Die Musikforschung

Besprechungen

Mo, 18 Mär 2024 00:00:00 +0100

Die einzige überlieferte Renaissance-Harfentabulatur in Deutschland: D-LEm I.191 (um 1540)

Kateryna Schöning — Mo, 18 Mär 2024 00:00:00 +0100

The manuscript D-LEm I.191 is presented here for the first time as a unique surviving Renaissance harp tablature in Germany. The paper provides comprehensive research results on the origins of the tablature, as well as its performance, didactic and aesthetic contexts in the 16th century. The manuscript is also situated in the context of 19th century historicism, as an object in the collection of Carl Ferdinand Becker (1804–1877). D-LEm I.191 was written in Central Germany around 1540 as a practical supplement (exercitio) and continuation of Martin Agricola’s Musica instrumentalis 1529, with which it is bound together. It explains through a fundamentum the basic tuning and playing techniques and demonstrates the practical use of the harp, which Agricola represented only as a picture. Thus, D-LEm I.191 documents for the first time: (i) the application of the old German keyboard tablature to the Renaissance harp, (ii) the method of intabulation for this instrument, and (iii) the adaptation of the known song and dance repertoire to the idiom of a diatonic Renaissance harp. The manuscript provides a unique insight into the cultivation of this repertoire in the school, student and urban-bourgeois milieus.

Zur Bezeichnung „Musikologie“ bei Guido Adler

Malik Sharif — Mo, 18 Mär 2024 00:00:00 +0100

Guido Adler’s choice of the term “Musikologie” (“musicology”) as the preferred synonym of “Vergleichende Musikwissenschaft” (literally “comparative science of music”), a sub-section of the overall discipline of “Musikwissenschaft” (“science of music”), in his 1885 article “Umfang, Methode und Ziel der Musikwissenschaft” (“The scope, method and aim of musicology”) is puzzling and confusing. Situating Adler’s usage in terminological history of “Musikologie” in several European languages, this article discusses four hypotheses that seek to explain his choice of “Musikologie”: (1.) as a terminological lapse, (2.) as signifying the subdiscipline’s scientific nature, (3.) as caused by outside influence, and (4.) as inspired by hearsay and half-knowledge of Franjo Kuhač’s simultaneous terminological choice. The hypotheses have different degrees of plausibility and consistency, but no explanation emerges clearly as the single most obvious one.

Schönberg-Rezeption in Japan vor dem Zweiten Weltkrieg: eine Diskursanalyse um Schönbergs Harmonielehre

Minari Bochmann — Mo, 18 Mär 2024 00:00:00 +0100

The compositional reception of the twelve-tone technique started in Japan only around 1950. However, on an aesthetic as well as a literary level, Schönberg’s music and especially his Harmonielehre had been considered in Japan for several decades. This article explores that phase by analyzing Japanese pre-war music journals, demonstrating the aesthetic and theoretical reception of twelve-tone music in Japan before the start of its compositional reception. Schönberg’s Theory of Harmony was received very selectively in the circle of the New Composers’ Society in early 1930s Japan, as the composer Shūkichi Mitsukuri advocated Schönberg’s quartal harmony (and the music of Ravel and Debussy) as a model for a genuinely Japanese harmony, while functional harmonic systems were still dominant at the Tokyo Music Academy, where Klaus Pringsheim taught until 1937.