Talk:Laudate Dominum (Jan Pieterszoon Sweelinck)

14635

Bar 11: Tenor - E flat on "eum", not E natural.
Bar 14: Soprano II - E flats on "o-" and "po-", not E natural, according to the 1957 Alsbach edition, (though the Rutter version in European Sacred Music has E natural throughout).
Bar 14: Alto - E flat on "populi", not E natural.
Bar 15: Bass - "li" at beginning of bar should instead be a crotchet rest.
Bar 22: Tenor - crotchet rest should be a quaver rest, followed by a quaver D. First four syllables of "misericordia" should be shifted left one note.
Bar 33: Tenor - "Domii" for "Domini".
Jamesgibb 10:36, 2 August 2012 (CDT)

=====

James:
Bar 14: Tenor has no Es, flat or natural. Did you mean Sop2 and Alto rather than A & T? Anyway, the E naturals seem fine to me.
The other 'suggested errors'? - Agreed.
Marghek 04:07, 3 August 2012 (CDT)

Sorry about that. The suggested errors are in S2 and A, not A & T and I've made the corrections above. I'm going from a comparison with the Alsbach 1957 edition of Cantiones sacrae - a tone higher, but no F sharps in bar 14, other than at the end for S2.
Jamesgibb 04:57, 3 August 2012 (CDT)

Sorry to keep on about this, but OUP publish an edition (by John Rutter in European Sacred Music) where the E naturals (as transposed) in bar 14 are given. E naturals also sound better to me. Of course I accept that editions vary, but, IMHO, choir directors should be aware that opinions differ.
Marghek (talk) 04:34, 5 August 2012 (CDT)

No problem about your "keeping on about it" - that's part of the value of CPDL - but we clearly have differing views on Rutter! However, de gustibus...
In the case of the European Sacred Music version, all the accidentals in bar 14 of S2 are indicated as editorial. I'll add a note to bar 14 to acknowledge that the Rutter edition differs.
Jamesgibb (talk) 05:58, 5 August 2012 (CDT)

Thanks for your patience. I haven't given my view on Rutter as a composer - and I won't on this polite Wiki ;) However, as an editor and supported by the might of the OUP Music Department, I think his work needs consideration. Your note to bar 14 is the scholar's solution, of course - thanks again.

I have had a couple of other instances where ESM has differed from CPDL versions - one was in Palestrina's Sicut cervus where I remembered the tenor part differently from the CPDL version (after copying it and rehearsing it with 'my' choir several times).

--Marghek (talk) 04:03, 6 August 2012 (CDT)