Talk:Inviolata, integra et casta (Josquin des Prez): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
* In bar 51, Cantus, the semibreve should be E rather than F. | * In bar 51, Cantus, the semibreve should be E rather than F. | ||
[[User:Imruska|Imruska]] ([[User talk:Imruska|talk]]) 2020-03-30 | [[User:Imruska|Imruska]] ([[User talk:Imruska|talk]]) 2020-03-30 | ||
:Thanks for spotting this. Correction made, together with correction of a few typos in the underlay. Revised files uploaded.<br> | |||
[[User:Jamesgibb|Jamesgibb]] ([[User talk:Jamesgibb|talk]]) 09:03, 31 March 2020 (UTC) |
Revision as of 09:03, 31 March 2020
- 7927
Possible score errors:
- In the title, the second word should be 'integra', not 'intagra'.
- In bar 9, Cantus, the descending scale should be maintained, so the G should be an E: this is a melodic line that is repeated a number of times.
- In bar 40, Tenor 1, an editorial B natural is desirable, to avoid the tritone.
- In bar 102, Tenor 1, the second note should be G rather than F (other sources confirm this).
- In bar 136, Tenor 1's first note again requires an editorial natural, I think.
The underlay in several parts looks odd in several of the parts, missing in some places and some odd word placings.
Jamesgibb (talk) 09:06, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
- In bar 51, Cantus, the semibreve should be E rather than F
- 29733
- In bar 51, Cantus, the semibreve should be E rather than F.
- Thanks for spotting this. Correction made, together with correction of a few typos in the underlay. Revised files uploaded.