Wilhelm Karges, François Roberday, Capricio in g

You may also like...

3 Responses

  1. monhardt says:

    with regard to the Karges/Roberday piece, I am fist very surprised of this encounter and it would be interesting to know how these pieces circulated in Europe at that time. Second, I would think that there is really no need for a pedal part but of course this is just my opinion. Thank you for all this work!
    PS By the way I just located a other modern edition of Hasslers’s “Vater unser” however tructated to 6 variationsand edited in Switzerland by Podoux in the Schola Cantorum series of editor CH. Huguenin .

    • admin says:

      I agree it is a bit of a guess wether or not the bass part is meant as a pedal part. Yet I lean towards the pedal part for two reasons. The first is that there are places where Karges writes the bass note an octave lower than in the original (and often the result can’t be played by hands, at least not by me). The second is that in other places Karges exlicitly indicates it when the bass part is to be played with the hands. And he does not do so in this piece. So I choose to render it as a pedal part. Yet I could create a manualiter score as well, so that anyone can choose for him/herself what he\she likes best.

  2. Daniel Monhardt says:

    hello and thanks for your answer! I really don’t thin,k there is any need for you to create a manualiter version, the already existing can be easily played so if desired; I refered rather to French custom of the time, where pedal is used very differently from German use and where often there was no 16foot available since pedal was used mainly for cantus firmus mainly, whoch does not mean that its (w/ french pedalboard) uses was so easy anyway (see Louis Coupein’s trios or Grigny fugues for example) .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.