ChiavetteFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chiavette (Ger. Fr.; It. Chiavetta) is a system of standard combinations of clefs used in polyphonic music of the 16th-17th century. One set of clefs sometimes termed chiavi transportati places each staff line a third lower than the usual set of soprano, alto, tenor, and bass clefs, called chiavi naturali. A second set of clefs places each staff line a third higher.

The phenomenon of music appearing in standard clef combinations was first noted by Paolucci in 1765.[1] Scholars disagree over the meaning of these groupings, but there are two basic views:

1) When clefs shift, pitches shift -or-2) When clefs shift, vocal ranges shift, but pitches remain the same.

The first view implies that when a note such as C appears in chiavette [high clefs], it should be sung or played a third higher than a C appearing in chiavi naturale. If this view is true, many modern performances of Renaissance polyphony may be at pitches differing significantly from those of the Renaissance.

18th century theorists saw in these groupings a system of transposition clefs. This indicated the standard groupings could be used to transpose a piece for an ensemble of a different vocal range by reading a work in a different set of clefs. For example, a piece written in high clefs for a choir of men and boys could be performed by a men-only ensemble at a pitch a fifth lower by imagining the contrabasso set of clefs. This requires imagining a change of key signature.

References

1. ̂ Paolucci, Giuseppi (1765). Arte practica di contapunto...Tomo primo. Venice.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chiavette&oldid=521021110"

“Music written in high cleffs (chiavette) is believed to have been transposed a 3rd or a 4th

down, in order to match the range written in the low clefs” companion to medieval and renaissance music Kenneth kreitner

I often have younger singers, or lower voiced singers, asking (or complaining) to me about the ranges of renaissance polyphony. When singing with a modern "mixed voice" choir of SATB, the balance when singing this music is often skewed, with voices leaving whole parts of their range unused. Along with an unfortunate predilection for a white, "pianissimo" choral sound, this can lead to a very tired larynx and an unpleasant, shouted or hooted sound that is obviously alien to the music, but unavoidable given the high lying ranges.

The modern names of "soprano, alto, tenor, bass" meant very different things in the 16th and early 17th centuries than what we now think of as being characteristic of these voice types. In brief, the names referred to types of male voices:

S, cantus: falsettist or castrato

A, altus: high tenor

T, tenor: 2nd tenor, or what we might call a "bari-tenor" or "tenitone"

B, bassus: a true bass, often down to low D or C.

This scoring has a sonority and soundworld akin to most renaissance consort instruments: though all instruments are of the same family, the different sizes have different characteristics: the top instrument (falsettist, descant recorder, cornetto, violin, treble viol) has a slightly piercing quality which nevertheless complements the lower voices. The middle two voices are very nearly the same instrument (in fact, in a consort of viols, they are the same instrument), their tessiatura differing by about a 3rd. The bass instrument is again a complementary timbre, but has a bigger, rounder tone.

Historically, renaissance music was written at two differing visual pitches, called the "high" and "low" clefs respectively: "chiavi alti" and "chiavi naturali". The "low" clefs (C1, C3, C4, F4) suit music written for the established renaissance choir of adult male voices, whereas the "high" clefs (G2, C2, C3, F3/C4) don't often appear to suit any particular group, being particularly straining to sing. Both pitches actually equate to one and the same pitch: the high clefs ("chiavi trasportati", lit. transposing keys) were to be transposed "alla quarta/quinta bassa" - down a 4th or 5th. With this in mind, the ranges of such composers such as Palestrina, Lassus and Victoria begin to look decidedly more relaxed.

This contrasts to the modern "high clef" performances of renaissance music, where in order to sing the music at a spurious pitch, the gravitas and sonority of the music is lost. The music of Palestrina and Victoria, and even Monteverdi, is often perceived to be brilliant and "floaty", when in actual fact it is rich, sonorous and often dark in timbre.

The modern choirmaster's unwillingness to accept this historical transposition is usually caused by his being stuck with a mixed voice choir: a group that might for this music be described jack of all trades but master of none: this has influenced such people as Denis Stevens, who states (completely wrongly, as it turned out) that "there is no need to transpose Monteverdi"...despite a high amount of evidence and common sense that says otherwise. Having said this, the transposed top parts of high clef music do not often go below middle C, and are in my experience usually managable by sopranos and altos together.

The purpose of this short article is to draw attention to a problem that has in its roots a misguided interest in early music. The problem is caused by people thinking backwards rather than forwards: rather than seeing how Josquin's choir could sing Willaert, Palestrina or Gabrieli, they try and see how the mid 19th century Anglican collegiate or cathedral choir could.

This is to say: if you are a low voice who finds singing renaissance polyphony a scream on Sunday morning - it was never supposed to be, and if your gut instinct when confronted with the "screaming" mass is to tranpose it down - you are right! And don't let anyone tell you otherwise!

Renaissance polyphony was notated almost exclusively in two sets of clefs. In a four-part texture these would be either (from the top down): Treble, Mezzo-soprano, Alto, Baritone; or Soprano, Alto, Tenor, Bass. Why was this the case? Plainchant, as usual, provides the answer. Early polyphony was composed on a plainsong tenor, sung slowly in the third voice (which thus came to be called the tenor). Some melodies, particularly in modes 5 and 7 (range roughly F–f or G–g), cannot be notated on a staff with a tenor clef without ledger lines, which were usually to be avoided. So scribes would simply use an alto clef, and to maintain the normal disposition of voices, the other parts would be moved one clef higher as well.

Where this collides with our modern rationalism is in the performance pitch. Anyone who has ever directed a performance of Gregorian chant, for the mass say, has noticed that the notated "pitch" is not a hard and fast thing. In your typical mode 5 gradual, it would be prudent to sing with a final on D rather than the written F, unless your schola consists entirely of high tenors.

This same flexibility applied to polyphony. As I've hinted, pieces in the odd-numbered modes are generally written in the high clefs, and pieces in the even-numbered modes are written in the low clefs. Does this mean that different forces were required to sing music in the two systems? No. Music in the high clefs was regularly transposed down, probably about a fourth, but perhaps a little more or less.

Why is this controversial? In terms of scholarship it's a settled question, but it is regularly ignored by performing groups: even some justifiably famous and wonderful choirs. The reason is that the modern soprano voice was almost never used in the Renaissance, with the exception of English polyphony, which often includes treble parts on top of the usual continental "ATTB" disposition. In order to accommodate groups heavy with sopranos, the rules governing the high clefs are routinely circumvented.

Of course this has some negative practical consequences. Namely that the "Alto part" is generally thus written in an extremely uncomfortable range: going too low for women and too high for men. Down a fourth it's usually perfect for a high tenor. The general solution is to combine men and women on this part, but then nobody feels comfortable. And also the bass parts are too high, often drifting to middle C or higher. This usually throws the entire balance off.

To get back to my point, I found that Prof. Harrison had encountered this question and answered it correctly in his book. I had previously been under the mistaken impression that this was a more recent discovery of musicology, but he mentions it in passing as a settled question, citing Arthur Mendel. Shame on me for not knowing that:…The transposition of the second mode down a fifth to G…arose in polyphony from the need to accommodate the range of the mode to the range of the tenor voice. The reverse of this method of adjusting mode to range was also used, by keeping the normal pitch of the mode in the writing of the music, thus setting the voices at a pitch which required downward transposition in performance.