears in two forms: long-short (most common) and short-long (reverse inequality/ Lombardic rhythm. The latter is usually used as an occasional and unpredictable “seasoning”, often as semiquaver-dotted quaver. F. Couperin occasionally indicates this with a dot over the second of two paired notes. His indication pointé-coulé in his Courante a L’Italienne, Concerts Royaux no.4 (see figure 4) might also be understood to imply lombardic rhythm. This is most suitable for notes that are slurred in pairs and that descend stepwise (Fuller n.d.). Inequality outside France The question of whether or not to apply notes inégales to music that is not French has been an issue of controversy. Italian music of the era is, by nature, inhospitable to inequality: it features prominent disjunct motion, rapid keyboard figurations, syncopations and walking basses, hence the conclusion that inequality should not be applied to music that is Italian. In their treatises, Loulié, Brossard, Rousseau and others clearly state that inégales were not a feature of the performance of Italian music. Francois Couperin remarks that “the Italians write their music in its true time values but we do not. They play a diatonic succession of eighth notes evenly, whereas we always make the first of each pair a little longer than the second.” (Couperin 1717). It is probable, however, that Italians were familiar with the French custom; Couperin himself wrote a “Courante à l’Italienne” to which he gave the indication “pointé-coulé”: 4 Figure 6: Couperin, opening measures from "Courante à l'Italienne" from Concerts Royaux In Germany, only two writers mention inequality; George Muffat, who had studied in Paris as a youth and who dedicated the lengthy preface to his Florilegium secundum of 1698 to introducing his German compatriots to all the fine points of the "Lullian style”, and J.J. Quantz, flute teacher to Frederick the Great (who admired all things French), who in turn explained and recommended inequality to the Germans in his treatise “On Playing the Flute” (F. Neumann 1994). Since inequality was not as natural to foreign musicians as it was in France, composers who wanted unequal notes usually used explicit dots. A strong case for inequality in certain compositions by Handel, Scarlatti and others is suggested by the presence of dots in the opening measures which disappear thereafter, or, in the case of ensemble pieces, by dots in one part simultaneously with another part than is not dotted (most often, the solo part is written equal, with the orchestral part having dots) (Byrt 2007) (Newman 1992). Handel is said to have been known for his careless dotting, and the following example from his Halle sonata in B minor can be used to illustrate this. Newman suggests that Handel wrote dots in the first measure, indicating that he wanted the rest of the movement to be played unequally (reaffirming the dots in measures 4 and 5). Figure 7: Opening measures from Handel's Halle sonata for recorder and continuo 5 John Byrt uses the term “dotting for the band, but not for the singer” to express what he believed was a time-saving procedure common in Handel. An example of this occurs in the soprano arioso 'Besinne dich, Pilatus'. Here the basso continuo part is dominated by a vigorous ostinato, which is written throughout with semiquaver dotting. In bar 24 the voice part takes up the same motive, but here it is written in equal semiquavers. Byrt finds this odd, since the diminutions at bars 25 and 26 are clearly based on this motive and playing them without any form of inequality would produce a weak effect, arguably not what was intended by the composer. (Byrt 2007) Figure 8: extract from Handel's 'Besinne dich, Pilatus' A similar example occurs in Scarlatti’s “Bella sorte, mi e la morte” from Tigrane (1715). The vocal line comes in with the same theme as the continuo, notated equally. Performing the music as written results in what Byrt calls an “inexact echo”. Figure 9: opening of Scarlatti, "Bella sorte, mi e la morte" from Tigrane 6 Overdotting Overdotting, a term that was coined by German-American music scholar Erwin Bodky, can be defined as the “lingering on the dotted note in certain rhythmic figures somewhat longer than its written value, at the expense of the short note (or note group) following the dot, without changing the pace” (Abravaya 1997). It involves different aspects: lengthening the dotted note, synchronizing the simultaneous shorter notes after the dot, and uniforming (the unifying of short note values horizontally, within a single voice part, or within the entire piece). Sometimes in the early Baroque, composers wrote dotted rhythms which were clearly not intended to last their actual duration. Loulié wrote in his Elements ou Principes de Musique, “When the dot is within the same beat as the quaver that precedes it, one holds the semiquaver a little longer and passes quickly over the semiquaver that follows” (Collins 1969), and this concept was echoed by Metoyen and Hotteterre (Hefling 1993). However, the French writings on overdotting remain far less numerous than those on inégales, and hence our understanding of the issue is far less clear; most of the evidence is relevant largely to German and Italian music. (Stowell 2001) Quantz was the first composer to explicitly codify the late-Baroque practice of overdotting. In his treatise, On Playing the Flute, after giving the general rule that dotting a note adds half its value, he gives the exceptions to this: the short notes after dotted quavers, semiquavers and demisemiquavers (as in (a) below) which are to be performed “very short” (as in (b)), whether the tempo is slow or fast (Collins 1969). While Quantz doesn’t explicitly dictate a 7:1 relationship, it is implied through some of his musical examples that this would be the case. He also writes that the long note is not actually held for its full value, but is replaced by a rest, and that string players should be expected to play the short note on a new bow and not to hook (Hefling 1993). Figure 10: Overdotting as explained by Quantz in chapter 5 of "On Playing the Flute" Quantz also discusses pick-up figures: “When three or more demisemiquavers follow a dotted note or rest, there are not always played according to their value but at the very end of their collective value and in the greatest speed” (Collins 1969). This figure occurs most often in overtures and entrées, as we will encounter shortly in Bach’s BWV831. The other major composer who tackled the issue of overdotting is CPE Bach in his Versuch über die wahre Art das Clavier zu spielen (Essay on the True Art of Playing Keyboard Instruments). In the chapter on Performance, he writes: “The short notes after dots are always performed shorter than their notation requires. Therefore it is superfluous to place strokes or dots over them” (CPE Bach 1949). He did caution, however, against dogmatic rules on overdotting, suggesting that the performer utilize good taste in deciding when and when not to overdot. 7 The notation of a double-dot was very uncommon throughout the Baroque era. While some composers in France were writing actual double-dots in the seventeenth-century, including Andre Raison, Chambonnières and later, more sporadically, Clerambault, Corrette, and Hotteterre, it was not used by Lully, François Couperin, Rameau or any Italian or German master before the mid eighteenth century (F. Neumann, Facts and Fiction about Overdotting 1977). However, it is illuminating to note that beginning in the 1730s, several notable composers, including Handel and J.S. Bach, began notating double-dots and contracted tirata figures in their music. This is especially remarkable in Handel, whose output of French overtures spans nearly half a century (1705- 1752). Figure 12 illustrates this; Collins notes that with only two exceptions, the overtures up until 1738 use the upbeat figures shown in (a), while those after that date use the modernized notation of (b). (Collins 1969) Figure 11: an example of double dotting in Chambonniere's Allemande from "Second Livre" Figure 12: the progression of Handel's notation of up-‐beat figures in his French overtures. (a): before 1783; (b): after 1783 A similar practice is reflected in J.S. Bach’s rewriting of French Overtures and Allemandes that had formerly been simply dotted and overdotting the newer version. A famous example is the Overture in the French Style BWV 831, which exists in two versions. The first three measures are quoted below. In the second version, most of the simply-dotted rhythms were changed to or and nearly all upbeat groups in the form of were contracted to tirata-like figures . Figure 13: Opening measures of Bach's French Overture BWV831 a Figure 14: Opening measures of Bach's French overture BWV831 b 8 The question that has often been posed is whether the newer version was simply an improvement on the first or an explication of it. Did Bach intend new rhythms, or did he rather write old ones more literally? Many writers agree that it is the latter, or at least a combination of both. The above examples indicate that as the eighteenth century progressed and notational practices were changing, composers gradually moved towards a more accurate representation of musical meaning. It is probable, therefore, that Bach was likely expecting overdotting in his earlier music as well. The sharp rhythmic contractions due to overdotting later led to the term "French overture style”, in which dotted notes are supposed to be strongly overdotted by excessive lengthening of the dot or by corresponding insertion of rests (F. Neumann 1994). The effect is a nervous, relentless energy very characteristic of many French overtures. Thurston Dart writes: "In an overture in the French style ... all the parts should move together, jerkily, even when their written note-values do not suggest that this is how they should be played. All dotted rhythms should be adjusted so that they fit the shortest one in the piece." (F. Neumann 1994). This style has been inferred in works where dotting is written in the first few measures of the piece and later dropped, very common in Handel (as discussed under inequality above). Overdotting has also been applied to avoid clashing of rhythms, to synchronize overly-dotted parts with other than have simple dots. An example in Handel occurs in Oriana’s aria from Amadigi, quoted below. Here the voice enters with simple dotting, while all the other instruments play in sharpened rhythms. Figure 15: Excerpt from Oriana's aria in Handel's Amadigi, showing synchronization issues Another synchronization problem occurs in the opening of the overture to Partenope. Abravaya observes that “literal reading of the dotted quarter notes in the first two measures (viola, violin II) would give rise to “unprepared dissonances at the last quaver of each measure, hardly characteristic of the sensitive Baroque treatment of dissonance.” He explains that these “rough sonorities” would easily disappear by synchronizing the short notes after the dots as semiquavers. (Abravaya 1997) Figure 16: opening measures of the overture to Handel's "Partenope" 9 Others disagree with this reasoning. Frederick Neumann, the most famous “rightist” in the 20th century debate of rhythmic alteration, argues that a simpler solution to the above issues (especially example 16) is that composers meant what they put down, because “they wrote idiomatically for the voice that calls for rounder lines, while adding a delightful touch of rhythmic spice through sharper dotting of the instruments” (F. Neumann 1994). The “leftists” in the argument are followers of Arnold Dolmetsch, who first recommended overdotting in Handel and Bach in his aforementioned book. In the performing world, several musicians with well-established careers have adopted Dolmetsch’s theories. Gustav Leonhardt’s recording of the Bach BWV831, for example, shows sharp overdotting (Leonhardt 2012). Other performers have been aware of the rhythmic clashes produced by problems of synchronization and have taken other measures to diminish them (e.g. through soft articulation), as in Reinhard Goebel’s recording of Bach’s orchestral overtures with Musica Antiqua Köln (Köln 1986). Conclusion Most modern writings on the issue of rhythmic alterations conclude by leaving judgment to “good taste”, le bon goût, as 18th-century French writers on the issue recommended. However, David Fuller remarks that this should not be one’s personal taste but that of the era when the music was written. “Alien taste is laboriously acquired, and never completely so except by imitation,” writes Fuller (Fuller n.d.). The general affect of the piece is often the best indication to the performer. A comprehensive understanding or agreement of when and how to practice rhythmic alteration is far from reached, however, and personal decisions will have to be made. In the presence of many differing opinions, each with its own evidence and followers, it is probably best to keep an open mind about the issue. Rhythmic alteration is strongly present in today’s music as an essential element in jazz, where notes inégales are known as the term “swung note” (and notes to be played evenly are similarly called “straight eighths”) (Fuller n.d.). This practice is widely understood without being indicated, and it would be interesting to project this style a few hundred years into the future and watch musicians and scholars try to reproduce it from printed documents alone. Indeed, as Fuller remarks, “you can’t prove it by notation”. Bibliography Abravaya, Ido. "A French Overture Revisited: Another Look at the Two Versions of BWV831." Early Music 25, no. 1 (February 1997): 47-58+60-61. Borrel, E. "Les notes inegales dans l'ancienne musique francaise." Revue de Musicologie 12, no. 40 (November 1931): 278-289. Byrt, John. "Elements of Rhythmic Inequality in the Arias of Scarlatti and Handel." Early Music, November 2007: 609-626. Collins, Michael. "A Reconsideration of French Overdotting." Music & Letters (Oxford University Press) 50, no. 1 (January 1969): 111-123. Couperin, François. L'art de toucher le clavecin (edition de 1717): Règles pour l'accompagnement (manuscrit). Edited by Jr. Saint-Arroman. Courlay: Courlay: J.M. Fuzeau 1992, 1717. CPE Bach, Carl Philipp Emmanuel. Essay on the True Art of Playing Keyboard Instruments. 1. Translated by William J. Mitchell. New York: W. W. Norton, 1949. Donington, Robert. "A problem of inequality." The Musical Quarterly 53, no. 4 (1967): 503. Fallows, David. Andante. Oxford University Press. n.d. http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/00854. (accessed December 2, 2012). 10 Fuller, David. Notes Inegales. Oxford University Press. n.d. http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/20126 (accessed November 13, 2012). Hefling, Stephen. Rhythmic alteration in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century music : notes inégales and overdotting. New York: Schirmer Books, 1993. Köln, Musica Antiqua. 4 Ouvertüren (Suites) BWV 1066-1069, Ouvertüre BWV 1070. Cond. Reinhardt Goebel. Comp. Johnann Sebastian Bach. 1986. Leonhardt, Gustav. "Französische Suiten ." French suites; Inventions & sinfonias; Italian concerto, etc. Comp. Johann Sebastian Bach. 2012. Neumann, F. "Notes Inegales for Bach, Overdotting for Everybody? A commentary on an Attempt to Revive Dolmetsch's "Rhythmic Alterations"." Historical Performance, Spring 1994: 13-25. Neumann, Frederick. "Facts and Fiction about Overdotting." The Musical Quarterly (Oxford University Press) 63, no. 2 (April 1977): 155-185. Neumann, Frederick. "The Notes Inegales Revisited." The Journal of Musicology 6, no. 2 (Spring 1988): 137-149. Newman, Anthony. "Inequality (Inegales): A New Point of View." The Musical Quarterly (Oxford University Press) 76, no. 2 (1992): 169-183. Stowell, Robin. The Early Violin and Viola: a Practical Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. 11