1x8, 1x4 harpsichords

General
1

In another discussion Stuart wrote:

It’s a pity, but then it’s no surprise, as if we are to be honest the 4’ only serves to give brilliancy. At the cost of quality of tone, often.
Of course I am speaking about the ubiquitous French two manuals, 3-4 registers, which must compromise soundboard space and plucking points to accomodate 4’ strings.
(and key-depth and other things)

But a single-strung harpsichord is a joy to play. In a few minutes you don’t feel the need for a second keyboard. It is more verstile, not less, as you can properly play from Byrd to Soler. It can be voiced stronger, optimizing for sound, as you haven’t things such as staggering or overall keyboard weigth to count in.

And, if you have a 4’ on top of that, it will be perfectly useable as a solo-stop, adding to the overall expressivity. When blended with the 8’, the 4’ will not add only brilliance but another kind of sound-expressiveness. You can play a sorrow piece with 1x8, 1x4, or with the solo-4’, and it will not sound as “brilliant”. Plus, the tone of the single 8 and 4 coupled is the finest achievable ok a harpsichord.

I think teachers and makers should push pupils and harpsichordists towards G-d’’’ 1x8, 1x4 harpsichords. The “missing” notes will lead them to reshape some musical phrases; the disposition will help them to develop musicality.

If you have never tried playing a simple flemish 1x8, 1x4, try when you can, I’m sure you’ll love it.

Oh yes, they will miss the second keyboard when they play Goldbergs. When?

2

Go Ruckers!

3

Go Trasuntino!

5

Four foot pitch is great! :slight_smile:

6

The H.A. Hass single, circa1726, Lovstabruk Sweden, has 1x8’ & 1x4’. FF to f3.

7

No chimera. There are dozens of Ruckers, or spinets or Italian harpsichords like that. And there are hundreds with a shorter range C/D-c’’’. There are Couchets as well, with a range C-c’ chromatic. And then there are the “English” Rickers with a range G-c’’’. All of them 1x8, 1,4.

And then there are a lot of single-strung harpsichords: neapolitans in maple, etc etc.

9

As I wrote, the “English” Ruckers were harpsichords made by Ruckers specifically for the English market. They had a chromatic bass octave (as opposed to the usual short octave). No modifications of the internal framing.
There is a couple of Couchets going up to d’’’.

The bass extension to G is less banal than adding a top d’’’, but is fairly doable with minimum framing adjustments, something many makers do every day, even making “copies” of Ruckers with 5 octaves and three registers (which makes they are not copies, of course, nor vaguely resembling, but this is another story).

And, if one strictly wants to be “authentic”, ok for me: go for 1x8, 1x4, C-d’’’ range. Enough for 95% Bach, 80% Scarlatti, 100% everything else written 1500-1720.

(but, on a practical side, I’d still add that fourth to the bass…)

My post’s aim is to say that playing even Bach or Scarlatti on such instruments is not a deminutio. Their music can be well - maybe better - served on smaller harpsichords with less strings.

I admit French music of the XVIII century may request a different harpsichord.
But I think that today the ubiquitous French double has been made the “standard” harpsichord, relegating the others to special uses: continuo, flemish composers of the XVI… while I think the opposite could be true: the small harpsichords 1x8, 1x4 as standard, the big French for special needs of late French composers.

1 Like
11

Oh, come on, Dennis. I had explictly ruled out French composers and was referring to the others. However it doesn’t make so much a difference. F. Couperin himself gives instructions for playing on smaller-range keyboards, if I remember correctly (he says something like play at the octave or something). The same can be easily done for probably all the early French composers you name, as they usually use those bass note sparingly and not in melodic phrases. All the meaning was: with a smaller (G-d’’’ or C-d’’, 1x8, 1x4’) harpsichord you have better tone, more expressivity, and on top of that you still have at your disposal a huge quantity of significant and fundamental literature that the vast majority of harpsichordist will not play anyway (I don’t usually play French, for example).
However my main point was: the 4’ is a valuable stop which is too much sacrificed in a standard French double. We don’t really need a second 8’. That second 8’ introduces strain on case, worsened tone due to the added pressure on soundboard and the difference in length of the strings, and prevents us from playing 4’ solo. The second 8’ requires the harpsichord is voiced differently than if only one 8’ was there.
All the discussion on range was secondary to that and was introduced by you. (I don’t really care for the range, I eas speaking of registers. Though a too extrnsive range requires adjustments and deep modifications to the framing).
As I play much Scarlatti, I do feel the need for G (not F) and e’’’ (not f’’’). I can manage to play it on C-d’’’ however.

I really think that, unless one specialize in French music, the possibility of hitting a G or a A every now and then, comes at a cost (even a financial cost, as double harpsichords three ranks cost more). I’ve not even mentioned tuning stability, shorter tuning time, simpler maintaining…

12

we know that D‘Anglebert left three single manual harpsichords, two of which at least were Ruckers. I‘d be surprised if he didn‘t care to maintain one of these with its original 8‘4‘ disposition and maybe even compass (because it changes a lot if You add notes) -but so far there is no proof. And then there is a painting of Rameau in front of a transposing (Ruckers type) double. I‘d be surprised if Rameau should not have cared about the 8‘4‘ disposition… The 1645 Couchet in Edinborough is 8‘4‘ short octave, because he insisted that this was the superior solution to 8‘8‘. I tend to agree.

1 Like
13

Where is that written? I’d be very interested to know. Or is this just inferred?

14

Hello Andrew,

yes, it is part of Jan Couchets letter to Huygens, who had received a 88 single from him. The translation is in G. O’Briens book near the end.
I am sure You have come across it…

best wishes from Germany,

Dietrich

1 Like
15

Yes, Couchet praises his own harpsichord, but then he says if he should make another he would suggest to make it 1x8, 1x4 instead. Only two 2x8’ by Couchet are known.
This is the translation of the relevant part, the rest is readable in GOB’s book (which by the way derives with very little corrections from his dissertation; the dissertation was freely available on the internet, you should find it essily. I have both the book and the dissertation).

“Moreover, if the occasion should ever arise again, that I should have to make another for a music lover, I would advise him to have the same type made with an octave; that would be my wish.
This goes quicker and sharper than the unison, it is sweet and lovely in sound, then your honour will hear the difference.”

2 Likes
16

Are talking about Constantijn Huygens or Christiaan Huygens?

I must get a copy of GOB.

17

How could YOU of all people NOT have GOB? Available in paperback now! :wink:
Dongsok

18

@DongsokShin Yes, I am familiar with the book but I have never had my own copy. Shameful. Time to get it!

19

The dissertation is here: https://era.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1842/7221/375813_VOL_2_.pdf?sequence=2

This is the volume 2 of 3, but if you dig in you’ll find all of them. Problem is, that page is veeeery slow and often doesn’t load. I have the three volumes and can send them to who wishes. I assume I don’t break any copyright as the dissertation instill online on the college’s website.

Differences with the printed book are tiny if any.
I have the printed volume as well, the paperback edition. Sorry to say the printing of the photos isn’t top-notch. The same photos in the dissertation pdf are much better.

20

Here are the links to the three volumes of GOB Ruckers thesis:

  1. Vol:
    https://era.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1842/7221/375813_VOL_1_.pdf

  2. Vol:
    https://era.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1842/7221/375813_VOL_2_.pdf

  3. Vol:
    https://era.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1842/7221/375813_VOL_3_.pdf

1 Like
21

1983 and done on a typewriter! I forget how recent it is that we have had computers. It’s an authentic historical artefact in its own right.

Thanks so much @domenico.statuto for locating this essential work of great scholarship.

22

| domenico.statuto Domenico Statuto
September 22 |

  • | - |

Here are the links to the three volumes of GOB Ruckers thesis:

  1. Vol:
    https://era.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1842/7221/375813_VOL_1_.pdf

  2. Vol:
    https://era.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1842/7221/375813_VOL_2_.pdf

  3. Vol:
    https://era.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1842/7221/375813_VOL_3_.pdf

G. G. O’Brien, Ruckers: A harpsichord and virginal building tradition. PhD, University of Edinburgh, 1983, can also be downloaded freely from the British Library EThOS repository (the national repository of doctoral theses): https://ethos.bl.uk/

Simply search by author name or for ‘Ruckers’.

Regarding copyright, which was mentioned yesterday, note that ‘By entering and using EThOS you acknowledge that all Intellectual Property Rights in any Works supplied are the sole and exclusive property of the copyright and/or other IPR holder’. Much the same applies with other institutional repositories; by agreeing to the terms, one is confirming that the thesis downloaded is for one’s own personal use. This allows the library to count how many times a work has been downloaded.

If you then search EThOS for ‘harpsichord’, ‘clavichord’, spinet, etc., dozens of other scholarly delights will be revealed…

2 Likes
23

Thanks a lot. While searching, I have found a title that could be of interest to the temperament-versed people. I’ll give the link in the relevant topic.