When comparing Claudio Monteverdi’s compositional techniques in his madrigal “Dorinda, ah dirò” to what was traditionally expected in the prima practice, one notices a nonchalant treatment of dissonances, as well as an overall quickened sense of rhythm and far too many liberations in melodic writing. While observing Monteverdi’s madrigal, one notices several instances of note-against note dissonances. The first instance (example 1.1) displays dissonances of a seventh and a ninth between the canto and the bass voice. This harsh head on charge into the unpleasantness is forbidden in counterpoint practice. Instead, on should consider the correction in example 1.2. By lengthening the measure into two, giving the canto line a smoother transition
…show more content…
The first noticeable instance (example 3.1) starts off with a beautifully executed approach to two simultaneous suspensions; however, instead of following prima practice rules and resolving down immediately after, Monteverdi holds on to the suspension for two more beats. This highly emphasizes the non-sonorous intervals. This can be adjusted however, by merely moving down to the anticipated resolution and then merely moving to sonorous intervals subsequently (example 3.2). The next two iterations both display the same issue, a successive leap after a dissonance suspension. The first exhibits a smooth lead into the suspension with the lowest voice purely moving down a semitone, creating a seventh with the upper voice (example 4.1). The problem occurs whenever the top voice furiously leaps down a fifth. There is no excuse for this execution, for the expected resolution to C could have been used without dispute (example 4.2) The final figure is slightly more forgivable, as the seventh suspension between the outer voices could not have been resolved simply by step, as that would cause another dissonance with the other voices (example 5.1). The solution would have to be to throw out the problematic suspension all together, and have the soprano merely move by
The first noticeable instance (example 3.1) starts off with a beautifully executed approach to two simultaneous suspensions; however, instead of following prima practice rules and resolving down immediately after, Monteverdi holds on to the suspension for two more beats. This highly emphasizes the non-sonorous intervals. This can be adjusted however, by merely moving down to the anticipated resolution and then merely moving to sonorous intervals subsequently (example 3.2). The next two iterations both display the same issue, a successive leap after a dissonance suspension. The first exhibits a smooth lead into the suspension with the lowest voice purely moving down a semitone, creating a seventh with the upper voice (example 4.1). The problem occurs whenever the top voice furiously leaps down a fifth. There is no excuse for this execution, for the expected resolution to C could have been used without dispute (example 4.2) The final figure is slightly more forgivable, as the seventh suspension between the outer voices could not have been resolved simply by step, as that would cause another dissonance with the other voices (example 5.1). The solution would have to be to throw out the problematic suspension all together, and have the soprano merely move by