Missa Corona Spinea - Taverner/Tallis Scholars

[Simon Biazeck]

A tad harsh, maybe? I agree to the extent that to get a good choir, you need to invite the right people to join it! I have found PP a little 'mechanical' in the past, but I did feel that in Corona Spinea he (or maybe they) had given something extra, a new subtlety if you like.

No, I can say with some certainty that that is the case - insider info.

The singers are certainly responding to one another, as ever, and the remarkable aspects of the writing. Singing styles overall in this rep. have changed and that, for me, is mostly what I'm hearing. I could go on, so many stories, but I shan't.

[ardcarp]

insider info

[doversoul1]

I expect most regular members here know or have read it but Andrew Parrott writes about Choirs and high voices (‘Falsetto Beliefs’) in his new (-ish) book Composers’ Intentions?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Composers-Intentions-Traditions-Musical-Performance/dp/1783270322/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1446567340&sr=1-1

The technical aspects are well beyond me to read critically but the details Parrott amassed are amazing and fascinating.

[Vox Humana]

David Wulstan's home-spun musicology on high pitch transposition is based on pretty shaky evidence... almost none, in fact! I seem to recall he thought that because chiavette (high clef) scoring often necessitated downwards transposition (pretty much accepted these days) then works scored in chiavi naturali (natural clefs) should be transposed upwards as if in counter balance. Vox H. will correct and/or expand, I'm sure.

To be fair, Wulstan was only developing a view of pitch that already been gaining ground during the earlier twentieth century (Fellowes had already noted that transposition upwards by a minor third often best suited Byrd's music and there were others before him). The issue of "chiavette" is entirely independent from that of any pitch standard. One of Wulstan's most valid and important observations was that the compasses of the five types of voice in Tudor music (treble, mean, countertenor, tenor, bass) are remarkably consistent. Some pieces were notated at pitches higher than the norm and others at lower pitches (the scribes achieving this by selecting combinations of high or low clefs as necessary), but all these pieces could be transposed to a pitch that coincided with the "normal" ranges. Here he had some support from Thomas Morley, who, in his Plaine and Easie Introduction, made a comment about the pitch of pieces in high clefs and normal clefs coming to the same thing in performance (I forget Morley's exact words). So far, so good. However Wulstan then went too far by claiming that the various combinations of clefs used were all part of a code dictating specific transpositions (e.g. a baritone clef in the bass part required transposition down a tone, a tenor clef in the bass tranposition down a major third, etc). As he first proposed it (in 1967?) this code made complete sense since most pieces did seem to obey these rules, but as time went on and inconveniences surfaced, Wulstan's "clef code" became ever more elaborate to the point where, frankly, it just disintegrated under its own complexity. Roger Bowers agrees that pieces in high and low clefs were performed within the same compasses as those in "normal" clefs, but is no more prescriptive than that. He carefully avoids using the word "transposition", pointing out that, for Tudor singers, it wasn't a question of moving a piece's pitch up or down, but simply of finding a pitch for each piece that fell within the standard voices ranges.

[ardcarp]

He [Bowers] carefully avoids using the word "transposition", pointing out that, for Tudor singers, it wasn't a question of moving a piece's pitch up or down, but simply of finding a pitch for each piece that fell within the standard voice ranges.

Exactly. Pragmatism. And perhaps one might legitimately substitute the word "available" for "standard".

[Vox Humana]

Exactly. Pragmatism. And perhaps one might legitimately substitute the word "available" for "standard".

To an extent, yes, but, as I said, the voices ranges were remarkably standard in liturgical choral music, so it doesn't quite translate into "anything goes". It's more a case of "anything goes within narrow, clearly defined limits". Interestingly, the vocal ranges in secular music were not nearly so constant. I am inclined to think that this was to do with choral music having to cater for the majority of singers, whereas secular music was for soloists so could allow more flexibility, but I don't think anyone has yet addressed this.

[DracoM]

En passant, can I say what a fantastic thread this is?
Hope that doesn't sound patronising - no meant to be at all.
So much scholarship to assist opinions.
Truly much appreciated.

[Pulcinella]

The sentence before the one I quoted in full above (post 20) from the liner notes of The Sixteen's recording reads:

Though the overall compass of Corona Spinea extends over the usual twenty-two notes, the disposition......

Not sure how helpful this is. Is the implication that other pieces could be equally stratospheric?

[Vox Humana]

The sentence before the one I quoted in full above (post 20) from the liner notes of The Sixteen's recording reads:

Though the overall compass of Corona Spinea extends over the usual twenty-two notes, the disposition......

Not sure how helpful this is. Is the implication that other pieces could be equally stratospheric?

Oh yes indeed, there are loads. The three-octave overall compass was quite standard until 1559 (although there are also plenty of pieces for smaller forces). Here's one of Sheppard's best, sung at Oxenford pitch by the eponymous choir itself:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLYfMSwKwgg

(It may be at the "wrong" pitch, but it's a stunning performance.)

[Vox Humana]

Agreed! I'm learning a lot. Presumably the Bowers referred to above is Roger, who was DoM of my college back in the day

Indeed.

[Pulcinella]

Oh yes indeed, there are loads. The three-octave overall compass was quite standard until 1559 (although there are also plenty of pieces for smaller forces). Here's one of Sheppard's best, sung at Oxenford pitch by the eponymous choir itself:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLYfMSwKwgg

(It may be at the "wrong" pitch, but it's a stunning performance.)

I think I'm missing something here, as I don't see what is so special (if anything!) about this three-octave range (say from what I would think of as a bass g to to the treble g three octaves above). Isn't this what one would expect the range of the singers to be? It can hardly be said to stretch any part, can it? And what happened after 1559?

Thanks for link, not yet investigated!

PS: Link is to Sheppard's Verbum caro in the CfP recording by The Clerkes of Oxenford, directed by David Wulstan.
I have the CD in a previous incarnation to that shown on the YouTube clip.
Whole CD about to be put on!

[Vox Humana]

I think I'm missing something here, as I don't see what is so special (if anything!) about this three-octave range (say from what I would think of as a bass g to to the treble g three octaves above). Isn't this what would expect the range of the singers to be? It can hardly be said to stretch any part, can it? And what happened after 1559?

No, I don't think you're missing anything. No one said that the three-octave range special (except insofar as it emerged relatively suddenly c.1470), just that it was usual. After 1559 the Treble voice was abandoned (Bowers suggests because it was so intimately associated with the Latin liturgy, but I wonder whether the increasing influence of continental styles and the problem of singing in English were more to blame) and the standard top voice became the Mean (originally effectively a boy alto, but its range rose a fraction as the two voice types merged). The Treble voice was very briefly resurrected in a very small handful of works in the early seventeenth century, notably a couple by Gibbons and, famously, in Weelkes's Mag and Nunc for Trebles.

[Pulcinella]

Thanks, VH.
So it's probably the disposition within this range that does indeed make Corona Spinea 'special', or at least different.

When I moved from primary school to secondary (a bright spark, who passed the 11+ a year early, so still with some years to go before my voice broke), I was 'impressed’ by the music master, a local parish church organist/choirmaster, to supplement his choir at evensong, migrating thereby from a Methodist church (albeit one that had a choir that robed for services, but all adult) to one that introduced me to the glories of Byrd and Tallis. I have never looked back, and am ever grateful. Which is not to say that I don't enjoy a good Moody and Sankey hymn.

[Vox Humana]

Thanks, VH.
So it's probably the disposition within this range that does indeed make Corona Spinea 'special', or at least different.

The scoring of Corona spinea is unique in being for TrMCtTBB. Nearly all six-part music of the Taverner/Tallis generations was for TrMCtCtTB. In fact, the only other exception I can immediately recall is Ludford's mass Videte miraculum for TrTrMCtTB . My favourite moment in Corona spinea (especially at low pitch) is the final section of the Credo, which starts with two growling basses interweaving at the bottom of their range, soon joined by a soaring treble - an extraordinary sonority for the time.

[light_calibre_baritone]

My favourite moment in Corona spinea (especially at low pitch) is the final section of the Credo, which starts with two growling basses interweaving at the bottom of their range, soon joined by a soaring treble - an extraordinary sonority for the time.

There are similar moments in the gimel sections of Tallis' Gaude Gloriosa; an amazing gulf between high treble and low basses.