mark indigo -> RE: PETENERA! (Apr. 2 2020 15:53:14)
|
quote:
Flamenco guitar for cante appears to me, based on earliest wax cylinder evidence, to have been well established by the time of Marins method. The way we play for cante today is not much different in the traditional sense. The main guys on recordings that created the model were Gandulla, Borrull, Montoya, etc. These guys did not sound like classical guitar guys at all. They didn’t read music really. Some pro gitanos didn’t read or write their own name much less tablature or score. The method book we have discussed in the past, while an important historical source the actual content is like the “fakemenco” of its day. An appeal to the upper class classical guitar students that wanted to tip toe into the Flamenco sound without having to work in the mines of a Union or the forge in jerez. The trend continues today. The book is useless for a serious Flamenco student. The titles have form names but not form structures. Superficial similarities are incidental. Attempts to trace out cante melodies are “cute”. In my fathers library was Sophocles papas “easy Flamenco variations” from 1960s. Similar marketing concept. If you find the music fun to read and enjoy the melodies, great, but have no illusions you are learning Flamenco with those type of books. I have also listened to a lot of the old wax cylinder recordings, and played for dance for at least 20 years and totally agree with this. The rhythm goes DUM, dum, dum, DUM, dum dum, DUM, dum, DUM, dum, DUM, dum. Same as Guajira, you can attach whatever numbers you like to it![:D] I don't think 12, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 is any more right or wrong than 1 and a, 2 and a, 1 and, 2 and, 3 and. Bear in mind that lots of the falsetas and footwork variations will be repeated phrases of 3 beats (ie. lots of it could be written in 3/4, if anyone could be bothered to write it down)
|
|
|
|