Basso Continuo?
Kelly and Sandy
I think I have to find out about "basso continuo"...
...I am learning Bach's famous "partita" for solo violin, (BWV
1006), in E major, on the keyboard (a slightly honky-tonk piano and also
a well-tempered digital synthesiser).
Now the partita, (from BWV 1006), is also the basis for the
"sinfonia" that starts Cantata 29 "Wir danken dir, Gott, wir danken dir"
(BWV 29). The sinfonia has been transposed down to D major. In my
Eulenberg mini-score (A5 size), this sinfonia has staves written out for
two trumpets, timpani, two oboe-and-violin pairs, a viola part, and an
"organo obligato" and "organo continuo". (By the way, in the preface to
the mini-score, it also mentions that the BWV 1006 partita is also the
"introductory Sinfonia to the second part of the [incompletely
preserved] wedding cantata 'Herr, Gott, Beherrscher aller Dinge', BWV
120a".)
Now having said that there's an organ "obligato" and an organ
"continuo", it seems to me that the two together simply mean 'the organ
part'. 'Obligato' has a treble clef and 'continuo', the bass clef. The
obligato part is the old solo violin partita, with some slight
alterations, and the continuo is... the left hand?
However, written under the continuo stave, regularly and every so
often, are little groups of intriguing numbers and signs. Sharp and
flat signs, and other marks, that accompany and augment the numbers.
I'm guessing that this is some kind of concise chord notation that can
be spontaneously interpreted on the set by the live performers. Just
like chord mark-ups in popular-music scores today. I'm guessing that
the original score had the right hand part, plus a "basso continuo"
shorthand that Bach used to signal to himself (or the organist) the
chords and accompaniment come the actual live performance.
...How do I find out more about this 'Basso Continuo' system? And
is this the same as 'figured bass'?
With kind regards,
Sandy
--
Alexander Anderson <junk.r...@alma-services.abel.co.uk>
(Yorkshire, England)
Where there is no vision, the people perish.
Sybrand Bakker
<junk.r...@alma-services.abel.co.uk> wrote:
> ...How do I find out more about this 'Basso Continuo' system? And
>is this the same as 'figured bass'?
Yes, it is.
Refer to (amongst many others)
Hermann Keller Thorough Bass Method Columbia University Press New
York,
ISBN 0-231-07321-6
Also, most reference texts on performance practice will have a chapter
on basso continuo.
Sybrand Bakker
anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres
danc...@yahoo.com
"Basso Continuo" is not so much a system as it is a feature of Baroque
Orchestral music. The "continuo" was sort of what we now call a
"rhythm section". It usually consisted of a harpsichordist, one or
more cellists, and possibly other bass instruments such as a bass
violin or a bassoon.
The notes that are on the bass staff for the harpsichordist would be
considered the "bass" notes and would be played by everyone. In
addition, the harpsichordist would improvise additional material to go
along with what everyone else was playing.
The little numbers below each note would indicate what the harmony is
for that note and time duration. (The book Sybrand referred you to can
explain what the numbers mean. An explanation can also be found in any
good music theory text book used for an undergraduate level class)
In practice, many harpsichordists will do the "improvisation" in
advance and write out (or have someone else write out) a full part that
"realizes" the "figured bass" part.
One of the most well known things Bach wrote that has figured bass are
the Brandenburg Concerti. If you listen to a few different recordings
where the harpsichord is not buried in the mix, you'll hear different
realizations of the figured bass parts.
Kelly and Sandy
danc...@yahoo.com wrote
>The little numbers below each note would indicate what the harmony is
>for that note and time duration. (The book Sybrand referred you to can
>explain what the numbers mean. An explanation can also be found in any
>good music theory text book used for an undergraduate level class)
>
>In practice, many harpsichordists will do the "improvisation" in
>advance and write out (or have someone else write out) a full part that
>"realizes" the "figured bass" part.
>
>One of the most well known things Bach wrote that has figured bass are
>the Brandenburg Concerti. If you listen to a few different recordings
>where the harpsichord is not buried in the mix, you'll hear different
>realizations of the figured bass parts.
Ah... durga, durga, durga!
Thank you for this overview of what "basso continuo" is, in human
terms. I know that there was far more improvisation and spontaneity
from all players then than there is now in the world of "classical
music". Bach would put people into an absolute rapt trance, improvising
on the keyboard of an afternoon. Yet he would be irate if he caught out
any student composing "at the keyboard" -- so that they started to hear
musical ideas in their mind's ears, and on the page, I believe.
Shostakovich would write down an entire symphony, complete, after having
it in his head.
Well, I still can't quite sight-read. But with the compelling
beauty of Bach's scores I'm heading -- painlessly and very enjoyably --
in that direction.
I will look up basso continuo further sometime, Sybrand, now that I
know what it is we're talking about.
P_b
> In article <1116949248....@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> danc...@yahoo.com wrote
>
> >The little numbers below each note would indicate what the harmony is
> >for that note and time duration. (The book Sybrand referred you to can
> >explain what the numbers mean. An explanation can also be found in any
> >good music theory text book used for an undergraduate level class)
I've wondered why they continue to teach
figured bass in college theory courses. It's
not the best way of teaching harmony and
voice leading, is difficult to learn to actually
use, and isn't used, to speak of.
danc...@yahoo.com
Kelly and Sandy wrote:
>
>
> Ah... durga, durga, durga!
>
> Thank you for this overview of what "basso continuo" is, in human
> terms. I know that there was far more improvisation and spontaneity
> from all players then than there is now in the world of "classical
> music". Bach would put people into an absolute rapt trance, improvising
> on the keyboard of an afternoon. Yet he would be irate if he caught out
> any student composing "at the keyboard" -- so that they started to hear
> musical ideas in their mind's ears, and on the page, I believe.
> Shostakovich would write down an entire symphony, complete, after having
> it in his head.
>
> Well, I still can't quite sight-read. But with the compelling
> beauty of Bach's scores I'm heading -- painlessly and very enjoyably --
> in that direction.
>
> I will look up basso continuo further sometime, Sybrand, now that I
> know what it is we're talking about.
>
> With kind regards,
>
> Sandy
My library is pretty sparse but I do have one example of a figured bass
realization that you might still be able to find in print. Dover
publishes several musical scores in paperback. One of these is a
volume containing the Musical Offering and Art of Fugue.
One part of the Musical Offering is a Trio Sonata. The score is
written out for Obligato flute and violin and then a basso continuo
with figured bass. In another part of the volume, there is a full
keyboard part that realizes the figured bass. The realization was done
by J.P. Kirnberger who was one of J.S. Bach's pupils.
You could probably get more exposure to these sort of things if you
find the right teacher.
danc...@yahoo.com
I think some of it may just be "learning the language". As time goes
on, the "language" may change. But people still will talk about I 6-4
chords and figured bass provides the explanation for the name.
Kelly and Sandy
<tvi...@BSteleport.com> wrote
>> >The little numbers below each note would indicate what the harmony is
>> >for that note and time duration. (The book Sybrand referred you to can
>> >explain what the numbers mean. An explanation can also be found in any
>> >good music theory text book used for an undergraduate level class)
>
>I've wondered why they continue to teach
>figured bass in college theory courses. It's
>not the best way of teaching harmony and
>voice leading, is difficult to learn to actually
>use, and isn't used, to speak of.
How many complete rotters does one have to put up with in _any_
"uni" course? How many platefuls of pre-packaged assembly line shit do
we have to swallow during any course soever? It's all withered and died
-- that bright adventure started in the Renaissance -- about fifteen
years ago: for myself, its passing away is marked with the deaths of
Richard Feynmann and Joseph Campbell in '80s, the retirement of Niklaus
Wirth in the '90s. I myself, in the satanic nineties, did three years
of stultifying hell in "computer systems engineering" -- it's a miracle
I still have an interest in anything. It's the same whatever the
course, wherever in the world. (Anywhere it's not, it's in the process
of being ripped apart and destroyed.)
It's part of a very serious malaise. Western civilization is dying,
nay, putrefying. Look to our leaders, look to our TV screens.
The communication of genuine understanding these days only happens
in the most unexpected ways. Satori. It's not seen in any brochures,
or Matt Damon "gap years", or officially sanctioned tick boxes. And God
almighty, how many officially sanctioned boxes are there walking around
the streets today?
"The kingdom will not come by waiting for it. It will not be a
matter of saying 'here it is' or 'there it is'. Rather, the kingdom of
the father is spread out upon the earth and men do not see it."
But, my friend, we all have to go through so much suffering before
this ridiculous reply of mine that I started, was seen to be sitting in
the field of common sense.
With kind regards,
Sandy
P.S. Apropos absorutery everything, I am learning (Mandarin) Chinese
for myself from the *wonderful* Ni Hao series published by ChinaSoft,
started by an Australian couple, Shumang and Paul Fredlein.
Alain Naigeon
tvineNO-E8BF3B...@news1.west.earthlink.net...
They shouldn't teach writing trolls either ;-)
--
Français *==> "Musique renaissance" <==* English
midi - facsimiles - ligatures - mensuration
http://anaigeon.free.fr | http://www.medieval.org/emfaq/anaigeon/
Alain Naigeon - anai...@free.fr - Strasbourg, France
Kelly and Sandy
<junk.r...@alma-services.abel.co.uk> wrote
> I think I have to find out about "basso continuo"...
I have discovered quite a bit more about basso continuo. The great
thing to hold in your mind is that it's first and foremost a practical
system for living performers, _not_ an academic exercise. And therefore
it's fundamentally friendly and easy. My first guess was right: basso
continuo is a way of indicating chords (together with the bass line),
when improvising performances. I think it has an advantage over modern
chord notation, in that you can easily transpose pieces without
rewriting all the chords. (You know -- Dmaj7 becomes Emaj7, A7 becomes
B7 etc.) In basso continuo, only the actual notes -- including the bass
-- get transposed, the bass "figures" stay the same.
As far as I can see -- so far -- a C major chord could be indicated
as the bass note C (on the bass clef of the basso continuo) and
underneath it would be the numbers 5 and 3 -- meaning the note C, plus
the 3rd note struck after C in the C scale (?) and the fifth. That's C,
E and G. Very often, root chords being so common, nothing at all
written under a bass note implies [5 3]. The numbers are relative to
some key, in this case C.
You could _also_ indicate C major as the bass note E, together with
the numbers 6 and 3. That's E, plus the 3rd note after E (using the
notes of the C major scale), plus the 6th. That's E, G and C. This is
the first "inversion" of C.
And finally you can specify C major as G, 6 4. G, C and E. (The
2nd inversion.) The numbers used are relative to some scale; I've
conveniently chosen the C major scale. The figures in "figured bass"
work relative to the scale of the piece they're in. To summarize, here
are the three ways C major can be written in the figured bass, for a
piece written in C major:
1. C, 5 3
2. E, 6 3
3. G, 6 4
But how would you specify the three ways of saying D major, in a
piece written in C major? I can see the first -- "root" -- way:
1. D, 5 3# -- that's D, F# and A
and the second inversion:
3. A, 6# 4 -- that's A, D and F#
But how do you do the first inversion, one starting on F#???
Is what I've written so far on the right track or have I
misunderstood something? And what does 8 5 3 mean, for God's sake??
Isn't 8 the same note as the root??!
Thomas Wood
"Kelly and Sandy" <junk.r...@alma-services.abel.co.uk> wrote in message
news:5FOARNAq...@alma-services.abel.co.uk...
> In article <ThQT4KAc...@alma-services.abel.co.uk>, Kelly and Sandy
> <junk.r...@alma-services.abel.co.uk> wrote
>
>> I think I have to find out about "basso continuo"...
>
>
> I have discovered quite a bit more about basso continuo. The great
> thing to hold in your mind is that it's first and foremost a practical
> system for living performers, _not_ an academic exercise. And therefore
> it's fundamentally friendly and easy. My first guess was right: basso
> continuo is a way of indicating chords (together with the bass line),
> when improvising performances. I think it has an advantage over modern
> chord notation, in that you can easily transpose pieces without
> rewriting all the chords. (You know -- Dmaj7 becomes Emaj7, A7 becomes
> B7 etc.) In basso continuo, only the actual notes -- including the bass
> -- get transposed, the bass "figures" stay the same.
>
> As far as I can see -- so far -- a C major chord could be indicated
> as the bass note C (on the bass clef of the basso continuo) and
> underneath it would be the numbers 5 and 3 -- meaning the note C, plus
> the 3rd note struck after C in the C scale (?) and the fifth. That's C,
> E and G. Very often, root chords being so common, nothing at all
> written under a bass note implies [5 3]. The numbers are relative to
> some key, in this case C.
Customarily, a chord in root position would have no figures at all.
> You could _also_ indicate C major as the bass note E, together with
> the numbers 6 and 3. That's E, plus the 3rd note after E (using the
> notes of the C major scale), plus the 6th. That's E, G and C. This is
> the first "inversion" of C.
>
> And finally you can specify C major as G, 6 4. G, C and E. (The
> 2nd inversion.) The numbers used are relative to some scale; I've
> conveniently chosen the C major scale. The figures in "figured bass"
> work relative to the scale of the piece they're in. To summarize, here
> are the three ways C major can be written in the figured bass, for a
> piece written in C major:
>
> 1. C, 5 3
> 2. E, 6 3
> 3. G, 6 4
In actual useage, the third was normally understood, and no figures was
assumed as root position, so your table should read:
1. C (no figures)
2. E 6
3. G 4 6 (reading vertically up from the written bass note)
>
> But how would you specify the three ways of saying D major, in a
> piece written in C major? I can see the first -- "root" -- way:
>
> 1. D, 5 3# -- that's D, F# and A
Again, D and no figures would be customary. Even if 3 was written in, it
wouldn't need a # (that's in the key signature and thus not necessary).
However, if an altered 3rd was in the chord, it was customary not to write
in "3" but only the necessary accidental. Thus, a D minor chord in root
position in a D major piece would be figured with just a natural sign over
the written bass D.
>
> and the second inversion:
>
> 3. A, 6# 4 -- that's A, D and F#
A 6, with no sharps (accidentals were added ONLY when a note fell outside of
the home key's usual scale).
>
> But how do you do the first inversion, one starting on F#???
F# 4 6
> Is what I've written so far on the right track or have I
> misunderstood something? And what does 8 5 3 mean, for God's sake??
> Isn't 8 the same note as the root??
Sometimes composers would write in the 8 to indicate the root was to be
doubled.
Tom Wood
Sybrand Bakker
<woo...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>Sometimes composers would write in the 8 to indicate the root was to be
>doubled.
To be doubled at the octave, that is, of course.
Kelly and Sandy
Thomas Wood <woo...@worldnet.att.net> wrote
>> But how do you do the first inversion, one starting on F#???
>
>F# 4 6
Did you mean F# 3 6? (I mean F#, A, D.)
This I understand, in the context of a piece in D major. But what
about in the context of a piece in (say) C major? That's to say, where
F# isn't on the C scale. How do you count it?
Thomas Wood
> In article <HJ8ne.271718$cg1....@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> Thomas Wood <woo...@worldnet.att.net> wrote
>
>>> But how do you do the first inversion, one starting on F#???
>>
>>F# 4 6
>
> Did you mean F# 3 6? (I mean F#, A, D.)
I meant F# 6. Again, thirds were hardly ever figured. The 4 was an error.
>
> This I understand, in the context of a piece in D major. But what
> about in the context of a piece in (say) C major? That's to say, where
> F# isn't on the C scale. How do you count it?
>
I made a couple of mistakes in my earlier post:
First, the figures are typically written UNDER the notes of the bass line.
And I reversed my explanation of the D major chords in first and second
inversions.
In the context of C major, a D major chord (D-F#-A) it its three forms
would be figured:
D
# (no figure, just the accidental)
F#
6
A
6# (actually, a 6 with a line thru it)
4
Tom Wood
danc...@yahoo.com
Sybrand Bakker wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 02:05:27 GMT, "Thomas Wood"
> <woo...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >Sometimes composers would write in the 8 to indicate the root was to be
> >doubled.
>
> To be doubled at the octave, that is, of course.
To have a good understand of the principles involved here, we would
have to go into voice leading.
The point I want to make is that if the 8 is missing and the root of
the chord is in the bass, it still would be common to double the root
when playing the chord. [In other words, if there is just a root note
with no symbols, don't go thinking that you should limit yourself to
playing just three notes.]
When an 8 is put in, it is often a guide to how the voice leading
should happen when transitioning from one chord to another.
Also, the doubling doesn't have to be at the octave. It could be at
two or three octaves. (The same goes for the numbers. If there is a
6, the corresponding note could be either a sixth above or a thirteenth
or a twentieth.)
Kelly and Sandy
Thomas Wood <woo...@worldnet.att.net> wrote
>In the context of C major, a D major chord (D-F#-A) it its three forms
>would be figured:
>
>D
># (no figure, just the accidental)
>
>F#
>6
>
>A
>6# (actually, a 6 with a line thru it)
>4
Below I make explicit my -- at present -- perplexed understanding of
basso-continuo chord indication:
D (bass note)
#
is short for D
5
3#
That means D together with the (sharpened) 3rd note along the C
major scale (CDEFGAB, C! etc) starting on D, and the fifth note along
the C major scale starting on D. So that's (counting out... 1st D...
2nd E... 3rd F) F _sharpened_, and then (counting out... 1st D... 2nd
E... 3rd F, 4th G, 5th A) A. D, F# A. Root position D major.
F# (bass note)
6
is short for F#
6
3
That means F# together with the 3rd note along the C major scale
(CDEFGAB, C!) starting on F#, and the sixth note along the C major
scale, starting on F#. So that's (counting out... eh... 1st F# (sharped
somehow??), 2nd G, 3rd A) A, and (counting out... 1st F#??, 2nd G, 3rd
A, 4th B, 5th C, 6th D) D. F#, A D. 1st inversion. I don't quite know
how I'm supposed to start counting through the C scale, yet starting on
F#, instead of F. Please advise me on the "rule".
A (bass note)
6
4
This means A, the 4th note along the C major scale (CDEFGAB, C!)
starting on A, and the sixth note along the C major scale, starting on
A. So that's (counting out... 1st A, 2nd B, 3rd C, 4th D) D, and
(counting out... 1st A, 2nd B, 3rd C, 4th D, 5th E, 6th F) D. A, D F??.
This is D minor. Yikes. Somehow the F ought to be sharpened. Hmm. Is
this a mistake on your part? ie. Should it have been
A
6#
4 ?
Sybrand Bakker
It means just a major triad on D.
>
> F# (bass note)
> 6
>
> is short for F#
> 6
> 3
>
> That means F# together with the 3rd note along the C major scale
>(CDEFGAB, C!) starting on F#, and the sixth note along the C major
>scale, starting on F#. So that's (counting out... eh... 1st F# (sharped
>somehow??), 2nd G, 3rd A) A, and (counting out... 1st F#??, 2nd G, 3rd
>A, 4th B, 5th C, 6th D) D. F#, A D. 1st inversion. I don't quite know
>how I'm supposed to start counting through the C scale, yet starting on
>F#, instead of F. Please advise me on the "rule".
You should read it as a 6th chord on F#, in this case the first
inversion of the a major triad. You should just start on 'counting'
intervals from the note in the bass.
>
> A (bass note)
> 6
> 4
>
> This means A, the 4th note along the C major scale (CDEFGAB, C!)
>starting on A, and the sixth note along the C major scale, starting on
>A. So that's (counting out... 1st A, 2nd B, 3rd C, 4th D) D, and
>(counting out... 1st A, 2nd B, 3rd C, 4th D, 5th E, 6th F) D. A, D F??.
>This is D minor. Yikes. Somehow the F ought to be sharpened. Hmm. Is
>this a mistake on your part? ie. Should it have been
>
> A
> 6#
> 4 ?
>
>
>With kind regards,
>
>Sandy
The figures you show are
6
4
not
6#
4
Consequently the F isn't sharpened.
Any figure can have an accidental, be it a sharp or a flat or a
natural.
Thomas Wood
>
> A (bass note)
> 6
> 4
>
> This means A, the 4th note along the C major scale (CDEFGAB, C!)
> starting on A, and the sixth note along the C major scale, starting on
> A. So that's (counting out... 1st A, 2nd B, 3rd C, 4th D) D, and
> (counting out... 1st A, 2nd B, 3rd C, 4th D, 5th E, 6th F) D. A, D F??.
> This is D minor. Yikes. Somehow the F ought to be sharpened. Hmm. Is
> this a mistake on your part? ie. Should it have been
>
> A
> 6#
> 4 ?
If you look back to my second posting, I wrote:
A
6# (actually, a 6 with a line thru it)
4
As I said there, in practice composers usually wrote a 6 with a line thru it
instead of 6#.
You do sometimes encounter this:
G
5
3
...but it's usually a dominant (V) chord, not a tonic chord, and forms a
transition from a I 6-4 chord to a cadence in root position.
I pulled out a score of Handel's Water Music and tried playing the figured
bass to the famous "Air" (a nice slow movement with relatively simple
harmonies!).
It was fun! And it made the whole figured bass thing make more sense than
just reading about it ever did. But things get hairy in other movements
where the tempo is fast and there are lots of seventh chords....
Tom Wood
Fredrik Sandstrom
> F# (bass note)
> 6
>
> is short for F#
> 6
> 3
>
> That means F# together with the 3rd note along the C major scale
> (CDEFGAB, C!) starting on F#, and the sixth note along the C major
> scale, starting on F#. So that's (counting out... eh... 1st F# (sharped
> somehow??), 2nd G, 3rd A) A, and (counting out... 1st F#??, 2nd G, 3rd
> A, 4th B, 5th C, 6th D) D. F#, A D. 1st inversion. I don't quite know
> how I'm supposed to start counting through the C scale, yet starting on
> F#, instead of F. Please advise me on the "rule".
You don't really need to "count", and there is no need to think of any
scale at all. The number 6 simply means "one sixth above the bass".
What kind of sixth? you may ask. One that fits the key signature! In
this example we get a minor sixth (F# - D); had we had a key signature
of 4 sharps we would have landed on D# and got a major sixth. Had
there been 4 flats, the 6 would actually designate a diminished sixth
(F# - Db).
But if you insist on counting notes along the major scale, you can
just remove all extra accidentals, so in this case you would start
counting from F natural. This will give you the correct result as
well.
--
Fredrik Sandström
fsan...@abo.fi