The first piece with basso continuo and how it can teach you counterpoint! 

mamma mia make my pizza

@@michaelperkins8078 ravioli ravioli give me the formuoli

@@erzsblasfantaven3334 presto presto make my pesto

RU-vid, RU-vid, make my italian hand like button

Only took an italian making the video, and TA DAAAAA, magic XD .

It is.

My goodness! If word gets out, what will the neighbours say?? :D

AND the blue pig with sunglasses! 😎

Qué afortunada coincidencia! debo justo dar un examen de contrapunto y esto me será utilísimo. Gracias!!! ..it´s amazing how Italian and spanish can be so similar!! I don´t even speak Italiano!

In early music, it was common to use those kind of "alterations"=usual at their time. Even, you can find pitches of A=490Hz or A=418Hz used in the same church for each different season... That would be nice to hear Vivaldi's 4 Seasons a applying that principle! lol

It would be around 1800 if that helps narrow the search.

@@kathyjohnson2043 The Baroque, and therefore the basso continuo era, is said to have died with J.S. Bach in 1750.

Look into the book "Counterpoint in Composition" by Salzer and Schacter. You might also like Counterpoint, by Knud Jeppesen (a renaissance oriented vocal counterpoint book with lots of historical overview). For later baroque counterpoint, Counterpoint by Kent Kennan and 18th Century Counterpoint by Gauldin. For more about realizing an accompaniment from a bass line, you should explore the partimento tradition, and can read a lot about it (including some rules and lots of examples) in Sanguinetti's Art of Partimento.

It’s standard HIP practice to tune instruments to A=415 if you’re playing Baroque music.

@@agogobell28 Ohhhhh I had no clue! I'm fairly new to it all, thanks

I wouldn't say they were better...also jazz has so many periods and sub genres that you'll find that some of them like early bebop has it's own ways of resolving dissonance (like the music discussed here). I'd check out videos associated with Barry Harris to get an idea of what I'm trying to convey.

@@spiritualneutralist2597 They were better. I don't see jazz musicians ex temporising complex and beautiful counterpoint.

@@fernwehn5925 I love counterpoint as much as the next guy however, jazz and medieval/renaissance have different aesthetics. Dissonance is treated differently in both genres. The rules of counterpoint for this ancient style work for it's intervallic system. Anyway what I'm trying to say is neither is better than the other. They are essentially two different languages. You have to understand the context from a more complex objective standpoint.

@@spiritualneutralist2597 I am aware that a big part of music is merely a product of a our own human perception and therefore not based on anything "set" in stone. Furthermore I do have quite a bit of respect for jazz musicians, they are one of the saving graces of modern (popular) music which tends to be in all honesty, quite rubbish. Indeed, I consider them superior to many "modern" "classical" composers and their glorified cacophonies. I however do think that Bach, for instance, is orders of magnitude superior to all modern improvisers, classical or not. You could argue that comparing the greatest musical master of all times to mere disciples is unjust, and I would agree. But I would point out that Bach didn't exist in a vacuum and he couldn't have achieved what he did without the building blocks, as it were, given by a 1000 year tradition. Even if jazz has, quite obviously, its own language and its own rules, it still is much less strict and allows for much more dissonance, which is a definate aid to the improviser, even if said freedom of dissonance gives him also a greater palette and thus the possibility to show his command (or lack thereof) of music. As I said, I by no means think jazz musicians are inferior to the average classical musician of today. But I do think they are to 18th century musicians. You also have to consider that in those days the lines betweeen musicians, composers, and improvisers were blurred, the end result of this being a well rounded master. Unlike, say, the modern pianist, who can perform astouning feats of virtuosity, but would struggle to play from the simplest figured bass. Not to mention they were often trained from a very early age, almost every day of their lives, and their livelihood depended on it! The day I see a jazz musician ex-temporise anything close in complexity and strictness to a fugue, I will change my mind.

@@fernwehn5925 I see where you are coming from. I understand since I know how hard writing counterpoint is (I have written a fugue based on bebop harmonic vocabulary not an easy task). So you made a good point. I just feel that there is no point in comparing music that are many centuries apart. I would fully agree if you said something along the lines of music by Palestrina is better than troubadour music.

Maybe some random music academy pupil who must practice basso continuo and also pass on the exam XD.

סתם

I believe the reason was that it simply wasn't necessary to write everything out, and also the figures specified mainly key moments that were unintuive to the player. It was also said in the video that certain aspects of the realisation were left to the player, because there is not a single right way As for the jazz parallel, it isn't that far from the truth. Many more things weren't written down in the scores and improvisations, embellishments etc were a regular part of the practice. I'm sure I might be corrected on some points of my comment, but I hope I managed to convey the general idea.

When you're trying to save paper, you come up with notation methods that allow you to use as little paper as necessary.

Also continuo notation is more modular and thus accessible for more instruments, and it gives musicians a language with which to communicate basic harmonic moves, e.g. a "3443 cadence."

Yes, dissonances always have to be prepared. You check this episode: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-oIMNTMreIig.html

www.teechip.com/guidonianhand

Yes, naturally

indeed

@@EarlyMusicSources don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing your version. I'm just curios about the fact that by my counterpoint teacher false relations were wrong no matter, while in Cavalieri rendition they seem to be the lesser evil.

Chill lol

What should it be, rhotic? It sounds fine to me.

Well, when listening to his explanation though my headphones, my ears hurt because of the high frequencies in the audio when he makes a "S" of "sh" sound in his voiceover. That's not usual, I don't have that issue on other RU-vid channels I follow, hence the tip. This wasn't meant as an insult.