Suite no. 7 in d by Henry Purcell, Z.668, performed by Dale Carr on 7 October 1989 @dalecarr6361

Dale Carr | Suite no. 7 in d by Henry Purcell, Z.668, performed by Dale Carr on 7 October 1989 @dalecarr6361 | Uploaded May 2021 | Updated October 2024, 1 hour ago.
Suite no. 7 in d by Henry Purcell, Z.668:
- Prelude
- Almand very slow Bell=barr
- Corant

Performed by Dale Carr in the Pelstergasthuiskerk in Groningen on 7 October 1989 on a harpsichord built in 1975 by Hendrik Broekman, modeled on an instrument by Michel Richard, 1688

The prelude performed here is from a different suite {that in D major, Z.667}, and I have changed it to d minor - a minor adjustment, one might say - to match the almand & corant, since their suite has no prelude of its own. I have treated it as an unmeasured prelude in the French style.

Nobody seems to know why the almand has the name of a hamlet at the south end of Hatfield Park in Hertfordshire as a subtitle.

Both the almand & the corant have a lot of notes written to be played after the beat; I think this may indicate some kind of rubato, but I have never seen an explanation.

You can hear more of Purcell's harpsichord works at
youtube.com/watch?v=7CGiTFrddG8
and at
youtube.com/watch?v=GTI0lBxttxk

Suite in F major : Allemande grave, by Louis Couperin performed by Dale Carr on 25 April, 1987

$Suite in F major : Sarabande, by Louis Couperin, performed by Dale Carr on 25 April, 1987 Suite in F major : Sarabande, by Louis Couperin {~1626-1661}, performed by Dale Carr in the church in Middelbert {Groningen} on 25 April, 1987 on a harpsichord made by Hendrik Broekman in 1975 The Bauyn MS. contains three choices for the sarabande of the F-major suite; the general opinion is that the player may choose which and how many of each dance type to play, and that the allemande, courante, sarabande, & chaconne or passacaglia are generally included, though other types may well be omitted. One aspect of this sarabande that I find especially intriguing is its metric & rhythmic subtlety. As with the preceding courante, the triple meter allows a great variety of subdivisions of the measure. The time signature here is given as 3, not 3/4 or 3/2; this may seem imprecise, but it avoids forcing an ungraceful oom-pa-pa 3-ness. The 1st measure turns out to be actually a ½-measure anacrucis {upbeat} to a series of measures that we would now write as 3/2 or 6/4 - in any case, many of the measures contain 6 𝅘𝅥, although the MS is not entirely consistent {whether on purpose or not} in its bar lengths. Although upbeats tend to be but a fraction of the main note-value, music history has many instances of such a ½-measure upbeat, of which I’ll mention only a small number: - the beginning of the courante of Bachs 2nd French suite in c-minor, which is mostly in clear 3-beat bars; - the closing chorus of Bachs motet Komm, Jesu, komm, BWV229 {Drauf schließ’ ich mich …}, in which the measures are clearly & consistently paired in upbeat-measures & downbeat-measures; - many passages in Bachs organ prelude in G, BWV541, with the repeated rhythm 𝅘𝅥𝅮𝅘𝅥𝅮𝅘𝅥𝅮|𝅘𝅥𝄾 ; here the downbeat 𝅘𝅥 is often a dissonance resolved on the 2nd beat. An aspect of the over-all form that is worthy of mention is the matter of repetitions. The general ‘rule’ is that dances are in ‘binary form’ with an interior cadence on the dominant or another closely related key, and that each of the 2 §s is marked with repeat signs {which may or may not be obligatory}. The 1st ½ of this sarabande ends with a repeat sign {https://youtu.be/ZXO89bzvslQ?t=53}, but it consists of 2 nearly identical §s: only the last 3 𝅘𝅥 of the sections are different, the 1st time moving to a ½-cadence on the dominant {https://youtu.be/ZXO89bzvslQ?t=32}, the 2nd time concluding in the tonic {which is itself rather unusual}. I chose not to play the repetition, which is really a repetition of a repetition, and also because there’s an opportunity for extending the dance by 2 extra bars @ the end, thanks to a sign {𝄋} a few bars before the final cadence {https://youtu.be/ZXO89bzvslQ?t=115} indicating a petite reprise, which is a short coda. {This sign has been omitted in the final bar of the MS, where it would be expected; but the intention is sufficiently clear.} The harpsichord was tuned to a=~415Hz, in meantone. The plectra were crow quills.$ $Præambulum ex d manualiter, 1637 den 10 Januarij by Heinrich Scheidemann, performed by Dale Carr Præambulum ex d manualiter, 1637 den 10 Januarij, by Heinrich Scheidemann (ca. 1596-1663) ; Performed by Dale Carr on the organ in Midwolde {Westerkwartier} on 18 July, 1987 This work is preserved in 2 manuscripts, of which one specifies manualiter and the other the date of composition. Both indications suggest an organ comparable with that in Midwolde, which has no pedals, and which was built in 1630 {Levinus Eekman} and remodeled in 1660 {Andreas de Mare}. The structure of the piece has an interesting symmetry: near the beginning {050} theres a passage with harmonies ascending by 3rds {a-e, c-g, e-b}, which is rather unusual, especially in a sequence of this length. In the passage leading to the final cadence {313} this ascent by 3rds is balanced by a descent by 3rds {d, b♭, g}, introducing the subdominant. Between these passages with harmonic movement in 3rds are several passages moving up or down chromatically in one or another voice, with the other voices in harmony. Though the concluding bass movement in descending 3rds is fairly rare, I can refer to 2 other works in which it can be heard: - Bach, Kunst der Fuge, contrapunctus 1 {f, d, b♭, g}, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQ2oVZgq_dM @ 250. This descent is followed/echoed by a bass ascent in 3rds {d, f, a, c} leading to the transformation of the c♮ from the exposition - which has been a harmonic thorn-in-the-side throughout the piece - into a c#; - Tomkins, Pavan in 3 parts {c, a, f, d,}, @ the end of the 3rd section. If listeners are aware of other similar passages, Id be delighted to learn of them. registrations: {010} 8 Roerfluit, 4 Prestant, 2 Octaaf {050} 8, 4 {113} 8, 4, 2 {200} 8, 4, 2, 1½ Quint {treble, then bass} {255} 8, 4, 2, 1½, Sesquialter {treble}$ $Magnificat Quinti Toni by Jean Titelouze, performed by Dale Carr in Zeerijp on 12 Sept., 1980 Magnificat Quinti Toni {pub. 1626} by Jean Titelouze {1562/3 - 1633}, performed by Dale Carr on the organ in Zeerijp {prov. Groningen} on 12 Sept., 1980 {versets 1-3} Its a pity that Titelouzes works are seldom played, and thus little known, outside of France. His hymns & Magnificat verses are beautiful organ music, deserving of close study. His publication of Magnificat settings in 1626 included 7 versets in each mode, based on plainchant melodies. The 5th-mode melody, like the others, is in 2 phrases: the 1st is an ascending triad on f, that is f-a-c - and then some more depending on the verse in question. The 2nd phrase is a short melodic figure c-d-b-c-a - and then some more depending on the verse in question. The plainchant melodies derive from a time before our modern concepts of major & minor keys, which are roughly similar to those of Titelouze. He treats the melodies as subjects for modern music of his time, ergo in major & minor keys, more or less. This implies, for him, frequent use of b𝄬, though often with a nod to the original b𝄮. Many of Titelouzes organ works using plainsong melodies treat the melody as a cantus firmus, i.e. in long notes. This is the case in several of his magnificat versets, but not in those for the 5th tone, which are composed more or less as motets in which all parts have notes of roughly equal value. Verset 1 {Magnificat anima mea}: Since Titelouze is writing in a post-modal style, he seems to feel free to use real & tonal forms of his subjects, much as Bach or other later composers would do. The intervals of the tonal form are adjusted to fit the harmonic circumstances of the context. This means that instead of a triad f-a-c, spanning a perfect 5th, Titelouze might choose c-d-f, spanning a perfect 4th instead, without a guilty conscience. He even goes so far as to *begin* with the tonal form of his subject {https://youtu.be/Zo_hD5Dzg8E?t=19} c-d-f, *following* it by the real form {https://youtu.be/Zo_hD5Dzg8E?t=22} f-a-c in the upper voice. The 2nd § of this verse {https://youtu.be/Zo_hD5Dzg8E?t=62} is based on c-d-b-c-a, slightly varied. Verset 2 {Quia respexit}: Begins {https://youtu.be/Zo_hD5Dzg8E?t=116} as does the 1st with the tonal form of his slightly modified subject. The 2nd § {https://youtu.be/Zo_hD5Dzg8E?t=150} uses the repetition of the 1st tone of the subject that was heard in the 1st verset. The b𝄮 of the original is in this verset often preceded by a b𝄬. Verset 3 {Et misericordia ejus}: Begins {https://youtu.be/Zo_hD5Dzg8E?t=227} with the real form of the subject {f-a-c} but with a long c before; this is answered by the tonal form, which becomes f-c-d-f. The 2nd § {https://youtu.be/Zo_hD5Dzg8E?t=285} uses a more distant relative of the original: c-d-d-c-bb-a or f-a-a-g-f-e {later, even g-a-a-g-f-e}. This subject is also heard per arsin et thesin, i.e. with strong & weak beats reversed.$

Fantasia mit Bindungen by Sweelinck, played by Dale Carr in Örgryte nya Kyrkan on 13 December, 2000

Hymnus Ave maris stella by Girolamo Cavazzoni {Venice, 1543}, performed by Dale Carr

$Méditation sur ma morte future by Froberger, performed by Dale Carr on 7 October 1989 Méditation sur ma morte future by Johann Jakob Froberger {1616-1667}, from the suite in D Major, performed by Dale Carr in the Pelstergasthuiskerk in Groningen on 7 October 1989 on a harpsichord built in 1975 by Hendrik Broekman, modeled on an instrument by Michel Richard, 1688 In the notes accompanying my performance of Contrapunctus 1 from Bachs Kunst der Fuge {https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQ2oVZgq_dM }, I showed how a single tone {there c𝄮} can be used in a dominant role by the composer. This c𝄮, sounded repeatedly in the 1st bars of the piece, is left hanging until near the end, when it is forced up, with determined effort, to c# & thence on to d for the conclusion of the movement. Frobergers suite in D does something quite similar, with the tone *b*, but postpones the final resolution until the 2nd ½ of the last movement. Ill try to demonstrate that here, but its more difficult since the publicly available scores, especially for the 1st movement, the Méditation sur ma morte future, are full of mistakes. First a couple of considerations about what might move a composer to choose a particular tone. I think its a matter of the prominence of that tone; but what makes a tone prominent? There are several things that can be immediately heard as factors contributing to what I call prominence: - soprano tones are - other things being equal - likely to be more prominent than inner voices; not only in polyphonic music; - long tones & repeated tones are inherently more prominent than short tones & single tones; - chromatic tones may increase the prominence of what follows; - tones supported by a consonant harmony gain in prominence; - tones supported by a change of consonant harmony gain in prominence; - tones supported by an unexpected change of harmony gain even more in prominence; - tones approached by a leap, rather than by a step, are likely to be more prominent; - unstable tones, i.e. not-yet-resolved dissonances, are so prominent as to demand resolution according to quite strict rules of harmony & counterpoint; effective resolution may diminish their prominence; - volume in decibels plays a role in music of a later period, but is not among the most important factors in organ & harpsichord music; - ornamented tones may be more prominent, depending on the ornament; - &c. Theres nothing magical or arcane about these factors contributing to what I call prominence. Every listener hears them to a greater or lesser extent, and I would suggest that the greater the extent, the better the listener will be able to follow what is going on in the work, musically. Let me begin with the 1st bars of the Méditation. The 1st full chord is D major: from the bass upward it’s d-a-d-f#. Micro-melodically heard, the f# moves through g to a & then to c#; the important melodic movement is d-c# ; but the harmony doesnt change yet. Then the c# moves chromatically to a c𝄮 which is repeated 4x before moving on to *b* {https://youtu.be/a-xA7wjrtMk?t=34}, at which point the harmony does change {to a G-major chord}. Theres perhaps nothing terribly remarkable or prominent about this b, yet; but in retrospect it seems to lead the way through the rest of the piece. In any case, this b presently becomes an inner voice and fades into rather less significance. The upper voice next moves gradually upward d-e-f#-g#-a-g#... leading, one might predict, to a pause on an A-major harmony. This is however subverted by the # sign before the expected a, leading onward via a *b*-minor harmony {https://youtu.be/a-xA7wjrtMk?t=69}, with *b* in the top voice, to the delayed cadence on an A-major harmony. The upward scalewise movement from d to c# would have had to pass via *b* in any case, of course. But the emphasis given to the tone *b* by the root-position chord of *b* minor is remarkable. The end of the 1st ½ comes only 4 bars later, on a surprising harmony of F# {https://youtu.be/a-xA7wjrtMk?t=119}. The beginning of the 2nd ½ returns presently to the chord of A major, which ‘normally’ would have closed the 1st section. The movement of the bass is clearly in ½notes, establishing a regular harmonic rhythm against which the coming events can be measured. The top voice then moves unflinchingly upward from c# through d#, e, f#, g, to a, above a tonic chord of D. The surprising harmony that follows {https://youtu.be/a-xA7wjrtMk?t=310} , g#-d-e-b, emphasizes the tone *b* which is then suspended across the bar line, becoming a dissonance. The universal rules of harmony require that this correctly prepared dissonance must be resolved on the next harmonic beat by moving down a tone; that would be to ‘a’, but the ‘a’ is glided over much too fast and has already passed by the time of the next beat, so it doesn’t function as a melodic resolution at all. Froberger treats the tone *b* in the other movements of the suite with a comparable intent, leaving it clearly unresolved at the end of each movement except the last. Stay tuned!$

Felix namque by Thomas Preston {†1563} played by Dale Carr on the organ in Krewerd on 3 June, 1984

Fantasia in a BWV904 by J.S. Bach, performed by Dale Carr on the Schnitger organ in Norden in 1998

$Tombeau sur la morte de Blancheroche; by Johann Jakob Froberger {FbWV 632}, performed by Dale Carr Tombeau fait à Paris sur la morte de Monsieur Blancheroche; lequel se joue fort lentement à la discretion sans observer aucune mesure; by Johann Jakob Froberger {FbWV 632}; performed by Dale Carr on a harpsichord made in 1975 by Hendrik Broekman, based on an instrument by Michel Richard, 1688 ; chinoiserie and soundboard painting by Sheridan Germann. The MS of this piece is overloaded with words: a long title, to begin with, and a long marginal note describing the death of Monsieur Blancheroche {aka Blancrocher aka Fleuris}. But whats most important for most listeners is the sound, the music, and later perhaps the sources of inspiration or other apologiæ. In the case of this piece, the words tacitly raise many complicated questions which the player may attempt, or not, to answer in the performance. A tombeau is a musical in memoriam; most tombeaux are slow, many are in minor keys, often with unusual or unexpected harmonic or melodic movements. Several tombeaux seem to refer to the tolling of funeral bells. They offer plenty to exercise the imagination - not only the musical or aural imagination. Any listener contemporary with Froberger who had his check-list at hand would have given Froberger check-marks for tempo, for mode, for surprises, and for bells. But following a piece of music is more than exercise in filling in a form. The composers 1st direction lequel se joue fort lentement {to be played very slowly} leaves little room for doubt, and indeed, the 1st harmony lasts almost 15 with only the simplest filling-in by arpeggios and scale movements. The 2nd harmony is complete only after ~30, and is the nearest possible chord to the 1st, a simple dominant in 1st inversion, involving only the simplest melodic steps from the 1st chord. The expectation of a slow tempo is, at least in the beginning, written into the notes. Frobergers next instruction, à la discretion, is much less clear because we dont know whether he meant discreetness aka modesty, or preference of the player, who might be quite immodest; nor do we know what Froberger might have desired in a modest performance. He used the term elsewhere, e.g. in the gigue of his Suite XX in D, at https://youtu.be/pLuMy8GSC4Q?t=86 . I think that even the interpretation of the term is left to the discretion of the player. Frobergers last instruction, sans observer aucune mesure {without observing any measure}, is the most difficult to construe: was he referring to bar-lines, or to beats, or to note-values? And if he meant any of these, why did he then write clear bar-lines and detailed note-values {from 32nd-notes to whole notes, precisely indicated}? I have no answer. I have heard many performances of this piece in which the length of the 16th-notes, for example, is halved {more or less} in the 2nd part of the piece. This is not likely, I think, to be what the composer was referring to with this instruction, but the change of tempo makes musical sense to me. The description in the MS of Blancheroches last hours could lead a performer to attempt to interpret the piece as if it directly reflected the details of this description. Some commentators have said, for example, that the closing downward scale represents his fatal fall down the stairs. But before this fall we have already heard the tolling of funeral bells, so this interpretation seems to me unlikely. There are many possibilities for speculation about what this or that passage may represent; those who are so inclined will exercise their imaginations as they wish. A very different tombeau for Blancheroche, by Louis Couperin, can be heard @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_bAn9Yh 0$ $Het Juweel van Doctor Bull, quod fecit anno 1621 21 December, performed by Dale Carr in Zeerijp Het Juweel van Doctor Bull, quod fecit anno 1621 21 December {My Jewel}, performed by Dale Carr on the organ in Zeerijp {prov. Groningen} on 12 Sept., 1980 Bull composed 2 versions of this piece: one is a rump-ti-dump version, which is preserved in several variants including that in the Fitzwilliam Virginal Book; the present version, however, is more polyphonic, more developed, and requires, I think, a more thoughtful approach. It is preserved in a single MS giving the title & date as above. This setting, mostly in 3 clear voices, has a tune of 3 lines, each with a varied repetition, though the last line brings a surprise instead of a simple varied repetition. The 1st line has the tune g-c-d-e-g-c..., which gives rise to 2 important motives used later: c-d-e-c & e-g-c. But even before those motives are put to work, the tune itself is introduced in imitation {https://youtu.be/bh48KGFdgiE?t=15} in the 1st 2 measures. Measure 3 brings an unexpected new harmony {https://youtu.be/bh48KGFdgiE?t=26}, a B𝄬-major chord, above which the next part of the tune, e-g-f-B𝄬, is presented and then imitated in diminution in the following measure. Measure 5 {https://youtu.be/bh48KGFdgiE?t=35} returns to the chord of C supporting the next part of the tune, e-g-d , c-e-b in a dotted rhythm, which is also imitated in the other voices. This line ends {https://youtu.be/bh48KGFdgiE?t=45} with e-d-c-e-d-c, which should be construed as the 1st of the motives mentioned above {c-d-e-c} linked with its inversion. Theres a lot going on here underneath a rather unserious, even whimsical tune. The repetition of this 1st section begins {https://youtu.be/bh48KGFdgiE?t=54} by applying the 1st motive {c-d-e-c} directly to the tune that gave birth to it, again treated in imitation. To this mix is added a new motive {d-f-d} in the next measure {https://youtu.be/bh48KGFdgiE?t=65}, foreshadowing an important element of the 2nd section. In measure 13 {https://youtu.be/bh48KGFdgiE?t=74} the 2nd motive, e-g-c, reappears in the imitative fabric below the melody. The 2nd line of the tune begins in G {https://youtu.be/bh48KGFdgiE?t=93} with a melody b-d-d-d-(e-)d..., underneath which we hear the motive g-b-g in various forms {as mentioned above}. This motive is heard both on the beat & off the beat {per arsin & thesin}. The 1st 2 measures in G are followed by d-minor moving again to B𝄬. The repetition of this line {https://youtu.be/bh48KGFdgiE?t=131} takes the repeated tone d to make a new motive in 8th notes, b-c-d-d-e-d-d-e-d, which is used in parallel 3rds & 6ths. The 3rd line of the tune begins in F {https://youtu.be/bh48KGFdgiE?t=170} accompanied by the 1st motive, again linked with its inversion {a-f-g-a-f, & variants}. The figuration under the final chord of G includes g-e-f#-g-a-b-g-b-a-g, linking 3 forms of this motive with each other. The repetition of the 3rd line begins normally {https://youtu.be/bh48KGFdgiE?t=209} w/ another variant of the repeated-note motive, continuing normally for 4 bars. The 2nd ½ of this 3rd line {https://youtu.be/bh48KGFdgiE?t=227} is however not varied, but replaced by the tune known as Wolseys wild or The woods so wild. Any of Bulls listeners would have recognized this deviation instantly, since this tune was widely known at the time - far better known than the tune of Bulls Juweel. A 4th section is added in a completely different character {https://youtu.be/bh48KGFdgiE?t=246} : the tune of Wolseys wild is heard in the top voice, while the left hand provides a running bass in 𝅘𝅥𝅯. All of those meticulously developed motives from the 1st 3 sections are here forgotten. Registration: Rugwerk, 8 Quintadena, 2 Gemshoorn ; repeats on the Hoofdwerk, 8 Holpijpe, 2 Octave; Last section {https://youtu.be/bh48KGFdgiE?t=246} {Wolseys wild}: right hand on Rugwerk, as above; left hand on Hoofdwerk, 8 Holpijpe, 3 Quinte Fluite, 2 Octave. Will Yow Walke the Woods soe Wylde {https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_Yow_Walke_the_Woods_soe_Wylde} The recording heard here was previously uploaded without the score and with a shorter commentary {https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLttnwf4St0 published 211121}$