Toolkit
This interpretative toolkit for reimagining The Mulliner Book is aimed at explaining to listeners the many musical methods I used to explore the repertoire, and the reasons behind the interpretive decisions I made during the recordings.
My research into the interpretative issues of The Mulliner Book has mostly taken place at keyboard instruments. Each piece was recorded in a “neutral stance” initially; played on the spinet in a completely unadorned and basic fashion. I chose the spinet due to its popularity during the Tudor period and its suitability to play all the repertoire recorded for the project. After these neutral recordings I then made further experimental recordings of each piece, moving between the instruments I selected for the project, namely: the harpsichord, spinet, chamber organ and organ. Repertoire was matched to each instrument based on the suitability of the piece for the selected instrument, and the likelihood of the instrument producing a successful reimagining of the piece. After completing all the recordings, I then compiled and used the interpretive toolkit, which is outlined below, as a way of discussing and exploring the interpretive decisions that I made during the recording process.
This project’s primary goal was not to attempt to reproduce this music as it would have been heard by Thomas Mulliner, or anyone at Henry VIII’s court: rather, the project’s goal was to rediscover the music through creative reimaginings. Therefore, a “historically minded” performance approach has been at the heart of The Mulliner Project’s recordings. However, a historical performance (HP) aimed at a “faithful” reproduction of this music has not been a central feature of this project. We simply do not know how this music would have sounded in the 1500s, nor how anyone might have performed this repertoire. The musical connection with the organs of this time is completely broken thanks to the Reformation and the destruction of all original instruments. Likewise, very few harpsichords (and other keyboard instruments) of this period survive in a suitable working condition that haven’t undergone significant structural or tonal alteration to make them playable once again.[1] The only practical connection we have with the music of this time are the manuscripts that still survive, such as The Mulliner Book. Therefore, it is The Mulliner Book itself which has been the primary inspiration for my recordings, not the instruments of the time. This source, in conjunction with the speculation of how instruments might have been played and the knowledge of how we play similar instruments today, has formed the basis of my performance-led research.
Regarding the commentaries on each recording, they are my own personal reflections on my experience producing the recordings, my experience listening back to the recordings, and my reflection on the artistic process which resulted in the end product. These commentaries are designed to guide your listening experience and to help you understand my artistic decisions and the thought processes behind such decisions. The commentaries are not meant to be definitive summaries or reviews of each performance. You (as the listener) may have a completely contrasting view to mine (as the performer) regarding what you heard in the recording and whether it was successful. Occasionally you may feel as though my commentaries do not match your listening experience and this is an outcome I acknowledge as a possibility. As listeners, all of us bring to the table a wealth of musical experiences (whether as a performer or listener) and prejudices regarding what we expect to hear from a performance. Some listeners will be delighted by the recordings that turn their expectations upside down, and other may not appreciate such interpretations and think I am spoiling this beautiful repertoire. Ultimately, the recordings produced by this project are an experiment, both for me and the listener. They are designed to challenge the ways in which performers interpret this music, and the expectations we (as listeners) have of this music.
[1] Stephen Bicknell, The History of The English Organ (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 26-32.
Instrument selection and registration selection
This piece of the interpretive toolkit is essential to what I am exploring in The Mulliner Project: how the affect of repertoire can change based on a variety of factors and how the instrument itself encourages a reimagining of the repertoire. Instrument selection plays a huge part in how a piece of repertoire from The Mulliner Book will ultimately sound. The large variety of instruments available to Tudor musicians would have meant that no piece could have possibly sounded the same twice. The instruments themselves will also play an important part in deciding what kind of affect will dominate each interpretation. Playing a gentler piece of music on a robust sounding organ will drastically alter the original affect of the pieces. Similarly, performing one of the sacred versets on a spinet will have a comparable change in mood and musical projection. Likewise, playing a religious piece (intended for public performance) on a private instrument, such as a spinet, will have a dramatic impact on the piece’s affect and interpretation. This principle applies vice versa for secular music performed on instruments designed for public performance spaces. Using an instrument to change the affect of a piece can be done in many ways and this will be explored and explained individually alongside each recording.
Registration selection on the harpsichord, portative (chamber) organ, and larger church organ plays a similar role to general instrument selection. In most of the recordings, I have attempted to be faithful to what would be considered original stop selections for the repertoire. However, in a few examples I have embraced registration practices which were commonly used in the French Classical organ school and the German Baroque organ school. The specifics of these registration practises will be outlined in the recordings where they occur. While some of these registrational practises may not have been possible in Tudor England, they ultimately did become common in later periods of English organ music thanks to continental influences in organ design. Some general examples of registration practises which I have experimented with include: using the French Grand Jeux registration in broader or grander pieces, and using Germanic solo stops to employ a quasi-chorale-prelude style sound. Experimenting with registration selection is just one way in which organists can explore and reimagine the music they perform. While some of these registration options may not have been available to Tudor organists, if they had been available, I am confident that they would have experimented with these registration combinations just as modern organists do today.
Ornamentation
The specifics of ornamentation in Tudor keyboard music is too large of a subject to be covered within the scope of this project. There is little concrete evidence regarding what the various strokes and signs definitively mean. The research done by Desmond Hunter in his numerous articles and publications has greatly furthered our understanding of the kind of ornamentation the Tudor Virginalists would have used in their music. To summarise it briefly, Virginalists used two main ornamentation markings in their scores, the single stroke and double stroke.[1]
The single stroke has many possible realisations. Hunter notes that single strokes were usually applied to short notes. Originally, the single stroke was only used in combination with another single stroke to indicate the embellishment of two notes in a chord, such as an arpeggiation.[2] However, the single stroke was most commonly associated with one-note graced embellishments.[3] Single strokes were also used on long notes and would usually be realised as a trill or shake.[4]
The double stroke was a far more common ornamentation marking. The double stroke was commonly associated with some form of shake or cadential trill.[5] In some instances, double stroke signs have been written out as cadential shakes.[6] Occasionally, the double stroke was also used to indicate either a turn or a broken turn.[7]
As you can tell, even with his meticulous research, we still don’t definitively know the meaning of either of these signs. When considering how to ornament a note one must contemplate many circumstantial factors, such as the length of the note, the type of sign, and the instrument being used. Longer notes will require a different embellishment to shorter notes. Longer notes, particularly on the harpsichord or spinet, will require more elaborate and longer ornamentation to prevent the note from decaying. Shorter notes will generally require either no ornamentation (thanks to their short duration), or a crisp and simple embellishment that is able to be executed within the duration of the note. Ultimately, the decision regarding how I ornament a particular passage of music will be completely circumstantial and reply upon listening out for what sounds tasteful and appropriate.
The amount and type of ornamentation will also change greatly depending on which instrument I am playing. More ornamentation will be required on an instrument such as a spinet to assist with sustaining the sound. Less ornamentation will be necessary on the organ due to the sound being constant while the key is depressed. To add a further step to the decision-making process, I could decide to add more ornamentation or reduce the amount of ornamentation depending on the affect and style of a piece. The suggested tempo apace also has a huge implication on the style of ornamentation. Complex ornamentation will not be possible in quicker and more lively pieces. Slower interpretations will encourage more ornamentation, as there will be time to execute the ornaments. In summary, there is no point having a defined rule regarding ornamentation; each piece and instrument will require a different approach that will be commented upon alongside each recording.
[1] Desmond Hunter, “The Application of (Ornamental) Strokes in English Virginalist Music: A Brief Chronological Survey,” Performance Practice Review 9, no. 1 (1996): 66.
[2] Hunter, “The Application of (Ornamental) Strokes in English Virginalist Music,” 67.
[3] Hunter, “The Application of (Ornamental) Strokes in English Virginalist Music,” 71.
[4] Hunter, “The Application of (Ornamental) Strokes in English Virginalist Music,” 71.
[5] Hunter, “The Application of (Ornamental) Strokes in English Virginalist Music,” 68-69.
[6] William Byrd, Organ and Keyboard Works, Fantasias and Related Works (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 2019), 63.
[7] Hunter, “The Application of (Ornamental) Strokes in English Virginalist Music,” 73.
Improvisation and repeats
Improvisation would have been an artform commonly used by the keyboardists of Tudor England.[1] Improvisation can take many forms, but generally falls into two categories: completely free improvisation, or improvisation which uses the score as a departing and returning point where the improvisation takes place in that gap. For The Mulliner Project, I decided to use the latter type of improvisation. There are many pieces in The Mulliner Book which are suitably bare, in a structural sense, that they imply the need to improvise in order to complete the composition. Likewise, the repetitive nature of many of the dance pieces from The Mulliner Book suggests that an element of improvisation may be employed when interpreting the music. There are numerous recordings in my project which feature the score as a starting point from which an improvisation takes off, and then seamlessly re-joins with the original music. This kind of improvisation is an interesting concept as I am trying to recreate an authentic sounding Tudor improvisation in a world and time totally disconnected from Tudor culture.
Adding repeats (and occasional cutting of sections and repeats) into this repertoire is perhaps more applicable to the dance and madrigal music than the sacred music. The nature of dance music lends itself to being repeated to enable the music the cover the physical act of dancing. In recordings which feature the repeating of sections, I have tried to recapture the action of a musician attempting to cover a courtly or social dance with a limited amount of music. Typically, in repeated sections of this music I have changed the ornamentation and introduced various instrument specific techniques to the performance: such as the spreading or sustaining of chords to add further contrast and interest. Occasionally, the additions of repeats has been done in conjunction with improvisation. This will be individually commented upon alongside the recordings in which this happens.
[1] Bruno Nettl et al., “Improvisation,” Grove Music Online, accessed 15 Sep. 2021, https://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000013738.
Instrument specific techniques
Instrument specific techniques are ultimately what makes a performance on a given instrument sound authentic and convincing. Examples of this are the spreading of chords on the harpsichord and spinet, or bebung (a form of vibrato) on the clavichord, or the appropriate use of pedals on the organ. While the use of these techniques on their respective instruments is nothing revolutionary, I plan to use a selection of these techniques on the instruments that they were not originally intended to be. For example, the spreading of chords on the organ, or the sustaining of chords (that may need to be repeated) on the harpsichord to enhance the resonance of the melody. The use of these techniques on their non-native instruments has some interesting implications regarding the interpretation of this repertoire. How do they affect the interpretation? Do these techniques enhance the performance, or not? How does it change the affect or character of the piece? If the “improper” usage of these techniques was not successful, what might I change to make it more successful? These questions will be discussed individually in each recording.
Tempo
The selection of tempo greatly changes a piece’s characteristic and the listener’s perception of the performance. When it comes to renaissance and baroque music, nowadays there is almost a de facto tempo which performers tend to select when interpreting repertoire from these periods. For lively pieces most performers will select a typical one or two to a bar tempo. Slower pieces are equally afflicted by this “one tempo fits all” approach – we have all heard the predictable grave three in a bar tempo that most French Overtures are played to. In The Mulliner Project I aim to challenge the listener’s expectation of tempo choice. A fast piece played slowly can have a very profound effect on the listener, similarly a slow piece played fast completely transforms its interpretation. I will experiment with playing pieces faster, or slower, depending on the instrument and the affect I am attempting to highlight.
Phrasing
Music of the Tudor period does not contain any marking indicating phrasing and this includes The Mulliner Book.[1] The lack of markings leads to a question: how do we even begin to approach this topic in relation to this repertoire? I believe the answer is to look further afield to see what other instruments commonly do. In my recordings I have taken an open-minded approach to phrasing. In some recordings, I have attempted to incorporate elements of strings, woodwinds, and vocal phrasing into my keyboard performance: aiming to group notes like these musicians would aim to do so. In other recordings have taken on a more conventional keyboard approach to phrasing. In addition to this question of phrasing, the usage of legato and staccato (perhaps just a more detached style of playing) has an important impact on the resulting performance. In his manuscript, Mulliner did not indicate any usage of legato or staccato. Therefore, my options to explore what style of playing works or does not, are completely limitless. In my recordings I have tried to demonstrate a combination of legato and a more detached style of performance on all the instruments used. Some instruments, such as the plucked keyboard instruments, naturally produce a more detached sound due to the way their key action works. Therefore, overcoming this innate detached sound is an interpretive challenge in itself. The use of staccato and legato on the organ has a huge rhythmic impact on the music. This is due to how staccato and legato affect the placing of accents. All of these aspects of performance will be commented on individually where applicable.
[1] Geoffrey Chew, “Articulation and phrasing,” Grove Music Online, accessed 15 Sep. 2021, https://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000040952.
Character implications of a piece
The character implications of a piece and whether a given performance either amplifies these characteristics or subverts them, can completely change the interpretive outcome of a performance. Experimenting with a listener’s expectations of a piece can have a profound impact on their listening experience and understanding of a piece. This could be as simple as playing a broader section much faster or playing a delicate section more detached. Playing the same piece on different keyboard instruments will naturally help to amplify or thwart the affect of the piece. When delicate pieces, originally composed for a harpsichord, interpreted on the organ it is possible that they may lose some of their original character. However, this is not necessarily a bad outcome. The new character the piece may gain during this interpretive process could completely transform the piece into a complete new and different listening experience. It is also possible that the organ may be able to amplify the original delicate character by the use of a suitably subtle stop. This is only one example and the possibilities for manipulating character and affect through the usage of instruments is almost limitless.
When manipulating the character of a transcription of a madrigal I will need to consider the original text of the vocal score. Many of the works contained within The Mulliner Book are Mulliner’s own arrangements of choral music for a keyboard instrument. When it comes to interpreting these works on a keyboard instrument, the original text will be key to communicating the affect of the piece to the listener. In some cases, there are multiple alternate texts for these vocal works. Attempting to inhabit the character of these different texts, when performing the transcriptions on a keyboard instrument will no doubt produce some very interesting recordings. Especially so, if the differing characters were explored through the use of repeats in a single performance.