Discussion:
Question: BWV 1000 and 1001
(too old to reply)
Arthur Ness
2006-05-24 10:37:48 UTC
Permalink
The tablature facsimile (Musikbibliothek der Stadt Leipzig), edited by
Schulze, "Fuga / del Signore Bach" has A flat (cipher D=A flat), four
measures from the end (lower case in orig.)
|\ |\
|\ |\
| |
--------D---C-------------C----A-------|
----------^^^-----------------^^^--------|
----C------------B---A------------------|
--------------------------------------D---|
--------------------------------------------|
-------------------------------------------|

Hey, hey! Look at that! I didn't see that before. On beats 2, 3 and 4, the
2nd and 3rd notes are SLURRED (shown with ^^^, here)!!! It's a "pull-off."
There are slurs all over the page. Are they shown in your guitar scores?
What about the violin facsimile?
=========================================
Do you mean of the autograph ms. of the tabulature by Weyrauch (there
isn't an autograph of the lute version in Bach's writing)?
Thanks for the offer, I already have the tabulature facsimile.
Andrew
Arthur Ness
2006-05-24 10:38:56 UTC
Permalink
Well here's my take on it. I have the Kalmus reprint of the BGA.

Violin (bga): A flat (BWV 1001)
Violin (autograph): unavailable to me.

Lute (facsimile of Weyrauch's tablature): A flat (=BWV 1000)
[It's clearly the cipher "d" on the first course (pitched to F)]

Organ (bga): E natural = A natural (BWV 539)

Lute (bga): not indexed properly: can't find it
(Should be in BGA vol. XXVII/1, page 4.)

Lute (nba): not available to me at home (Kohlhase, ed.)
(Is this your tabl. and transc. source, Andrew?).

===========================================
In the Bach-Gesellschaft Edition of BWV 1001, in
the 4th measure before the end, there is an Ab at the second 16th note
of the 3rd beat. However, in the lute version, BWV 1000, there is an A
natural in the same place, in the accompanying tabulature as well.
BWV 1000 (Lute): A flat
BWV 1001 (violin): A
BWV 539 (organ): A (transposed)
source: J.S.Bach, Opere per liuto, Paolo Cherici, Edizioni Suvini
Zerboni 8402 (new edition - sadly)
--
Remove Spamtrap to reply
Listen to my music!
http://www.soundclick.com/clausrogge
Andrew Schulman
2006-05-24 15:43:00 UTC
Permalink
I'm not sure which edition my tabulature is from as I have a xerox
which is probably 20 years old at least. however, at the top left side
of the page it says "Originaltabulatur", below the tabulature is the
grand staff over which it says "Ubertragung des Herausgebers" and there
is an asterisk next to the title, Fuge g-Moll* and at the bottom of the
page it says "*Konjekturen nach der Violinfassung (in Kleinstich) nur
der Ubertragung".

In this version it is an A natural, in the tabulature (cipher "e" on
the first course) as well as in the grand staff. There are slurs in
both sections in this measure, but in the next measure, as the sequence
continues, there aren't. I play slurs in both measures in my
arrangement for 8-string guitar which is based on the lute version
except for places where it differs from the violin in which case I play
the violin notes, with the one exception being the opening section of
the piece where I play the lute version because I have the bass notes
available on the 8-string guitar.

In the violin part facsimile of the autograph that I have there is an A
natural, but no slurs in either measure.

Given the A natural in these parts I have, autograph, lute version, and
also the organ version, but most obviously the auto graph, I will stay
with the A natural.

Andrew
Andrew Schulman
2006-05-24 15:43:24 UTC
Permalink
I'm not sure which edition my tabulature is from as I have a xerox
which is probably 20 years old at least. however, at the top left side
of the page it says "Originaltabulatur", below the tabulature is the
grand staff over which it says "Ubertragung des Herausgebers" and there
is an asterisk next to the title, Fuge g-Moll* and at the bottom of the
page it says "*Konjekturen nach der Violinfassung (in Kleinstich) nur
der Ubertragung".

In this version it is an A natural, in the tabulature (cipher "e" on
the first course) as well as in the grand staff. There are slurs in
both sections in this measure, but in the next measure, as the sequence
continues, there aren't. I play slurs in both measures in my
arrangement for 8-string guitar which is based on the lute version
except for places where it differs from the violin in which case I play
the violin notes, with the one exception being the opening section of
the piece where I play the lute version because I have the bass notes
available on the 8-string guitar.

In the violin part facsimile of the autograph that I have there is an A
natural, but no slurs in either measure.

Given the A natural in these parts I have, autograph, lute version, and
also the organ version, but most obviously the auto graph, I will stay
with the A natural.

Andrew
Arthur Ness
2006-05-24 18:11:18 UTC
Permalink
I'll respond below.
=========================================
Post by Andrew Schulman
I'm not sure which edition my tabulature is from as I have a xerox
which is probably 20 years old at least. however, at the top left side
of the page it says "Originaltabulatur", below the tabulature is the
grand staff over which it says "Ubertragung des Herausgebers" and there
is an asterisk next to the title, Fuge g-Moll* and at the bottom of the
page it says "*Konjekturen nach der Violinfassung (in Kleinstich) nur
der Ubertragung".
<<<>>> It interesting to combine the two. I would guess that it's the NBA.
But Wilhelm Tappert made an early editiuon, and I think Bruger did too.
Both of them would have known about the tablature in Leipzig. It belonged
(iirc) to CarlBecker, and Tappert knew Becker and couldhave consulted it
before it went to the Musikbibliothek der Stadt. We tend to forget how many
editions there have been of JSB's lute music.
Post by Andrew Schulman
In this version it is an A natural, in the tabulature (cipher "e" on
the first course) as well as in the grand staff.
<<<>>>The editor could have felt the autograph reading was authentic, and
changed the lute to fit. The A flat in the violin version might have come
from some other 18th century manuscript, if the autogeraph was not then
available. To do a critical edition, one would obtain copies of all early
versions and compare them note-by-note, and make editiorial decisions based
on that collation of sources. (Plus ones own musical sense.)
Post by Andrew Schulman
There are slurs in
both sections in this measure, but in the next measure, as the sequence
continues, there aren't.
<<<>>>Yes, likewise the tablature facsimile. There are slurs (counting
backwards) in meas. 7, 8, 16, 17, 20, etc. They are so small, they might
easily be missed. I hadn't noticed them before.
Post by Andrew Schulman
I play slurs in both measures in my
arrangement for 8-string guitar which is based on the lute version
except for places where it differs from the violin in which case I play
the violin notes, with the one exception being the opening section of
the piece where I play the lute version because I have the bass notes
available on the 8-string guitar.
In the violin part facsimile of the autograph that I have there is an A
natural, but no slurs in either measure.
<<>>I was curious. Thanks for looking.
Post by Andrew Schulman
Given the A natural in these parts I have, autograph, lute version, and
also the organ version, but most obviously the auto graph, I will stay
with the A natural.
<<<>>>There's no autograph for the organ versions, according to BWV (1950
ed.).

<<<>>>Now if you bring up that note about 3/4rds of the way through BWV 999,
I'm going on strike!! I can't make up mymind. Either one is possible. I
checked the critical notes in the NBA (new Bach edition), but can't remember
what the situation is. --ajn
Post by Andrew Schulman
Andrew
Andrew Schulman
2006-05-24 19:11:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arthur Ness
I would guess that it's the NBA.
But Wilhelm Tappert made an early editiuon, and I think Bruger did too.
Both of them would have known about the tablature in Leipzig. It belonged
(iirc) to CarlBecker, and Tappert knew Becker and couldhave consulted it
before it went to the Musikbibliothek der Stadt. We tend to forget how many
editions there have been of JSB's lute music.
I'm curious about which edition, if anyone knows from my description
please post-
Post by Arthur Ness
Post by Andrew Schulman
In this version it is an A natural, in the tabulature (cipher "e" on
the first course) as well as in the grand staff.
<<<>>>The editor could have felt the autograph reading was authentic, and
changed the lute to fit. The A flat in the violin version might have come
from some other 18th century manuscript, if the autograph was not then
available.
Yes, fortunately the autograph eventually showed up.
Post by Arthur Ness
Now if you bring up that note about 3/4rds of the way through BWV 999,
I'm going on strike!! I can't make up mymind. Either one is possible. I
checked the critical notes in the NBA (new Bach edition), but can't remember
what the situation is. --ajn
Yes, at measure 23 I play the F natural in the bass (this is of course
the note in the Kellner autograph of BWV 999 although that is in Cm and
on guitar it is played in Dm); easy to do on an 8-string guitar as a
bar, the F is on the 8th string in that position. The 6-string
solution, playing the F an octave higher doesn't work well at all in my
opinion, nor does grabbing the F at the 6th string-1st fret for a split
second.

The F makes harmonic sense of course as the root of the F dominant 7th
chord which is the harmony at the point. But the disruption of the E
pedal is obviously what bothers people that don't like it, especially
keyboard players who play it in C minor although some do like it (in
that case, an Eb). But the disruption of the pedal also bothered me
somewhat. Last year I tried something, I played the bass on the
downbeat of m. 28 as a D#! I love it, there is then a symmetry of a
half step above the pedal at 23 and a half step below at 28, and the D#
fits the harmony there as does the F natural at 23.

I've been playing BWV 999 & 1000 in concerts all year with my group (I
open the second half of programs with these 2 solos) and not a single
person has asked me about the D# (or the F). But it sounds very good
to me and to my players and I haven't had an ectoplasmic manifestation
by J. S. Bach telling me to cease and desist, so it stays in my score.

Andrew
Arthur Ness
2006-05-24 19:29:51 UTC
Permalink
On second thought it probably is NOT the Neue Bach Ausgabe, ed. Kohlhase.
Probably Bruger. Cherci would be in Italiian, but Claus will know. I
thought I had the Bruger, but can't find it now.

For BWV 999, I think it's Cammerton/Chorton, and lute also should be in d
minor. The lutenist Kellner is a different person. Bach's Kellner was an
organ virtuoso. He also copied the violin partita BWV 1001, and lots of
other Bach works. A flat or not??

Now I'll have to get out the score and see what your solution for BWV 999
is.
Post by Andrew Schulman
Post by Arthur Ness
I would guess that it's the NBA.
But Wilhelm Tappert made an early editiuon, and I think Bruger did too.
Both of them would have known about the tablature in Leipzig. It belonged
(iirc) to CarlBecker, and Tappert knew Becker and couldhave consulted it
before it went to the Musikbibliothek der Stadt. We tend to forget how many
editions there have been of JSB's lute music.
I'm curious about which edition, if anyone knows from my description
please post-
Post by Arthur Ness
Post by Andrew Schulman
In this version it is an A natural, in the tabulature (cipher "e" on
the first course) as well as in the grand staff.
<<<>>>The editor could have felt the autograph reading was authentic, and
changed the lute to fit. The A flat in the violin version might have come
from some other 18th century manuscript, if the autograph was not then
available.
Yes, fortunately the autograph eventually showed up.
Post by Arthur Ness
Now if you bring up that note about 3/4rds of the way through BWV 999,
I'm going on strike!! I can't make up mymind. Either one is possible. I
checked the critical notes in the NBA (new Bach edition), but can't remember
what the situation is. --ajn
Yes, at measure 23 I play the F natural in the bass (this is of course
the note in the Kellner autograph of BWV 999 although that is in Cm and
on guitar it is played in Dm); easy to do on an 8-string guitar as a
bar, the F is on the 8th string in that position. The 6-string
solution, playing the F an octave higher doesn't work well at all in my
opinion, nor does grabbing the F at the 6th string-1st fret for a split
second.
The F makes harmonic sense of course as the root of the F dominant 7th
chord which is the harmony at the point. But the disruption of the E
pedal is obviously what bothers people that don't like it, especially
keyboard players who play it in C minor although some do like it (in
that case, an Eb). But the disruption of the pedal also bothered me
somewhat. Last year I tried something, I played the bass on the
downbeat of m. 28 as a D#! I love it, there is then a symmetry of a
half step above the pedal at 23 and a half step below at 28, and the D#
fits the harmony there as does the F natural at 23.
I've been playing BWV 999 & 1000 in concerts all year with my group (I
open the second half of programs with these 2 solos) and not a single
person has asked me about the D# (or the F). But it sounds very good
to me and to my players and I haven't had an ectoplasmic manifestation
by J. S. Bach telling me to cease and desist, so it stays in my score.
Andrew
Andrew Schulman
2006-05-24 19:42:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arthur Ness
For BWV 999, I think it's Cammerton/Chorton, and lute also should be in d
minor. The lutenist Kellner is a different person. Bach's Kellner was an
organ virtuoso.
Thanks, I always thought it was Kellner the lutenist.

A.
Arthur Ness
2006-05-24 22:14:33 UTC
Permalink
The lutenist was David Kellner (d. 1748), the organ virtuoso and cantor was
Johann David Kellner (d. 1772). As far as I know, they were not related.

By the way, Gounod composed a second "ave-maria-type" composition, the
second one based on BWV 999. I've never seen the music, nor heard it
performed. You probably could find a copy in the NYPL.
============================================
Post by Andrew Schulman
Post by Arthur Ness
For BWV 999, I think it's Cammerton/Chorton, and lute also should be in d
minor. The lutenist Kellner is a different person. Bach's Kellner was an
organ virtuoso.
Thanks, I always thought it was Kellner the lutenist.
A.
Andrew Schulman
2006-05-25 02:39:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arthur Ness
By the way, Gounod composed a second "ave-maria-type" composition, the
second one based on BWV 999. I've never seen the music, nor heard it
performed. You probably could find a copy in the NYPL.
I've heard about it but have never come across a copy. I'll let you
know if I find a copy.

A.
Arthur Ness
2006-05-25 07:25:50 UTC
Permalink
I've never been particulrly interested in seeing it, other than as a
curiosity.
===================================
Post by Andrew Schulman
Post by Arthur Ness
By the way, Gounod composed a second "ave-maria-type" composition, the
second one based on BWV 999. I've never seen the music, nor heard it
performed. You probably could find a copy in the NYPL.
I've heard about it but have never come across a copy. I'll let you
know if I find a copy.
A.
Arthur Ness
2006-05-25 08:33:24 UTC
Permalink
It is curious, how one of Gounod's most famous pieces was the creation of a
tenor who added the sacred text to that "Meditation" for 'cello and piano.
When Gound attempted to replicate the success using BWV 999, it was a flop.
But in comparison with the C major prelude, BWV 999 is a rather weak piece,
and that may account for the different reception. Guitarists must find the
the original "Ave Maria" to be requested often for weddings. Schubert's
"Ave maria" uses a secular text, and as a theatrical piece cannot be used in
church.
===============================
Post by Arthur Ness
I've never been particulrly interested in seeing it, other than as a
curiosity.
===================================
Post by Andrew Schulman
Post by Arthur Ness
By the way, Gounod composed a second "ave-maria-type" composition, the
second one based on BWV 999. I've never seen the music, nor heard it
performed. You probably could find a copy in the NYPL.
I've heard about it but have never come across a copy. I'll let you
know if I find a copy.
A.
Arthur Ness
2006-05-25 08:41:48 UTC
Permalink
Schubert's text is "Ellen's Song" from _Lady of the Lake_ by Sir Walter
Scott.
==============================================
Post by Arthur Ness
It is curious, how one of Gounod's most famous pieces was the creation of a
tenor who added the sacred text to that "Meditation" for 'cello and piano.
When Gound attempted to replicate the success using BWV 999, it was a flop.
But in comparison with the C major prelude, BWV 999 is a rather weak piece,
and that may account for the different reception. Guitarists must find the
the original "Ave Maria" to be requested often for weddings. Schubert's
"Ave maria" uses a secular text, and as a theatrical piece cannot be used in
church.
===============================
Post by Arthur Ness
I've never been particulrly interested in seeing it, other than as a
curiosity.
===================================
Post by Andrew Schulman
Post by Arthur Ness
By the way, Gounod composed a second "ave-maria-type" composition, the
second one based on BWV 999. I've never seen the music, nor heard it
performed. You probably could find a copy in the NYPL.
I've heard about it but have never come across a copy. I'll let you
know if I find a copy.
A.
Young Generation
2006-05-25 10:40:09 UTC
Permalink
It is unclear whether J.D. Kellner was a Bach student. Some of the many
Bach manuscripts from his library were copied jointly by Bach and Kellner,
and they may hsve been assembled for Kellner's use as performance and
teaching materials. Kellner also was a personal friend of Handel's.

Kellner's most famous pupil was J.P. Kirnberg, the music theorist. He
studied briefly with JSB. Part of K's fame lies in the musical dice game,
which is thought to be his, although it is sometimes attributed to Mozart. A
minuet and trio is assembled by the toss of the dice. There are so many
permutations that it would take 30 years, eight-hours per day, to play them
all. Without taking the repeats.<g>

It's a rather fun parlor game when you have some musicians in for a party.
You can assemble a dozen or so minuets by rolls of the dice, and then
perform them. John Cage has a similar piece. One-measure snippets of
famous marches are assembled, and then played. It's hilarious to hear a
measure from "Stars and Stripes," then a measure from "Colonel Bogy,"
"National Emblem," etc. In fact it was even more amusing when I heard it,
because it was performed on piccolo with piano.
==================================
Post by Arthur Ness
The lutenist was David Kellner (d. 1748), the organ virtuoso and cantor
was Johann David Kellner (d. 1772). As far as I know, they were not
related.
By the way, Gounod composed a second "ave-maria-type" composition, the
second one based on BWV 999. I've never seen the music, nor heard it
performed. You probably could find a copy in the NYPL.
============================================
Post by Andrew Schulman
Post by Arthur Ness
For BWV 999, I think it's Cammerton/Chorton, and lute also should be in d
minor. The lutenist Kellner is a different person. Bach's Kellner was an
organ virtuoso.
Thanks, I always thought it was Kellner the lutenist.
A.
Arthur Ness
2006-05-25 10:51:26 UTC
Permalink
That's Kirnberger, not Kirnberg.
======================
Post by Young Generation
Kellner's most famous pupil was J.P. Kirnberg, the music theorist.
Sybrand Bakker
2006-05-25 15:53:52 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 24 May 2006 22:14:33 GMT, "Arthur Ness"
Post by Arthur Ness
The lutenist was David Kellner (d. 1748), the organ virtuoso and cantor was
Johann David Kellner (d. 1772). As far as I know, they were not related.
Do you believe humans read from bottom to top? If not, why do you
insist on top-posting and repeating the entire previous article?


Sybrand Bakker

anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres
Andrew Schulman
2006-05-25 16:01:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sybrand Bakker
Do you believe humans read from bottom to top? If not, why do you
insist on top-posting and repeating the entire previous article?
Sybrand, you had mentioned this a few months ago during a thread and I
realized that I was, egads, a top-poster!!

So I changed my evil ways, and I am a better person for it.

Thank you,
Andrew
Roman Turovsky
2006-05-25 17:35:21 UTC
Permalink
Andrew,
Sybrand is a well known PMSy crank, oblivious to the fact that some do
prefer top-posting, because their mail clients preview messages that way.
RT
Post by Andrew Schulman
Post by Sybrand Bakker
Do you believe humans read from bottom to top? If not, why do you
insist on top-posting and repeating the entire previous article?
Sybrand, you had mentioned this a few months ago during a thread and I
realized that I was, egads, a top-poster!!
So I changed my evil ways, and I am a better person for it.
Thank you,
Andrew
Sybrand Bakker
2006-05-25 18:25:44 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 25 May 2006 17:35:21 GMT, "Roman Turovsky"
Post by Roman Turovsky
Andrew,
Sybrand is a well known PMSy crank, oblivious to the fact that some do
prefer top-posting, because their mail clients preview messages that way.
RT
And RT is a well known troll that indulges in arrogant behavior, and
chasing me all over the Usenet.
In doing so, this is a clear case of pott<->kettle<->black!!!

Sybrand Bakker

anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres
Andrew Schulman
2006-05-25 18:43:14 UTC
Permalink
Yes, I am quite familiar with good ol' Sybrand from the alt.bach list!


Thanks,
Andrew
Richard Schultz
2006-08-10 09:05:43 UTC
Permalink
In alt.music.j-s-bach Roman Turovsky <***@verizon.net> wrote:

: Sybrand is a well known PMSy crank, oblivious to the fact that some do
: prefer top-posting, because their mail clients preview messages that way.

That someone "prefers" to be rude does not make him any less rude. It has
been a matter of netiquette for more than two decades that the proper
form for responses to usenet posts is to place your remarks immediately
after the text to which you are replying, and to edit out any extraneous
material.

-----
Richard Schultz ***@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing."
John Briggs
2006-08-10 12:37:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Schultz
Post by Roman Turovsky
Sybrand is a well known PMSy crank, oblivious to the fact that some
do prefer top-posting, because their mail clients preview messages
that way.
That someone "prefers" to be rude does not make him any less rude.
It has been a matter of netiquette for more than two decades that the
proper form for responses to usenet posts is to place your remarks
immediately after the text to which you are replying, and to edit out
any extraneous material.
In e-mail it is more conventional to place a complete reply above the
message being responded to (if included). Which is the source of the
confusion, of course.
--
John Briggs
Richard Schultz
2006-08-10 14:49:40 UTC
Permalink
In alt.music.j-s-bach John Briggs <***@ntlworld.com> wrote:
: Richard Schultz wrote:
:> In alt.music.j-s-bach Roman Turovsky <***@verizon.net> wrote:

:>> Sybrand is a well known PMSy crank, oblivious to the fact that some
:>> do prefer top-posting, because their mail clients preview messages
:>> that way.

:> It has been a matter of netiquette for more than two decades that the
:> proper form for responses to usenet posts is to place your remarks
:> immediately after the text to which you are replying, and to edit out
:> any extraneous material.

: In e-mail it is more conventional to place a complete reply above the
: message being responded to (if included). Which is the source of the
: confusion, of course.

Actually, I believe that the source of the confusion is that some low-grade
newsreaders default to top posting, and most people who use those newsreaders
are unaware that what they are doing is frowned upon.

-----
Richard Schultz ***@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"an optimist is a guy/ that has never had/ much experience"
Andrew Schulman
2006-08-10 15:13:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Schultz
Actually, I believe that the source of the confusion is that some low-grade
newsreaders default to top posting, and most people who use those newsreaders
are unaware that what they are doing is frowned upon.
Fascinating. This adds a lot to the discussion of Bach's music.

Andrew
http://www.abacaproductions.com/
Robert Crim
2006-08-10 16:33:26 UTC
Permalink
Bach was obviously a top poster. I like to post both top and bottom.
I'm bi.

Robert
Post by Andrew Schulman
Post by Richard Schultz
Actually, I believe that the source of the confusion is that some low-grade
newsreaders default to top posting, and most people who use those newsreaders
are unaware that what they are doing is frowned upon.
Fascinating. This adds a lot to the discussion of Bach's music.
Andrew
http://www.abacaproductions.com/
Bach was obviously a top poster. I like to post both top and bottom.
I'm bi.

Robert
Alain Naigeon
2006-08-10 16:41:15 UTC
Permalink
"Robert Crim" <***@earthlink.net> a écrit dans le message de news:
***@4ax.com...

[...]

LOL :-) He was a top composer too :-o

[...]
--
Français *==> "Musique renaissance" <==* English
midi - facsimiles - ligatures - mensuration
http://anaigeon.free.fr | http://www.medieval.org/emfaq/anaigeon/
Alain Naigeon - ***@free.fr - Oberhoffen/Moder, France
John Nguyen
2006-08-10 17:05:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alain Naigeon
[...]
LOL :-) He was a top composer too :-o
[...]
--
Français *==> "Musique renaissance" <==* English
midi - facsimiles - ligatures - mensuration
http://anaigeon.free.fr | http://www.medieval.org/emfaq/anaigeon/
But he's long been decomposed, from top to bottom!

Cheers,

John
John Briggs
2006-08-10 16:56:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Schultz
Post by John Briggs
Post by Richard Schultz
Post by Roman Turovsky
Sybrand is a well known PMSy crank, oblivious to the fact that some
do prefer top-posting, because their mail clients preview messages
that way.
It has been a matter of netiquette for more than two decades that
the proper form for responses to usenet posts is to place your
remarks immediately after the text to which you are replying, and
to edit out any extraneous material.
In e-mail it is more conventional to place a complete reply above the
message being responded to (if included). Which is the source of the
confusion, of course.
Actually, I believe that the source of the confusion is that some
low-grade newsreaders default to top posting, and most people who use
those newsreaders are unaware that what they are doing is frowned
upon.
Yes, but the reason they default to top-posting is because they are
primarily intended for e-mail.
--
John Briggs
JonLorPro
2006-08-10 21:11:44 UTC
Permalink
Wed, May 24 2006 3:11 pm
Post by Andrew Schulman
Post by Arthur Ness
Now if you bring up that note about 3/4rds of the way through BWV 999,
I'm going on strike!! I can't make up mymind. Either one is possible. I
checked the critical notes in the NBA (new Bach edition), but can't remember
what the situation is. --ajn
Yes, at measure 23 I play the F natural in the bass (this is of course
the note in the Kellner autograph of BWV 999 although that is in Cm and
on guitar it is played in Dm); easy to do on an 8-string guitar as a
bar, the F is on the 8th string in that position. The 6-string
solution, playing the F an octave higher doesn't work well at all in my
opinion, nor does grabbing the F at the 6th string-1st fret for a split
second....
I just came across this topic, so my contribution is belated-
I, too, am a "multi-string" guitarist, and am able thereby to play the
low F. I agree that it is preferable on six string simply to continue
the E, though I have heard both the solutions you allude to in recorded
versions.
But, just for laughs, here is what I worked out for that measure and
its preparation in the previous meaure for a student not too long ago-
not seriously proposed for performance, but fun to fool around with,
and it does relieve, if only minimally, the split-second grab (copy and
paste the tab below to notepad, or some mono-spaced font to resore
legibility):

m.22

use l.h. 2,3,4 (not a bar), and slide 2 down to fourth fret on third
string


|-----------10----------0-----0-----0--|
|--------9-----9-----9-----------------|
|-----9-----------9--------4-----------|
|--------------------------------6-----|
|--------------------------------------|
|--0-----------------------------------|


m. 23

slide 4 from fifth to eighth fret,
then use 1 and 3 for first and third strings,
reach around with 4 for the fifth string F. # then slides to
seventh fret in the next measure and
normal fingering resumes.


|--------5/(8)-5-----5-----------------|-----------7--------
|-----4--------------------------------|--------6-----6-----
|-----------------8-----8-----8-----8--|-----7-----------7--
|--------------------------7-----------|--------------------
|--------------------------------8-----|--------------------
|--1-----------------------------------|--0----------------- etc.
Post by Andrew Schulman
...The F makes harmonic sense of course as the root of the F dominant 7th
chord which is the harmony at the point. But the disruption of the E
pedal is obviously what bothers people that don't like it, especially
keyboard players who play it in C minor although some do like it (in
that case, an Eb). But the disruption of the pedal also bothered me
somewhat....
Before I had an 11-string I, too, convinced myself that I was
"bothered" by the disruption of the pedal- but I found my distaste for
it vanished once I actually had some choice in the matter.
Below is an excerpt from a draft of some writing I was doing on the
design of my tuning, why I have it set up the way it is (High A,
basses stepped downward diatonically from the low E to low A but
ordered so that the low B is adjacent to the low E). I went way off on
a long tangent about this piece and about the meaning of this spot in
particular. This excerpt may finally may have a place of relevance
here. Hope it is interesting to read and criticize. (My sense of the
theoretical sophistication of my targeted reader varied considerably as
I was writing this) :


"....Finally, having the low D and C strings means I don't lose access
to at least some of the notes between the low E and B when I move to
upper positions."
"Every guitarist who does his own transcriptions is familiar with the
problem alluded to in this last point as it exists analogously on the
six string guitar. We've all wished at some time, while availing
ourselves of the upper reaches of the fingerboard, to have an extra
finger or two with which to reach back for a low F, F#, G. or G#, which
are the fingered notes between the two lowest strings and available
only on the four lowest frets. A famous example is in a piece known to
any classical guitarist familiar with the basic intermediate
repertoire, one of Bach's "little" preludes. This particular one is
often referred to as the "little prelude in c", because when played as
originally written on a keyboard instrument, it begins, apparently, in
c minor. It ends in G, the dominant of C, though by the time this
happens there is no vestige left of a C centered tonality and G has
become the tonic- so it ends in a key other than that in which it
began, which is unusual (in any key, the "dominant" is chord which we
hear as having a tension and inherent tendency directed towards the
tonic or "home" chord as the most likely chord to follow and satisfy or
"resolve" that tension. 99.99% of all pieces written end with a
harmonic movement or "progression" from a dominant chord to the tonic).
In the guitar transcription this piece has been transposed up a whole
step, so it begins in d minor and ends in A, but nevertheless has still
sometimes been referred to in guitar programs as the "little prelude in
c". "
"There is a long section in this prelude in which on the downbeats of
several successive measures there is a constant reiteration in the bass
of the same note, while chords change above it. This sustain or
constant repetition of a bass note while chords change freely above it
is called a "pedal point" because when organists wrote it into their
works it typically was a note that was held down with their foot on the
pedal keyboard. So long as the chords at the beginning and end of a
pedal section are chords that include the note that is being "pedaled",
the chords in between do not have to "recognize" that note, and in fact
can be chords which if played out of the blue with that note in the
bass might sound horribly wrong. Yet in a pedal section the listeners
ear accepts and understands what is going on. The compositional effect
is that of an extremely intricate and elaborated version extended in
time of the chord with which one enters and leaves the pedal section."
" In this "little" prelude the "pedaled" note is the dominant of the
key in which the piece ends, which in the transposed guitar
transcription is E. It is the length and insistence of this long
sustained dominant E with its expected but deferred resolution to A
which makes A sound convincing as a final tonic, and pretty much
obliterates any aural or "sound-sense" expectation that the piece will
work its way back to d minor and end there. The chord succession above
the pedal point here is not a very complex one as pedal point sections
go, it begins with a simple alternation back and forth between E
dominant seventh and A minor chords. This simple back-and-forth does
not mean it is boring or monotonous though, because the voicing, or
order in which the chord tones are vertically organized, is arranged so
that with each succesive chord there is a dramatic rise in pitch to a
climax on one of the dominant chord voicings, at which point it turns
around and begins a descent back to the chord and voicing with which
the pedal section started- and then continues its descent beyond that
point. This continuation past the return to this chord seems to evoke a
hushed quietude which serves to intensify the overt drama of the rise
and fall which has preceded it, which further supports the point being
made that E is the true dominant of the piece, and the structure can
end nowhere else but on A."
"A centerpiece to Bach's compositional argument as to the true
tonality is encapsulated in one particular measure in the midst of this
process, the measure in which is effected the change in direction after
having attained to the climactic dominant and the descent begins. If
Bach had adhered to the pattern of harmonic alternation that he had
established up to that point then the chord in this measure would have
been another A minor chord, such as the one immediately preceding the
climactic dominant. An interesting experiment is to try substituting a
repetition of that preceding measure in place of the one that Bach
wrote to follow that climax. This results in a continuation of the A
minor-E dom 7 alternation which has characterized the section up that
point with the same melodic rise and fall- only now it seems shallower
in effect, even insignificant, and arbitrarily constructed."
"The chord that Bach used instead at this juncture is an augmented
sixth chord, a special type of chord which seems as insistent upon
resolving to a chord understood to be a dominant as is a dominant to
resolve to a tonic- perhaps even more so because often dominant chords
resolve to chords which turn out themselves to be dominants, or have
alternative resolutions to other areas of the tonality, whereas
augmented sixths are usually pretty specific about where they are
going. The use of this dominant presaging chord particularly at this
dramatic moment intensifies the "dominantization" of E in a more
profound and eloquent fashion than simply repeating the E chord in its
dominant form over and over again would have done. It is notable that
it is only after having used this clarifying chord in which the status
of E as a dominant of larger than local significence is confirmed that
Bach then varied from his harmonic alternation, and instead of A minor
chords in some places he used forms of the dominants own dominant. To
have done so before this point would have been slightly disorienting as
E would not yet have been sufficiently confirmed as the dominant of
greater structural significance than one used for local effect."
"A salient feature of Bach's writing of this augmented sixth chord is
that as originally written he breaks the pedal point- for this measure
only- and, in the key of the guitar transposition, the bass note would
be F, not another E. F is one of the components of the augmented sixth
chord most intensivly directed towards E (the other is D#). This
breaking of a pedal point only to resume it immediately is another
unusual feature, but it does show that Bach really did intend this
chord to be heard as especially significant. In fact, the emphasis as
a dominant that the F in the augmented sixth chord places on its note
of resolution, the E which it has replaced, serves not so much to break
the pedal point as to reinforce its meaning."
"To return to the point about guitar stringing from which I entered
into this lengthy tangential discussion- this bass note cannot be
played on six string guitar! (at least not in a wholly satisfactory
fashion, though there are various solutions-more on this below). This
is because the notes of the chord being sounded above this bass note
are located on the eighth and tenth frets, and the tenor motion entails
a note usually played on the twelfth fret. There is no way to do this
while at the same time accessing the low F on the first fret, and
provide for sustain of all components to achieve a continuity of
texture with surrounding measures, or indeed a texture similar to any
other measure of this piece. Therefore guitarists usually content
themselves with simply re-iterating the low E. This doesn't mean that
the transcription is a failure; what happens is that the pedal is
maintained literally throughout, rather than recieving the
re-inforcement of upper neighbor F in the bass in this measure. The
augmented 6th quality of the chord does finally become realized when
the tenor motion descends to the F on the second to last note of the
measure to form the augmented 6th interval with the D#, the repeated
note in the upper chord tones. It is, however, a loss that the effect
is considerably less overt, and deferred to the very end of the
measure, than if this bass F were possible...."


Last year I tried something, I played the bass on the
Post by Andrew Schulman
downbeat of m. 28 as a D#! I love it, there is then a symmetry of a
half step above the pedal at 23 and a half step below at 28, and the D#
fits the harmony there as does the F natural at 23.
Kinda neat! (Did you mean to refer to m.25 in the above?)

A fun thing to do with this piece is to play each measure as though it
were two meaures alternating between 6/8 and 3/4 (or 6/16 and 3/8) -
suddenly its Latin American! Luis Bonfa wrote a wordless vocalise
using this piece as an accompaniment, which he recorded with a singer a
long time ago, and which I "lifted" from the record so my wife and I
could do it- sorta like the vocalise of Villa-Lobos' "Bachianas no.5"-
but he didn't do this rhythmic re-interpretation- too bad, it would
have been right up his alley that way.

Johh Bigelow
Andrew Schulman
2006-08-12 00:45:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew Schulman
Last year I tried something, I played the bass on the
Post by Andrew Schulman
downbeat of m. 28 as a D#! I love it, there is then a symmetry of a
half step above the pedal at 23 and a half step below at 28, and the D#
fits the harmony there as does the F natural at 23.
Kinda neat! (Did you mean to refer to m.25 in the above?)
Finally! At last!! Someone ventured an opinion about m. 28 and the D#
(yes, I was referring to m. 28, not m. 25).

Thank you. I continue to enjoy that D#.

Best regards,
Andrew
Jackson
2006-08-12 09:28:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by JonLorPro
Wed, May 24 2006 3:11 pm
Post by Andrew Schulman
Post by Arthur Ness
Now if you bring up that note about 3/4rds of the way through BWV 999,
I'm going on strike!! I can't make up mymind. Either one is possible. I
checked the critical notes in the NBA (new Bach edition), but can't remember
what the situation is. --ajn
Yes, at measure 23 I play the F natural in the bass (this is of course
the note in the Kellner autograph of BWV 999 although that is in Cm and
on guitar it is played in Dm); easy to do on an 8-string guitar as a
bar, the F is on the 8th string in that position. The 6-string
solution, playing the F an octave higher doesn't work well at all in my
opinion, nor does grabbing the F at the 6th string-1st fret for a split
second....
I just came across this topic, so my contribution is belated-
I, too, am a "multi-string" guitarist, and am able thereby to play the
low F. I agree that it is preferable on six string simply to continue
the E, though I have heard both the solutions you allude to in recorded
versions.
But, just for laughs, here is what I worked out for that measure and
its preparation in the previous meaure for a student not too long ago-
not seriously proposed for performance, but fun to fool around with,
and it does relieve, if only minimally, the split-second grab (copy and
paste the tab below to notepad, or some mono-spaced font to resore
m.22
use l.h. 2,3,4 (not a bar), and slide 2 down to fourth fret on third
string
|-----------10----------0-----0-----0--|
|--------9-----9-----9-----------------|
|-----9-----------9--------4-----------|
|--------------------------------6-----|
|--------------------------------------|
|--0-----------------------------------|
m. 23
slide 4 from fifth to eighth fret,
then use 1 and 3 for first and third strings,
reach around with 4 for the fifth string F. # then slides to
seventh fret in the next measure and
normal fingering resumes.
|--------5/(8)-5-----5-----------------|-----------7--------
|-----4--------------------------------|--------6-----6-----
|-----------------8-----8-----8-----8--|-----7-----------7--
|--------------------------7-----------|--------------------
|--------------------------------8-----|--------------------
|--1-----------------------------------|--0----------------- etc.
Post by Andrew Schulman
...The F makes harmonic sense of course as the root of the F dominant 7th
chord which is the harmony at the point. But the disruption of the E
pedal is obviously what bothers people that don't like it, especially
keyboard players who play it in C minor although some do like it (in
that case, an Eb). But the disruption of the pedal also bothered me
somewhat....
Before I had an 11-string I, too, convinced myself that I was
"bothered" by the disruption of the pedal- but I found my distaste for
it vanished once I actually had some choice in the matter.
Below is an excerpt from a draft of some writing I was doing on the
design of my tuning, why I have it set up the way it is (High A,
basses stepped downward diatonically from the low E to low A but
ordered so that the low B is adjacent to the low E). I went way off on
a long tangent about this piece and about the meaning of this spot in
particular. This excerpt may finally may have a place of relevance
here. Hope it is interesting to read and criticize. (My sense of the
theoretical sophistication of my targeted reader varied considerably as
"....Finally, having the low D and C strings means I don't lose access
to at least some of the notes between the low E and B when I move to
upper positions."
"Every guitarist who does his own transcriptions is familiar with the
problem alluded to in this last point as it exists analogously on the
six string guitar. We've all wished at some time, while availing
ourselves of the upper reaches of the fingerboard, to have an extra
finger or two with which to reach back for a low F, F#, G. or G#, which
are the fingered notes between the two lowest strings and available
only on the four lowest frets. A famous example is in a piece known to
any classical guitarist familiar with the basic intermediate
repertoire, one of Bach's "little" preludes. This particular one is
often referred to as the "little prelude in c", because when played as
originally written on a keyboard instrument, it begins, apparently, in
c minor. It ends in G, the dominant of C, though by the time this
happens there is no vestige left of a C centered tonality and G has
become the tonic- so it ends in a key other than that in which it
began, which is unusual (in any key, the "dominant" is chord which we
hear as having a tension and inherent tendency directed towards the
tonic or "home" chord as the most likely chord to follow and satisfy or
"resolve" that tension. 99.99% of all pieces written end with a
harmonic movement or "progression" from a dominant chord to the tonic).
In the guitar transcription this piece has been transposed up a whole
step, so it begins in d minor and ends in A, but nevertheless has still
sometimes been referred to in guitar programs as the "little prelude in
c". "
"There is a long section in this prelude in which on the downbeats of
several successive measures there is a constant reiteration in the bass
of the same note, while chords change above it. This sustain or
constant repetition of a bass note while chords change freely above it
is called a "pedal point" because when organists wrote it into their
works it typically was a note that was held down with their foot on the
pedal keyboard. So long as the chords at the beginning and end of a
pedal section are chords that include the note that is being "pedaled",
the chords in between do not have to "recognize" that note, and in fact
can be chords which if played out of the blue with that note in the
bass might sound horribly wrong. Yet in a pedal section the listeners
ear accepts and understands what is going on. The compositional effect
is that of an extremely intricate and elaborated version extended in
time of the chord with which one enters and leaves the pedal section."
" In this "little" prelude the "pedaled" note is the dominant of the
key in which the piece ends, which in the transposed guitar
transcription is E. It is the length and insistence of this long
sustained dominant E with its expected but deferred resolution to A
which makes A sound convincing as a final tonic, and pretty much
obliterates any aural or "sound-sense" expectation that the piece will
work its way back to d minor and end there. The chord succession above
the pedal point here is not a very complex one as pedal point sections
go, it begins with a simple alternation back and forth between E
dominant seventh and A minor chords. This simple back-and-forth does
not mean it is boring or monotonous though, because the voicing, or
order in which the chord tones are vertically organized, is arranged so
that with each succesive chord there is a dramatic rise in pitch to a
climax on one of the dominant chord voicings, at which point it turns
around and begins a descent back to the chord and voicing with which
the pedal section started- and then continues its descent beyond that
point. This continuation past the return to this chord seems to evoke a
hushed quietude which serves to intensify the overt drama of the rise
and fall which has preceded it, which further supports the point being
made that E is the true dominant of the piece, and the structure can
end nowhere else but on A."
"A centerpiece to Bach's compositional argument as to the true
tonality is encapsulated in one particular measure in the midst of this
process, the measure in which is effected the change in direction after
having attained to the climactic dominant and the descent begins. If
Bach had adhered to the pattern of harmonic alternation that he had
established up to that point then the chord in this measure would have
been another A minor chord, such as the one immediately preceding the
climactic dominant. An interesting experiment is to try substituting a
repetition of that preceding measure in place of the one that Bach
wrote to follow that climax. This results in a continuation of the A
minor-E dom 7 alternation which has characterized the section up that
point with the same melodic rise and fall- only now it seems shallower
in effect, even insignificant, and arbitrarily constructed."
"The chord that Bach used instead at this juncture is an augmented
sixth chord, a special type of chord which seems as insistent upon
resolving to a chord understood to be a dominant as is a dominant to
resolve to a tonic- perhaps even more so because often dominant chords
resolve to chords which turn out themselves to be dominants, or have
alternative resolutions to other areas of the tonality, whereas
augmented sixths are usually pretty specific about where they are
going. The use of this dominant presaging chord particularly at this
dramatic moment intensifies the "dominantization" of E in a more
profound and eloquent fashion than simply repeating the E chord in its
dominant form over and over again would have done. It is notable that
it is only after having used this clarifying chord in which the status
of E as a dominant of larger than local significence is confirmed that
Bach then varied from his harmonic alternation, and instead of A minor
chords in some places he used forms of the dominants own dominant. To
have done so before this point would have been slightly disorienting as
E would not yet have been sufficiently confirmed as the dominant of
greater structural significance than one used for local effect."
"A salient feature of Bach's writing of this augmented sixth chord is
that as originally written he breaks the pedal point- for this measure
only- and, in the key of the guitar transposition, the bass note would
be F, not another E. F is one of the components of the augmented sixth
chord most intensivly directed towards E (the other is D#). This
breaking of a pedal point only to resume it immediately is another
unusual feature, but it does show that Bach really did intend this
chord to be heard as especially significant. In fact, the emphasis as
a dominant that the F in the augmented sixth chord places on its note
of resolution, the E which it has replaced, serves not so much to break
the pedal point as to reinforce its meaning."
"To return to the point about guitar stringing from which I entered
into this lengthy tangential discussion- this bass note cannot be
played on six string guitar! (at least not in a wholly satisfactory
fashion, though there are various solutions-more on this below). This
is because the notes of the chord being sounded above this bass note
are located on the eighth and tenth frets, and the tenor motion entails
a note usually played on the twelfth fret. There is no way to do this
while at the same time accessing the low F on the first fret, and
provide for sustain of all components to achieve a continuity of
texture with surrounding measures, or indeed a texture similar to any
other measure of this piece. Therefore guitarists usually content
themselves with simply re-iterating the low E. This doesn't mean that
the transcription is a failure; what happens is that the pedal is
maintained literally throughout, rather than recieving the
re-inforcement of upper neighbor F in the bass in this measure. The
augmented 6th quality of the chord does finally become realized when
the tenor motion descends to the F on the second to last note of the
measure to form the augmented 6th interval with the D#, the repeated
note in the upper chord tones. It is, however, a loss that the effect
is considerably less overt, and deferred to the very end of the
measure, than if this bass F were possible...."
Last year I tried something, I played the bass on the
Post by Andrew Schulman
downbeat of m. 28 as a D#! I love it, there is then a symmetry of a
half step above the pedal at 23 and a half step below at 28, and the D#
fits the harmony there as does the F natural at 23.
Kinda neat! (Did you mean to refer to m.25 in the above?)
A fun thing to do with this piece is to play each measure as though it
were two meaures alternating between 6/8 and 3/4 (or 6/16 and 3/8) -
suddenly its Latin American! Luis Bonfa wrote a wordless vocalise
using this piece as an accompaniment, which he recorded with a singer a
long time ago, and which I "lifted" from the record so my wife and I
could do it- sorta like the vocalise of Villa-Lobos' "Bachianas no.5"-
but he didn't do this rhythmic re-interpretation- too bad, it would
have been right up his alley that way.
Johh Bigelow
JonLorPro, excellent, excellent work in analyzing 999. This is rmcg at
its best.

Guys, let's have more of this kind of thing and less nonsense. Thanks.
Jackson
2006-08-12 09:31:00 UTC
Permalink
JonLorPro, excellent, excellent work in analyzing 999. This is rmcg at
its best.

Guys, let's have more of this kind of thing and less mischief. Thanks.
Xu Zhian Wen
2006-08-10 20:32:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Schultz
That someone "prefers" to be rude does not make him any less rude. It has
been a matter of netiquette for more than two decades that the proper
form for responses to usenet posts is to place your remarks immediately
after the text to which you are replying, and to edit out any extraneous
material.
Welcome to the new world. Everything's gonna change in the next few
years anyway. Your grandkids probably won't believe the rules you abided
by and how unregulated the net was. For now, a lot of the new users are
ignorant of the old rules. That's the breaks, it's all over.

david
Richard Schultz
2006-08-13 10:46:12 UTC
Permalink
In alt.music.j-s-bach Xu Zhian Wen <"Xu Zhian Wen"@hawaiiantel.net> wrote:

: Welcome to the new world. Everything's gonna change in the next few
: years anyway. Your grandkids probably won't believe the rules you abided
: by and how unregulated the net was. For now, a lot of the new users are
: ignorant of the old rules. That's the breaks, it's all over.

It was all over the day that Delphi users were allowed to post to Usenet.
AOL ("ME TOO!") was just the final nail in the coffin.

-----
Richard Schultz ***@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"an optimist is a guy/ that has never had/ much experience"

Arthur Ness
2006-05-25 16:18:10 UTC
Permalink
I alwys read from the bottom up. Don't you? In fact I once had a friend
(since deceased) who was left-handed. And so he wouldn't smear the ink as
he wrote, he wrote from left to right, backwards. When you got a note from
Ingolf, you had to take it to a mirror to read it.

Since most persons have already read the thread, putting new information at
the end, makes it difficult to find the newer thoughts.

=============================================
Post by Sybrand Bakker
On Wed, 24 May 2006 22:14:33 GMT, "Arthur Ness"
Post by Arthur Ness
The lutenist was David Kellner (d. 1748), the organ virtuoso and cantor was
Johann David Kellner (d. 1772). As far as I know, they were not related.
Do you believe humans read from bottom to top? If not, why do you
insist on top-posting and repeating the entire previous article?
Sybrand Bakker
anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres
Arthur Ness
2006-05-25 16:28:07 UTC
Permalink
Now Sybrand's got me all mixed up. Ingolf wrote from RIGHT to left. Dahl,
that is.<g>
======================================================
Post by Arthur Ness
I alwys read from the bottom up. Don't you? In fact I once had a friend
(since deceased) who was left-handed. And so he wouldn't smear the ink as
he wrote, he wrote from left to right, backwards. When you got a note from
Ingolf, you had to take it to a mirror to read it.
Since most persons have already read the thread, putting new information
at the end, makes it difficult to find the newer thoughts.
=============================================
Post by Sybrand Bakker
On Wed, 24 May 2006 22:14:33 GMT, "Arthur Ness"
Post by Arthur Ness
The lutenist was David Kellner (d. 1748), the organ virtuoso and cantor was
Johann David Kellner (d. 1772). As far as I know, they were not related.
Do you believe humans read from bottom to top? If not, why do you
insist on top-posting and repeating the entire previous article?
Sybrand Bakker
anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres
Sybrand Bakker
2006-05-25 18:29:02 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 25 May 2006 16:28:07 GMT, "Arthur Ness"
Post by Arthur Ness
Now Sybrand's got me all mixed up. Ingolf wrote from RIGHT to left. Dahl,
that is.<g>
And you still don't adhere to basic Netiquette!!!!!!

Sybrand Bakker

anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres
Sybrand Bakker
2006-05-25 18:28:29 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 25 May 2006 16:18:10 GMT, "Arthur Ness"
Post by Arthur Ness
I alwys read from the bottom up. Don't you? In fact I once had a friend
(since deceased) who was left-handed. And so he wouldn't smear the ink as
he wrote, he wrote from left to right, backwards. When you got a note from
Ingolf, you had to take it to a mirror to read it.
Since most persons have already read the thread, putting new information at
the end, makes it difficult to find the newer thoughts.
I don't read from bottom up.
If you wouldn't quote the entire message always, your concern is
irrelevant. The effort to cut the irrelevant part is minimal and can
be accomplished by a few keystrokes, even by those who suffer from
Bill Gates III and his Evil Empire.

Sybrand Bakker

anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...