Alright, so apparently it's just going to get sloppier and sloppier but the idea remains! lol I just don't have the time or attention span to keep recording till it's perfect. Here's the second and third letra, below the chords. I decided to leave the half compas at the begining of the second letra as the idea of this exercise for me is to catch someone coming in on a half compas so I get used to the sound of it.
This letra is something like this.
A Bb (first compas A second compass Bb) Quien me l’ha partío Bb esta batita que yo tenia Bb primo mio de lunares A Dmin(on 12) quien me l’ha partío como Cambio no me compré una que mare que yo voy a perdé er sentío Cambio que manda me compré una que mare que yo voy a perdé er sentío
Sounds fine to me! Just realized who Macaninta is... the singer on on that old Vicente Amigo tape from his first album. Gonna give it a go.
Definitely hear your half Compás this time around. I have a really hard time catching it if I’m not keeping track. Like in the example Ricardo gave at the end of El Mandaito. All of this is so simple yet so complicated at the same time.
The half compas is easy(ish) once you can hear and feel how it fits, it's just doing it that gets you over the hurdle. The tough thing about this stuff is it's subtle, good accompaniment has the subtlest of details that just make all the difference in the world, we don't have the luxury of just strumming away mindlessly like bob dylan, ever single time your finger hits the string it's with some very specific intention.
Yeah flamenco is way more subtle, I think even if you just stay on A it's not technically "wrong" it's just kinda lame....I think. If you listen to how Macanita gets to the Dmin in the first letra as opposed to the second the second letra is way more subtle, when my teacher was making me do the leg work of figuring this out I completely missed it.
No post this week because I'm failing at accompanying the major key portion of this....It's only two chords and somehow that's way harder than the rest of it.
This topic has died down...I know it’s pretty deep stuff. I have to admit I like to nerd out on the study of the cante sometimes when I am not drinking and partying and jamming some rumba (most of the time [:D]). So, I should probably do a blog or something but in any case, to keep this topic alive I will share my latest discoveries. I have recently gone down the rabbit hole of the Cante levantes, trying to get a mental handle on all the different melodies and how they are named or categorized...it’s tough stuff. And things have evolved of course since the first recordings of these cantes were made.
So for a concrete example of what I am on about, I want to share my opinions on this one cante that is pretty famous. We saw this in the cante accomp thread, Jason gave us a cante minus guitar of it, the lyrics are “los picaros tartaneros...” etc. I have known it as the “cartagenera clasica”, to be distinguished from the cartagenera that Chacon is famous for creating. Anyway here is the textbook example from the modern era, the model I was taught and used most of my career with singers that have sung this, and it’s really great and inspired version....starts at 4:43.
Now the music speaks for itself clearly here...however, as this is in the same family as other cante de Las minas, almost all of which follow the same basic structure as Malagueñas, which also derives from the simpler Fandango form, I was always confused as to how this thing evolved. Where is the original in the trad repertoire, and why does it not follow the same form as the others harmonically? What I mean is Fandangos is based on a simple form of major chords, C-F-C-G-C-F/E. 6 lines or phrases of melody with 6 harmonic moves (the ending resolution is thought of a single move as far as lines of verse are concerned). Most melodies of fandangos that follow this form don’t use many accidentals...the melody sticks to the natural scale.
Malagueña follows this basic form, but it is elongated and stretched and usually allows for accidentals to the key which can imply secondary dominants and such. Guitarists will traditionally play these extra chords or skip them depending on their personal style. For example, G7-C, then C7-F, D7-G, etc, inserted into above 6 part structure. It can give the illusion to the casual listener that some of these are completely different forms than fandangos. I have recently noticed some guitarists are better than others at defining the original base form with the way they respond to the cante, and it’s quite fascinating to me. My initial encounters with various malaguenas was wonder if the guitar was either lost, or the singer simply out of the key...and major disconnect going on. My ear today hears things very differently.
I notice as well many old malaguenas accompanied in the same key as Taranto and the other cantes de La mina, which can create ambiguity for some ears. With this in mind, I will refer now on to the form in that key, (A7)-D(D7)-G(A7)-D(E7)-A(A7)-D(D7)-G(G7)/F# being the new structure for ALL the levantes. That is it’s still the 6 part structure with secondary dominants for EACH harmony, even the ending can use it (as the Taranto and Granaina are both famous for). Remember all those secondary chords in () might be implied by the vocal melody OR actually played by the guitar. So if we look at Los picaros, it’s totally out of the above form: Bm, F#, Bm-D-D7-G-D-E7-A-D-D7-G-F#.....only the middle there sort of reminds us of the form. So what happened? Here is what I think happened and, again this all my personal opinion based on my investigation.
Cartagenera clasica, Cartagenera grande, Cartagenera grande del Rojo Alpergatero etc...these are names I have heard. Antonio Piñana (b.1913) is featured in Rito as the maestro of all these cantes de La mina, first hand student of sr. Rojo. His singing never really did it for me, and I noticed him basically copying some of Chacon stuff, plus his son (b. 1940) accompanying using PDL falsetas and moves to accomp his dad made me dubious about this being the best source. So the oldest guy I know singing this song? Chacon himself (b. 1869)....and he is was creating malagueñas and other things when Rojo was a baby as well. So sorry, I have to trust his example as the source of this cante. Recorded 1908 (!) juan gandulla el habichuela....and wow, it’s beautiful and clear, with the clear structure of malagueña intact! Two letras, same melody, so very deliberate and precise...los picaros is second letra.
I next found tons of examples of the same style, Nina de los peines, cojo de Malaga, Nino de Cabra with montoya, narjanito, etc obviously folks trying to copy the master’s version note for note. (Is this a Chacon creation? I would have to say considering all the rest he created, sure why not???). I love how the melody creates those exotic colors against the basic form (singing the 6th over the D chord, the same melody over G chord sounds lydian, etc, beautiful). Here check montoya’s Beautiful clear accomp of cojo de Malaga, same melody wrongly labeled Taranta:
So now the modern stuff sounds all wrong to me. Piñana sings the same version, as does Morente, as the Chacon (at least they try, falling short IMO as far as detail and precision), but their guitarists are totally F-ing up the form!!! Why???
And what a mess here:
Also, the delivery is different than Camaron...so what is the missing link here? Well in Camaron recent documentary they talk about Juanito Valderrama taking camaron under his wing and encouraging him when he was not being accepted. Next camaron is singing Valderrama’s letras por fandangos....so I found this which basically says it all. You hear clear the seeds of what ended up being Camaron’s version, plus a confused guitarist (Pepe Martinez was a follower of Montoya so this is shocking IMO). So, in addition to the wrong form title and a confused delivery of the melody, plus bad accompaniment, a new form evolves and is reborn and equally beautiful IMO. Evolution of cante has been doing this since the start.
Malagueña follows this basic form, but it is elongated and stretched and usually allows for accidentals to the key which can imply secondary dominants and such. Guitarists will traditionally play these extra chords or skip them depending on their personal style. For example, G7-C, then C7-F, D7-G, etc, inserted into above 6 part structure. It can give the illusion to the casual listener that some of these are completely different forms than fandangos. I have recently noticed some guitarists are better than others at defining the original base form with the way they respond to the cante, and it’s quite fascinating to me.
This is me. When I am accompanying Malagueña (or any cante libre) it's usually rehearsed first. The singer shows me what they want to do by sharing a youtube video of someone else singing. I then copy the guitarist- without much understanding of what is the base form and what are extra/personal chords. Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts. Your post has given me a way in to begin to understand.
Just in relation to the cante de los minas. Alot things on the "to buy list" but this is one of them.
Rafael Chaves Arcos y Norman Kliman's book on cante mineros. When I was in Jerez last october, Norman gave me a good look over the book and its extremely comprehensive with audio files included.
Going back to practical things, where some of us dont have access to a singer to work with, these book+cd packs these are also on the to buy list. (very shortly). The Solea CD is on deezer and is great, a tonne of tracks a palo seco for each letra from each area, jerez, lebrija, utrera to practice with.
This topic has died down...I know it’s pretty deep stuff. I have to admit I like to nerd out on the study of the cante sometimes when I am not drinking and partying and jamming some rumba (most of the time ). So, I should probably do a blog or something but in any case, to keep this topic alive I will share my latest discoveries. I have recently gone down the rabbit hole of the Cante levantes, trying to get a mental handle on all the different melodies and how they are named or categorized...it’s tough stuff. And things have evolved of course since the first recordings of these cantes were made.
Gone for a couple weeks and feel like I haven't been here in AGES. AMAZING post!!! Didn't want to quote the whole thing for cleanliness purposes. Very interesting the idea that new forms being developed from confusion and basically wrong accompaniment. Kind of like a language evolving from foreign speakers and borrowed words.
In the first few paragraphs it kind of sounds like you're using cante levantes and cante de las minas interchangeably? I'm I just reading it wrong or is it that way. I always thought of cante de las minas being a form of cante levante.
In the first few paragraphs it kind of sounds like you're using cante levantes and cante de las minas interchangeably? I'm I just reading it wrong or is it that way. I always thought of cante de las minas being a form of cante levante.
not interchangeable... I have been studying the Malagueñas and granainas along with the cantes de La mina, viewing them all as in the same box. In other words, a lot of what I point out about los picaros, also applies to Malagueña de mellizo for example. In other words, the oldest recordings of those also never use the Am chord, instead follow the fandango structure. Not sure who started the change but the modern version is quite different than this early example:
that’s 1910... the change at 1:44 to F is normally staying on C or G7-C. There is another version of the melody that goes down from C-A that often gets an Am treatment as well, but again would have been F as here.
Next at 2:12, again it’s typical to play C here, but we hear the G7 loud and clear as any 4th sung line of fandango would have.
Finally at 2:35, every modern interpretation uses Am here, then walks it down the Andalusian cadence .... however we hear the good old F chord held throughout till it resolves. I think Ramón Montoya is playing here. Hope you can hear how those F chords change the character of the melody in a significant way.
Following on from the Aminor in Malagueña de mellizo. I went through this Camaron version 'Las espinas de una flor'.
Here is the Malaguena 'base' form: (G7)C - (C7)F - (G7) C - (D7)G - (G7)C - F/E.
This is my understanding of what Paco is doing. It seems it is G7 to C all the way through except the last line? But maybe I am misunderstanding where the 6 letra lines end?
.......G7..... C 1.Ay De una flor G7 C
.......C ....G7 2.cortando cortando la vi yo un dia G7 C
....C .. G7 3.Ay, Ay las espinas de una flor G7 C
...C ...G7 4.que mala suerte, que mala suerte la mia G7 C
...C ..G7 5.ay ay que buena es la de la flor G7 C
........C .................Am D G7 6.que en la mano tu tenia ay…. F E
Yep. So in the old days, that second line of verse should have gone to F major, the 4th line to G7 (from D7 if you wanted as to not clash with the sung C note) and also the 6th line could have skipped the Am and gone directly to F as well.
Pepe sings first Granaina as was made popular by Aurelio de Cadiz, then the mellizo. Here teenage Paco messing with the form in key of Taranto by sticking extra chords into each sung line... notice 5th sung line is left hanging on the G chord. Oddly his version with Camaron is even more conservative than here. [:D]
Oddly his version with Camaron is even more conservative than here.
Although he does do a full on picado run after the fifth line, he's usually a bit less flashy within the letra when accompanying? Maybe he ran out of variations for the G7 to C move!
Hope you can hear how those F chords change the character of the melody in a significant way.
I can indeed, with the guitar, it still feels really subtle if I were to imagine it without guitar. I don't think I would catch it if I were playing alone.
I wish I had the time to REALLY dissect this right now.....
Yes...there are really only 3 different Granaina melodies I can identify. Two of them give the chord tones of the changes more like Fandango than Malaguenas and Cante de las minas do. I would say you don’t really use the F# major chord at the end....it’s really C7, or C7#11/Bb...and of course F#7b5 is the exact same chord with #11 as the bass note. THe sung Bb note (or A#) seems to be an option as some singers don’t really use it. (The only other form that uses this ending, half step below tonic, is the modern Taranto, called “Mineras” on Chacon’s versions).
This version of the melody (like Camaron above) often gets labeled “media Granaina” as it seems to have been a flip flop of order for what Chacon’s early recordings intended. Most aficionados agree that the “Media Granaina” proper is the fancier melody that chacon created (it goes all the way up to G note and above and more closely resembles the malagueñas in terms of tone changes than the classical granaina here.) He gets accused of using “falsetto” voice as he lightens up and uses his throat to sing the very high notes, but it’s not. My favorite version of this melody is performed by Platero in Rito y geografia, where he actually modifies the first letra (Serrana...) that chacon did as the classical granaina first, to actually the media Granaina I am describing. In other words, he is actually doing two media granaina back to back. My favorite version I have heard so far as he is copying all the detail of Chacon original PLUS adding a couple flourishes of his own, again using that high tight voice.
The third granaina is the famous “buscando La flor que amamba” made famous by Manuel Torre, and often considered or debated as instead being a “Malagueña”. This also goes up to the high note G and above, but is a much simpler melody than the media granaina above, and in fact gives tono changes more like fandango/granaina. Most singers sing a D note and want a D chord in the second sung line (Esperanza insisted I do it). Some actually give a clear C note instead (Indio Gitano) But most copy Torre’s version (which I think is a mistake to be honest, the C note release would be better IMO and I think his intent is a C chord as short as he cuts off after holding E note before. THe guitar in Taranta key plays G which corresponds to C chord anyway.)
Going back to mellizo for a moment I found this version of Manuel Vallejo that shows Ramon Montoya directly involved with changing the form. Not sure of the date here, but its probably not as old as the Nino de La isla version I posted earlier. THis is the second lower pitch melody I referenced that sometimes gets combined with the valiente version we already heard. But Montoya is subtly changing the form. He does do the F chord as the conclusion of the second sung line, however it’s pretty late occurring at 1:55 and could have happened sooner. Next the 4th sung line he extends the C chord over the sung A note unlike how he delivers G7 on time for Niño (which clashes as G7 against a sung C note), so he delivers G7 SUPER late at 2:24...I would say as part of the 5th sung line practically as this phrase is pulling back to the C chord. So he is consciously avoiding delvering the normal fandango form IMO as to not clash with the melody as in the other version with Nino.
Finally, the game changer, he hits us with the Am chord at 2:43 for the 6th sung line, and follows down with Andalusion cadence as is done today. So again we see a missing link between the old world form and the modern trends.
he delivers G7 SUPER late at 2:24...I would say as part of the 5th sung line practically as this phrase is pulling back to the C chord
Sounds that way to me too. Montoya sounds like he plays the C deliberately at 2.18 to close the 4th line. But also Manuel Vallejo sounds like he joins the 4th and 5th lines rather than leaving a clear pause for the G7. The 'Ay' at 2.19 could be heard as an extension of 'temblaba' or the beginning of the 5th line, sounds like a bridge between the two. Temblaba means shake/tremble so the 'Ay' is a great expression of the word. It seems that Manuel Vallejo was significant in his time but is a forgotten artist today.
So these kinds of studies I take issue with when I come across statements such as on page 50 the description of verdiales. Minimalistic negates the understanding of implied secondary dominants implied by the vocal melody which distinguish it from fandango ...not to mention the difference between abandolao compas vs huelva style compas. Next the lack of appreciation for what is required to play loud music with acoustic instruments pre- live sound reinforcement with the description of the panda being monotonous and hypnotic.....next
Researchers often seem to be looking at flamenco with more social political historical perspective/expertise than musical?
Maybe Rafael Chaves Arcos and Norman Kliman's book that Henry linked to earlier in the thread is better. Except I can't read Spanish that well.
Right...but next chapter 6 from your same book, a critic of such study for the same reason, they are not “musical”....so the person compared malaguena and fandango statistically based on music form, meaning pitches and rhythm....I got so exicted reading the abstract, like yes yes finally! Wow, what a bummer. The comparison is with anything from 19th century maybe “called” a fandango or malaguena, not actual flamenco versions necessarily, though they correctly describe the copla harmonic structure as we discuss above, the actual data is nonsense. At one point the write claims malaguena uses instrumental themes not found in fandangos, and proceeds to show notation for Lecuona cheesy crapolla. [8|]. At least they admit at the end to do this proper you need to go note by note comparing letras (obviously means scoring out the melodies exactly as per recordings...which there are almost none of in the 19th century [8|]). Oh well.
Not sure if this has been posted before but here is someone analysing cante melody with theory. I know very little about music theory, but might be of interest those that do.
For me I am interested because he's written out some cante melody in notation. I can't read music but slowly I can figure out the notes and play them on the guitar/bad sing them to help me learn/understand/appreciate/accompany the cante better. We could also point to specific sung notes in discussion. I want to get clearer on the exact note/s to follow with chord changes, and how to recognise the different melody classification on Norman's site.
E.g. Platero de Alcala Solea at 23.14
More Solea Agujetas viejo 3.37, Pansequito 5.52, Tio Borrico 10.01, Maria Vargas 12.15
