I am perplexed. I thought that Vicentino had experimented with the 31 note octave because it produced better thirds. However, it is quite unsuitable for demonstrating the Greek genera. The Greek tetrachord was based on the perfect fourth, so it makes sense to switch to a 29 note octave (because it makes the fourth better), rather than to a 31 note octave (which makes it worse). Moreover, the enharmonic scale involved dividing the major semi-tone into two equal quarter tones, so it is not only sensible but actually essential to switch to a 29 note octave rather than a 31 note octave because the former divides the major semi-tone in two while the latter divides it in three. Can anyone explain?
I think the short answer is that he wasn't thinking about it in terms of "notes per octave", but rather expanding on the resources that were common in his time. This would have been quarter-comma meantone, extended to its playable limit. His keyboard, the archicembalo, actually had 36 keys per octave on it - of which 5 were *pure* 5ths tuned to the black notes on the upper manual, and therefore technically not in the meantone gamut at all! It seems clear he wasn't thinking in terms of equal temperament, even though his gamut comes very close to 31edo (and is functionally identical, especially for singers). So it probably wouldn't have occurred to him to look for other edos as such. Also, I know that a chain of perfect 5ths has an MOS at 29 pitches per octave, so he could have arrived at an approximation of 29edo that way (if he were thinking specifically about Greek music theory), but this sacrifices both the 5/4 and the 6/5, and his music is VERY triadic. Clearly he wasn't trying to reproduce Greek music - only to extend the practice of his time, using Greek models as *justification* for using unfamiliar (and small!) intervals.
29 is not suitable, it actually supports both meantone and schismatic tunings, but the meantone one is mistuned, so it's worse than 12 equal. You use can certainly use 29 for medieval or ancient Greek music, but 31 is better for classical, because its meantone is not mistuned.
He wrote about the greek to be taken seriously by the intellectuals, but in the end, he was saying "we can compose like this, it sounds better, go have fun with it."
Fair question. I wouldn't normally, but I was conducting them on this occasion so they could concentrate on the tuning. I am sure they could do it without me now, though.
Getting that in tune... and with room for ornaments such as vibrato as well...
Just mind-blowing.
Wow! Wow! Wow! Speechless...
Finally we have a decent, proper rendition of this!!
Phenomenal! So inspiring to hear musicians expand harmonic possibility in a masterful, musically inspiring way.
instablaster
Thank you, EXAUDI, for lifting Vicentino's radical expressions of musical beauty from the pit of obscurity. 🥂
Another sublime performance of Vicentino's work. More musicians today should take a leaf from his book.
Id say its one of the few pleasing ones, some sound harsh and not smooth at all
Cannot count the number of times this took my breath away.
very moving 9/7 and 7/6's and the best third-based harmony
Thank you! Very impressive! Please release the record - CD or download.
Faszinierend
Extraordinary
Lovely!
I am impressed
I am perplexed. I thought that Vicentino had experimented with the 31 note octave because it produced better thirds. However, it is quite unsuitable for demonstrating the Greek genera. The Greek tetrachord was based on the perfect fourth, so it makes sense to switch to a 29 note octave (because it makes the fourth better), rather than to a 31 note octave (which makes it worse). Moreover, the enharmonic scale involved dividing the major semi-tone into two equal quarter tones, so it is not only sensible but actually essential to switch to a 29 note octave rather than a 31 note octave because the former divides the major semi-tone in two while the latter divides it in three. Can anyone explain?
I think the short answer is that he wasn't thinking about it in terms of "notes per octave", but rather expanding on the resources that were common in his time. This would have been quarter-comma meantone, extended to its playable limit. His keyboard, the archicembalo, actually had 36 keys per octave on it - of which 5 were *pure* 5ths tuned to the black notes on the upper manual, and therefore technically not in the meantone gamut at all!
It seems clear he wasn't thinking in terms of equal temperament, even though his gamut comes very close to 31edo (and is functionally identical, especially for singers). So it probably wouldn't have occurred to him to look for other edos as such.
Also, I know that a chain of perfect 5ths has an MOS at 29 pitches per octave, so he could have arrived at an approximation of 29edo that way (if he were thinking specifically about Greek music theory), but this sacrifices both the 5/4 and the 6/5, and his music is VERY triadic. Clearly he wasn't trying to reproduce Greek music - only to extend the practice of his time, using Greek models as *justification* for using unfamiliar (and small!) intervals.
29 is not suitable, it actually supports both meantone and schismatic tunings, but the meantone one is mistuned, so it's worse than 12 equal. You use can certainly use 29 for medieval or ancient Greek music, but 31 is better for classical, because its meantone is not mistuned.
He wrote about the greek to be taken seriously by the intellectuals, but in the end, he was saying "we can compose like this, it sounds better, go have fun with it."
What does the sheet music look like?
Still 7 notes but with extra accidentals like C, C half sharp, C sharp etc until 31 notes.
why conducting 4 singers???
Fair question. I wouldn't normally, but I was conducting them on this occasion so they could concentrate on the tuning. I am sure they could do it without me now, though.
Good performance, but the name is Nicola Vicentino, not Nicolà
(I deleted my replies as I think we were talking at cross purposes before...Nicola without an accent it is then.)