medieval.org
Telefunken "Das Alte Werk" SAWT 9487-A (LP )
1966
medieval.org
Telefunken "Das Alte Werk" SAWT 9487-A (LP )
1966
[Seite 1]
Walther von der VOGELWEIDE (ca. 1170-1230)
1. Mir hât hêr Gêrhart Atze ein pfert erschozzen zisenache [3:59]
Baß, Flöte, Schalmei, Harfe, Rebec, Schlaginstrumente
· Melodie: Stadtbibliothek Breslau, ms. 356 „Puschmanns Singebuch", Hg. G. Münzer 1906, S. 43 Nr. 57
· Text: Die Lieder Walthers von der Vogelweide, Hg. F. Maurer, I, 1960, Nr. II, 4 (= 103, 13 ff)
2. Unter der linden an der heide [3:24]
Mezzosopran, Psalterium
· Melodie: Paris, Bibl. de l'Arsenal 5198, Hg. P. Aubry, 1909 pag. 366 (= B. Kippenberg, Der Rhythmus im Minnesang. 1967, S. 28 f)
· Text: Die Lieder Walthers von der Vogelweide, Hg. F. Maurer, II (1962), Nr. 68 (= 39, 11 ff)
3. Nu alrest lebe ich mir werde (Palästinalied) [4:49]
Baß, Flöte, Schalmei, Harfe, Laute, Rebec, Schlaginstrumente
· Melodie: Staatsarchiv Münster, ms. VII, 51 (= Jaufre Rudel, Lanquan li jorn son lonc em may, vor 1147)
· Text: Die Lieder Walthers von der Vogelweide, Hg. F. Maurer I (1960), Nr. 2 (= 14, 38 ff)
Neidhart von REUENTAL (ca. 1190-1240)
4. Meie, dîn liehter schîn [3:57]
Tenor, Laute
· Melodie:
„Sterzinger Miscellaneen-Handschrift" (= W. Schmieder, Die Lieder
Neidharts DTÖ XXXVII, 11 Bd. 71, Faks. S. 24, Übertr. S. 41, S. 6)
· Text: Die Lieder Neidharts, Hg. E. Wießner - H. Fischer, 1963, Anhang II (= XI ff)
5. Blozen wir den anger ligen sâhen [4:21]
Mezzosopran, Zitôle (Cister), Rebec
· Melodie:
Deutsche Staatsbibliothek Berlin. Ms. germ. fol. 779 (= W. Schmieder,
Dic Lieder Neidharts, Faks. S. 7 f, Übertr. S. 33, c 28)
· Text: Die Lieder Neidharts, Hg. E. Wießner - H. Fischer, 1963, 26, 23 ff
6. Fürste Friderîch (Owê dirre nôt) [1:24]
Tenor, Flöte, Schalmei, Rebec
· Melodie:
Deutsche Staatsbibliothek Berlin, Ms. germ. fol. 779 (= W. Schmieder,
Die Lieder Neidharts, Faks. S. 14, Übertr. S. 36, c 93)
· Text: Die Lieder Neidharts, Hg. E. Wießner - H. Fischer, 1963, 101, 6 ff
7. Meienzît [4:50] (Pseudo-NEIDHART)
Tenor, Harfe
· Melodie
und Text: Deutsche Staatsbibliothek Berlin, Ms. germ. fol. 779 (= W.
Schmieder, Die Lieder Neidharts, Faks. S. 6, Übertr. S. 32, c 17 =
E. Rohloff, Neidharts Sangweisen, 1962, Nr. 9)
[Seite 2]
anonymous (um 1300)
8. Chançonetta Tedescha I [1:52]
Flöte, Schalmei, Harfe, Laute, Rebec, Schlaginstrumente
· Melodie: Aus einer norditalienischen Handschrift, London, Brit. Mus., Add. 29987
Reinmar von BRENNENBERG († vor 1276)
9. Wol mich des tages do mir alrest ist worden kunt [6:49]
Tenor, Flöte, Laute
· Melodie: Munchen, Bayer. Staatsbibliothek, cgm. 4997 „Colmarer Liederhandschrift", Hg. P. Runge, 1896 S. 158, Nr. 101
· Text: Deutsche Liederdichter des 13. Jahrhunderts, Hg. C. v. Kraus, 1952,
Nr. 44, IV, Str. 4, 7, 13
anonymous (um 1300)
10. Chançonetta Tedescha II [1:16]
Flöte, Schalmei, Harfe, Laute, Rebec, Schlaginstrumente
· Melodie: Aus einer norditalienischen Handschrift, London, Brit. Mus., Add. 29987
Der UNVERZAGTE (um 1280)
11. Der kuninc Rodolp [5:31]
Baß, Schalmei, Rebec
· Melodie:
Universitätsbibliothek Jena, „Jenaer Liederhandschrift", Hg. G. Holz,
F. Saran u. E. Bernoulli, 1901, Nr. XV S. 70, Übertr. II, S. 26
· Text: Fr. H. v. d. Hagen, „Minnesinger", Leipzig, 1838-1861, III, Nr. 14, S. 45 f
Heinrich von MEISSEN (FRAUENLOB) († 1318)
12. Ez waent ein narrenwise [4:28]
Baß, Flöte, Schalmei, Harfe, Fidel
· Melodie:
Universitätsbibliothek Jena, „Jenaer Liederhandschrift", Hg. G. Holz,
F. Saran u. E. Bernoulli, 1901, Nr. XXVII, Übertr. II, S. 67
· Text: Frauenlob, Hg. L. Ettmüller, 1843, Nr. 316, 318, 319, S. 181 ff
WIZLÂW (um 1300)
13. Ich warne dich, vil junger man, gezarte [1:32]
Mezzosopran
· Melodie:
Universitätsbibliothek Jena, „Jenaer Liederhandschrift", Hg. G. Holz,
F. Saran u. E. Bernoulli, 1901, Nr. XXIV, Übertr. H, S. 47
· Text: Hg. L. Ettmüller, 1852, Nr. 22, S. 35
14. Loibere risen [2:58]
Tenor, Fidel, Psalterium
· Melodie:
Universitätsbibliothek Jena, „Jenaer Liederhandschrift", Hg. G. Holz,
F. Saran u. E. Bernoulli, 1901, Nr. XXIV, Übertr. S. 51
· Text: Hg. L. Ettmüller, 1852, Nr. 44-45, S. 50 f
Studio der Frühen Musik
Thomas Binkley
Andrea von Ramm, Mezzosopran
Willard Cobb, Tenor
Sterling Jones, Rebec, Fidel
Thomas Binkley, Laute, Zitôle, Psalterium
Weitere Mitwirkende:
Max von Egmond, Baß
Leonore Wehrung, Flöte
Caroline Butcher, Schalmei
Helga Storck , Harfe
Horst Huber, Schlaginstrumente
Recording: Burghausen Castle on the Inn, 5.1966
Übertragung un Bearbeitung; Thomas Binkley
Revision der Texte and Übersetrungen: Burghart Wachinger
Titelseite: Heinrich Frauenlob aus der Manessischen Handschrift, Universitätsbibliothek, Heidelberg
Ausgaben:
Textausgaben
— Fr. H. v. d. Hagen, Minnesinger, 5 Bde., Leipzig 1838-61
— K. Lachmann, Des Minnesangs Frühling, (30. Aufl. v. C. v. Kraus, Leipzig 1950 u. öfters)
— C. v. Kraus, Deutsche Liederdichter des 13. Jahrhunderts, 2 Bde., Tübingen 1952-58
— Walther v. der Vogelweide, Hg. K. Lachmann, bearb. v. H. Kuhn, Berlin 1965
— Derselbe, Hg. Fr. Maurer, (Altdeutsche Textbibliothek 43 u. 47), Tübingen 1955-56
— Neidhart v. Reuental, Hg. E. Wießner, (Altdeutsche Textbibl. 44), 1955
— Frauenlob, Hg. L. Ettmüller, Quedlinburg und Leipzig 1843
Ausgaben von Liederhandschriften:
— Die Jenaer Liederhandschrift, Hg. G. Holz, F. Saran u. E. Bernoulli, 2 Bde., Leipzig 1901 (Nachdruck Hildesheim 1966)
— Die Sangesweisen der Colmarer Liederhandschrift u. der Donaueschinger Liederhandschrift, Hg. P. Runge, Leipzig 1896 (Nachdruck Hildesheim 1966)
— Die Lieder Neidharts, Hg. W. Schmieder, (Denkmäler der Tonkunst in Österreich XXXVII, 1, Bd. 71), Wien 1930
— Neidharts Sangweisen, Hg. E. Rohloff, 2 Bde. (= Abh. d. Ak. d. Wiss. zu Leipzig, Phil. hist. Klasse. Bd. 52, H. 3-4), Berlin 1962
Auswahlsammlungen von Singweisen:
— Fr. Gennrich, Troubadours, Trouvères, Minne- und Meistersang, (Das Musikwerk II), Köln 1951
— U. Aarburg, Singweisen zur Liebeslyrik der deutschen Frühe (= Ergänzungsheft zu H. Brinkmann, Liebeslyrik der dt. Frühe), 2. Aufl., Düsseldorf 1956
— E. Jammers, Ausgewählte Melodien des Minnesangs (= Altdt. Textbibl., Ergänzungsreihe I), Tübingen 1963
— R. J. Taylor, Die Melodien der weltlichen Lieder des Mittelalters, 2 Bde. (= Slg. Metzler 34-35), Stuttgart 1964
Lukas Richter. Minnesang und Spruchdichtung
(Eterna 8 26 133)
This is the first time that a recording devoted entirely to German Minnesang and Spruchdichtung has been produced.
The Sources
The
sources of German Minnesang are of three kinds: (a) containing texts,
(b) containing German melodies, (c) containing melodies related to the
German ones, but having texts in another language. The most important
text manuscripts, such a the Manessische and Wingartner songbooks
contain no music whatsoever. The earliest musical source is the famed
manuscript Carmina Burana (Munich, Bayerische Staastsbibliothek
Clm 4660), which contains just a few stems of Minnesang among the many
Latin songs and poems (cf. “Musik and ihre Zeit”, Carmina Burana, SAWT
9455-A). About a dozen manuscripts fall between this and the
Meistersinger sources of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, which
contain more corrupt, some false Minnesang melodies. Certainly the most
important musical source is the Jena song-book which was copied in the
mid-14th century, and contains exclusively German Minnesang. The final
group of sources of French Troubadour and Trouveres music, particularly
the Chansonnier de l'arsenal (Paris, Bibl. de l'arsenal 5198).
The Transcription of the Melodies
The
sources, spread over three centuries, were written in more or less
decipherable notations ranging from staffless neuma (Carmina Burana),
square notation (Jena) to mensural notation (Mondsee-Wiener song-book).
For the central sources, e. g. the Neidhart MS or the Jena song-book,
the transcription problem is focused on the question of rhythm. Scholars
are not in complete agreement about the rhythmic interpretation of the
notation, thre being four main theories, each supported by reasonable
arguments: 1. Completely free rhythm, rather like chant, 2. Modal
rhythm, 3. Word rhythm bound to strict regular meter, 4. Word rhythm
bound to a metrical framework, but with considerable freedom permitted
the executant.
We find no evidence that a rigid and consistent
rhythmic interpretation ever existed within the bounds of this
repertory. For we are dealing with what Eustache Deschamps calles
“musique naturelle”, music having no rules that might be learned, and
something differing from “musique artificielle” which did have rules of
composition. Almost all of the musical sources were compiled after the
songs had been at the mercy of oral tradition for quite some time, a
fact born out in the variants in the musical texts of different sources.
A song, after having been composed and performed, enjoyed its own
subsequent life, passing from performer to performer, from country to
country. Ulrich von Lichtenstein wrote that his lady sent him “ein wîs diu unbekannt ist in tiutschen landen gar, dâ sult ir ir tiutsch singen in”.
There
is no such thing as a correct version of one of these songs exclusive
of other correct versions. with the exception of the melismatic song of
Wizlaw, “Ich warne dich”, all the songs here are more or less metrical.
The choice between duple and triple meter is not always obvious, and in
one case, “Meien zît” we have applied the principle of “guet underschiedlich tact und mensura”.
The transcription of “Unter der linden” from the anonymous French
contrafactum “En mai au douz tens nouvel” (suggested by Kippenberg)
required only slight modification to fit the German text.
The Accompaniments
there
is convincing evidence to show that these songs were often -but not
always- accompanied. Pictures such as the cover illustration indicate
the affinity of the instrumentalist and poet. Ulrich von Lichtenstein
reports: “Nâch disen liedern sang ich dô einen leich mit noten gar, ir
ralt gelauben mir für wâr, das iche des leiches tœsanc gar niu, manic
fidelær mir danc ragt, das ich die not sô hô machet” (V. 1373), or “Vil
fidelære dâ bî uns riten der vinger grôz unmuozze liten: ir seiten wâren
gezogen hô, ir süeze dœn uns tâten frô” (V. 1455 biede Zitate aus Frauendienst).
The singers themselves were sometimes valued instrumentalists: “sô
suoze mit dem munde, daz niemand wizzen kunde wederez suezer waere oder
baz lobebaere, sîn harphen oder sîn singen” (Tristan V. 3267).
The
next question arises, what did the instrumentalists play as
accompaniments? Modern scholars tend to feel that the rôle of the
accompaniment was insignificant, being more than an attention getting
device (prelude) and a means of giving the singer a breather between
strophes (interlude). But there is reason to believe it was more than
that. A virtuoso instrumentalist would not be satisfied simply to play a
drone, nor would the poet-employer be likely to pay good money for
inconsequential services.
The instrumentalist might not have felt
the need to become expert if the work were simple. But the
instrumentalists were expected to be able to perform in different styles
as well as to know all the forms. Isolde, for example, “videlte ir stampenie, leiche und sôfremdiu notelin diu niemer femder kunden sîn, in franzoiser wîse”, whereas Tristan had played his vielle “in welhisher wîse” (Tristan V. 8062). Count Adân praised the six vielle players who impresed him with their “kunstelielichen griffen”.
They palyed with great precision, so that “deheiner dem andern nie
einem übersach” (Wirnt von Gravenbere, Wigaloise, B. 7425, 8479).
This
competent instrumentalists, aware of different styles, improvised
accompaniments to the songs. The accompaniment participated in the song
by underscoring its textual content and identifying the style. Walther's
Palästinalied is accompanied here in the southern, Arabic style, while
the accompaniments to his “Unter der Linde” is northern.
The Instruments
Questions
concerning medieval instruments arise with reference to two elements:
the structure of the instruments and its sound. Well over two dozens
names of instruments are known to us from literary sources of this
period, and scholars are trying to match them up with representations in
paintings, miniatures and sculptures.
It is axiomatic that in
the Middle Ages there were no completely standard forms of any
instruments, although there were basic types of instruments having
similar physical and acoustical characteristics. The variations within
each group were immense.
Bowed string instruments included the
vielle, the rebec and the bowed rota (crwth); plucked instruments
included the lute, harp, psaltery, plucked rota and citole; the winds
were variations of the flutes, shawms (double reeds), trumpets and
bagpipes. the capsule instruments such as crumhorn and rauschpfeife see
to be later developments.
Since practically none of these
instruments have survived it is necessary to reconstruct them, and thus
the question arises, how we can tell whether the sound of a
reconstructed instrument is correct? Fortunately we have a great deal of
written material from the period to aid us in coming with reasonable
bounds of accuracy. The physical characteristics of some instruments
indicate the desired direction of timbre and volume. Plucked instruments
with tiny sound boards and gut strings have small resonance;
instruments with metal strings have great resonance; double and triple
stringing increases resonance; bridge placement significantly affect
timbre, etcetera. Thus the harp, with single gut strings and a tiny
sound board had minimum resonance (and thus the best pitch definition),
the lute with double gut strings and larger sound board had greater
resonance (and less good pitch definition), the large psaltery with
triple gut strings and very large sound board had great resonance (and a
wide pitch band), while the citole with pairs of metal strings had the
greatest resonance (and the widest pitch fluctuation). Following this
procedure to infinitely more detail, and coupling it with observations
about the grouping of instruments, and finally comparing this with the
material written about the instruments at the time yields a reasonably
accurate pictures of the instrument and its sound. The question of sound
must also be raised in connection with the voice: how did singers then
sing? We have extensive information regarding singing styles and sound
preferences. For example, Conrad of Zabern in the fifteenth century
writes “ ... dye hochsten note zu singen sein mit subtiler stym vnd
nicht mitt vollem austrugck, vnd vor allen dengen, das man yn der pause
die langen czegel vermeid vnd das man auch nicht pauß mach, do sie niche
sein suellen. Hyer wider sundigen unzellige singer vnd singerin, die an
tawsent enden pause machen, do keine sein sollenn, ettliche gar nach
iglichen wortt”. He speaks of male and female singers, he insists
upon long phrases and he warns against high notes too loudly. He also
warns singers not go put H's in the middle of words where there is a
melisma. Fully five centuries earlier, Ekkehardt V said that although
the Germans were able to learn beautiful melodies, they ruin them with
their natural wildness and poor voices. The Germans, he said, were not
able to sing in the melismatic style of the Romance countries. The ideal
German voice was round, natural and manly, never reaching a full forte.
The St. Gall Instituta of ca. 1000 stresses good sound and tone
quality, with expression not dependent upon dramatic outburst but rather
on inner intensity (“sine strepitu vocis, cum affectu sine defectu pari voci”).
The singer is warned specifically to avoid singing through his nose or
employing any unnatural voice. Nasality in singing was never praised,
and on the contrary, the words employed to describe the voices of
Tristan and Isolde were “sweet” and “soft”.
Thomas Binkley
.jpg)