Chiavette

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!