Repetition in D'Anglebert's dances

Following up on the question about D’Anglebert’s Chaconne Rondeau, I have been looking at his series of pieces in D (beginning on page 99 of the 1689 publication). The allemande, two courantes and gigue have segni and directs at the end of the B sections that send the performer back to the beginning of the A section; there is also a repeat sign at the very end, in addition to the one that applies to the B section (this repeat sign is not found in the allemande). The Broude Trust edition (edited by C. David Harris) omits the final repeat signs but otherwise reproduces the original printing exactly.

It seems clear that the composer is directing the entire dance to be repeated. I can’t recall seeing such directions in other binary dances I have played. D’Anglebert’s dances are short, so playing the entire thing twice would give a more substantial piece of music. So, two questions:

  1. are there binary dances by other composers in which one is directed to repeat the whole work?
  2. should one play AABB AABB or AABB AB? (I would think the former but am curious about other peoples opinions.)

David Perry asks whether there are binary dances by other composers in which one is directed to repeat the whole work?

In Partitas II and III in Froberger’s Libro Quatro (FbWV 608 and 609) the binary form Gigues have a Dal Segno sign at the end which take you back to the beginning. There is no Fine indication, so I presume the direction is to repeat the entire piece - perhaps without repeating each ‘half’ the second time, though this may be a later idea. In any case I am not sure that Froberger would have been too prescriptive about this.

  • David Bedlow

Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.

You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode.

To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.

Not a direct answer, but another interesting case: the sarabande of Louis Couperin’s suite in d minor has no repeat signs in the MS. The 2nd ½ ends with a functional ‘petite reprise’, written out but not named {see }; there is only the indication ‘Fin’ after the double bar.

Regards,
Dale

I have a sense (no statistics yet to prove it) that slow movements are not repeated as often as faster ones. In the D’Anglebert pieces I’ve been studying, the sarabande – unlike the others – has only the regular AABB structure, without the indication to go back to the A section after playing the B.

Thanks to David B. for the Froberger reference – I’ll check it out.

Last night another possibility occurred to me. In the allemande and the two courantes I mentioned above, the first ending of the A section ends on the tonic and the second on the dominant. So one could actually perform the pieces as AABB A (or AABB AA). This is not how I would probably do it, but it’s possible. (The A section first and second endings of the gigue both end on the dominant, unlike the other three.)

Le 06/04/2022 19:48, David Perry via The Jackrail écrit :

I have a sense (no statistics yet to prove it) that slow movements are not repeated as often as faster ones. In the D’Anglebert pieces I’ve been studying, the sarabande – unlike the others – has only the regular AABB structure, without the indication to go back to the A section after playing the B.

The rather long G minor Passacaille, where each strain is repeated, also
has a repeat of the whole piece (including the repeats of each strain, I
assume).

The three Gaillardes (G major, G minor, D minor) are among the “slow”
pieces that have repeats of the whole piece.

Indeed it does. (Thank you for mentioning this piece; I was not familiar with it and it’s a good one.) There is no question about D’Anglebert’s intentions since the second ending of the final couplet, in addition to the repeat sign and the directs, carries the notation “pour recommencer."

When dealing with uncertainties about repetition, one of the things I think about is proportion and length. However, it’s clear that our Baroque forebears didn’t always think such issues the same way as I do. Sometimes I wish they could’ve gotten their act together about repeat indications :confused:

Maybe there is a question and it is indeed optional to repeat the whole piece. Perhaps ‘pour recommencer’ could mean “in order to begin again”

  • David Bedlow

David Perry wrote

David_Perry
April 9

Dennis:

The rather long G minor Passacaille, where each strain is repeated, also
has a repeat of the whole piece.

. . . There is no question about D’Anglebert’s intentions since the second ending of the final couplet, in addition to the repeat sign and the directs, carries the notation “pour recommencer." . . .

I understand ‘pour recommencer’ as a clear direction to repeat the whole piece, confirming the lead-in provided by the notes f#-g-a and the following directs, which clearly take one back to the very beginning. It doesn’t seem optional to me.