HOW DOES IT END?

By MATANYA OPHEE
THIS article is a continuing discussion of a

subject I have dealt with in many different guises

over the last 20 years - the process by which
mythologies and fantasies. let alone outright
fabrications. become an established part of our
condition and beliefs. The particular subject at

hand is this question: What were the precise

intentions of Heitor Villa-Lobos for the ending of
.
his Etude No.2?
T h i s a r t i c l e submits that in s p i t e of the
testimony of Abel Carlevaro I in this regard.
suggesting that the closing cadence should be
performed in bi-tones. the question is still open
a n d t h e bli n d acceptance of Carlevar o ' s
i n f o r m a t i o n i s a b i t prema t u r e . M o r e o ver.
d e v e l o p ing the idea of bi-tones into further
technical refinements. valuable as they may be.

and assigning such developments to Villa-Lobos.

is to create a memorial based on insufficient
historical data. something like assigning the
invention of dodecaphonic music to J S Bach.For
example. in a recent publication2. Ricardo Iznaola
says:
By playing on the left side (towards the nut) of
the fingerboard from the point where a left
hand finger is stopping a string. certain non
harmonic partials are obtained which. although
q u i t e w e a k . may be used t o g o o d e f f e c t .
Probably the first artistic use o f these sounds in
the literature occurs at the end of Heitor Villa
Lobos' Etude No.2; therefore we shall call these
sounds Villa- Lobos partials in honour of the
great Brazilian composer.
I fully share Mr Iznaola's admiration for Villa
Lobos. However. I find the procedure and the
appellation assigned to it by Iznaola confusing.
because the sound produced is not a partial
sound in the traditional sense of the word. but
rather aJundamental sound produced by the full
vibrating length of the string to the left of the
stopping finger. Moreover. the aSSignment of its
'first artistic use' to Villa-Lobos. it seems to me. is
a bit over-enthusiastic and premature. To begin
with. even if it can be established that Villa-Lobos
intended the ending of his Etude No.2 to employ
any non-standard techniques in the performance
of a simple closing cadence. a technique which is

known in contemporary music Circles as bl

tones3 there is no shred of evidence. or even a
ghost of a suggestion anywhere. that Villa-Lobos

e v e r c o n s i d e r e d split ting the b i - t o n e s into

s e p a r a t e actions in which the u s e of notes

produced by the left side of the string are to be

executed independently of the other half of the

bi-tone. the notes produced simultaneously with

the right side of the string.That is not to say that

the exercises provided by Iznaola in this respect
are not useful. On the contrary. Practising the
14

type of left-hand slurs on the left side of the

can be a u s e f u l e x e r c i s e in the

string

development of the l e f t -hand. Why. s ome

composer might even take up the idea and use it
in a compOSition. But the sound is not a partial .
and Villa-Lobos had nothing to do with it.
As for the full. un-split bi-tones effect: if it can
be established that bi-tones at the end of Villa
Lobos's 2nd etude are what the composer had in
mind. it would be indeed a 'first artistic use' in
guitar repertoire as Iznaola says. even though it
was used on other stringed instruments before
1929. when the 12 Etudes of Villa-Lobos were
composed.
I would like to propose here. however. that the
idea of bi-tones at the end of Etude No. 2 was
engendered by an unfortunate attempt to explain
a discrepancy in the notation of the last two bars
as shown in the printed edition of the 12 Etudes4.
actually printed in 19575. Here is the passage in
question:

IX--,

'"

_____

JTJWL8f1fl ;;j I
a

"In. ...g

.--J

barm. duples

rail.

Example 1 (last two bars)

,

T h e discrepancy i s t h a t t h e r e are three

indications which call for the last two dyads In
the first bar and the first dyad in the next to be
played as harmoniCS. The top line. In normal
eighth notes. is marked as m d
.Even though
the line is not in diamond-shape notes. it Is
clearly intended to be executed as octave. or
artifiCial harmonics. since otherwise. the m d
indication would be a redundancy>. The bottom
line. in diamond-shaped notes. is marked as m.g.
. an obvious reference to open-string, natural
_

harmonics. Just to m a k e s u r e there is no

misunderstanding. the additional remark harm.
duples' is added below (m d being French short
hand for main droite, right hand. and m.g. for

main gauche, left hand). So far so good, but th

problem is created by the word pizzo just to the

left of the m.g. indication.Whatever it was meant
to convey, most practitioners usually agree that It
cannot b e part of t h e d o u b l e harm oniC
sequence. Different performers apply different
solutions to this passage, with varying artistic

results.Here is a short sampler:

Manuel Barrueco
Turnabout (1977) TV 34676 LP.
Takes the whole piece at a blazing tempo. and
then, as if careening downhill in a car with no
brakes. ignores entirely all indications. including

C;:l'CCX2

I cencI '''<XIlOCO

etC

C:a:lD-CSUl111115

U-

passage in question. and plays it in normal tones

:,p the upper region of the fingerboard.

Julian Bream
ReARed Seal (1978) ARLI-2499 LP.
Much more r e l a x e d t e m p o throughout.
although a definite Allegro. At the end. Bream
ex ecutes precisely the double harmonics line.
with full attention to the rallentando. As for the
piZZo Bream ignores it.
Turibio Santos
MHS 1056 (a reprint of the ERATO recording).
Santos takes the entire piece at about the same
pace as Bream. At the ending. Santos treats the
notes a s if no m a r k i n g s whatsoever were
attached to them.He plays them at the indicated
pitch on the upper part of the finger board.
Narciso Yepes
Deutsche Grammophon. 2530 LP.
Yepes plays with wild variation in tempo from
one arpeggio to the next. It still gives him the
ability to slow down and finish the piece exactly
as Santos does (see above).
Wolfgang Lendle
Teldec Classics 244 197-2. CD.
Lendle rips through the piece at a much faster
speed than the other samples. He does slow
down towards the end. but he introduces there a
strange articulation which makes it difficult to
Judge how exactly he fingers it.It does sound. for
all practical purposes. about the same as in
Barrueco. Santos and Yepes.
The Orphee Data-base of Guitar Records lists 28
1tfferent recordings of this Etude and I am sure
.--Jlere are many more which are not listed7. A
cletaUed analySiS of all aVailable recordings will
der more accurate statistics. but nevertheless.
would venture t o g u e s s t h a t with few
eXcep tions. s u c h a s t h e Bream recording
e ntioned above. most gUitarists solve the
Qlscr epancy by ignoring all the markings and
ply the passage as do Barrueco. Santos and
Yep es. After a l l . if p l a y e d at p i t ch without
harmonic s . the piece still ends up with an
ascending A Major arpeggio culminating in a
trad iti
onal sub - d o m i n a n t / dominan t / tonic
cadence which serves as a calming repose after
the. storm of the piercing. shrill harmonies of
1fruch it is made. In one of the earliest articles
about Villa-Lobos's guitar music8 Michael Jaffee.
In diSCUSSing seeming uses of polytonality by our
COm poser. made this observation:
'. 'Strict' polytonality (e.g. the use of two or
.
Illore k e y s in f a i r l y e q u a l proportions
throughout a composition) is not found in the

8010 guitar music. At the end of any given

. COmp osition. Villa-Lobos always establishes

the suprem acy of one tonal centre.
l:pmI)ha.sis by Jaffee) ...Villa-Lobos' approach
both tonality and polytonality proves him a
original composer working within a
&"VJ"a.& framework.
observation. when applied to Etude No.2.

frUITY-SUPPOI (S (lie lIun

e
e r one
plays the double harmonics. or ignores them in
favour of stopped pitches. the spirit of the final
c.a dence remains the same. There is still this
annoying little pizzo lurking in the background.
Would it please go away?

Most performers simply ignore it. Yet. one is

curious to know where this pizzo came from and
what it is supposed to mean. Already in 1966.

Michael Jaffee pOinted out that the published

solo works of Villa-Lobos then available were full

of misprints. Over the years. there were many
attempts. published and unpublished. to reach a

consensus of opinion on many of the dubious

spots in the Eschig editions of Villa-Lobos. On

occaSion. some people would propose a solution.
only to be offered another. opposing. solution to
the same problem.As for our present dilemma. I
solved it for myself shortly after buying my copy
of the first edition at the offices of Connaissance .
de la Guitare in Paris in 1960. a mere three years
after its publication. I did not think much of the
matt er. a s . in my innocence at t h e t i m e . I

assumed it to be self-evident. Surely. I said to

myself. any semi-observant guitarist could clearly
see what I see on the page. In those days, I was
no t i n v o l v e d in wri t i n g a b out t h e g u i t a r.
preferring to spend my energies on playing it. On
the rare occasion when I would discuss technical
matters with fellow gUitarists. I did not come
across anyone who disagreed with my solution.
QUite the contrary.I found many other guitarists
of my generation who found the same solution
and accepted it without question.
Eventually. in April of 1979. I chanced upon a
given at a meeting of
lecture by Mr Kevin T
the Boston Guitar So ety. in which he explained
that the ending of
e 2nd Etude has nothing to
do with double
monies. but rather with bi
tones. The explrnation given by Mr T olly then
was that the position of the word pizzo just in
front of the word m.g. means that these two
words are linked together and their meaning is a
literal left-hand pizzicato. Therefore. he said. the
passage should be executed on one string. where
the m.d. is meant to indicate a simple plucking

by the right-hand. and the pizzo m.g. is meant to

indicate plucking the same string. between the
nut and the stopping finger of the left-hand. I
had a difficult time accepting this theory for
several reasons:
1 The idiomatic expression left-hand pizzicato. or

as it appears here. pizzo m.g.. is common in

violin playing where it represents the action of

pulling-off or hammering a string without a
corresponding bow action. In guitar parlance
the same technique is usually referred to as

ligados. legato. slurs. etc.Composers who used

bi-tones have invented a varied palette of

symbols for the effect. pizzo m.g. not a mong

them.

2 Mr Tolly was very eloquent in describing the

theory and how it was supposed to work. but

15

-tf\v,d'''j

J ...

"I,I

-t..

dea(f "'-f of PjA-k

,.

f.

he couldn't demonstrate it conVincingly. Trying

it for myself, I have found that it can work well
on some guitars, and totally fail on others. To
get an audible musical sound from the bi-tone,
one which is at least as loud as the mechanical

further. Over the intervening years. I have b'

meeting these people on a more or less regular

have a gUitar with a fairly high action, and / or

of the 12 Etudes. contained in his Masterclass

b o o k p u b l i s hed by Chanterelle. Carl e varo

click created by the plucking motion, one must

a warped finger board. On guitars with normal

action and a perfectly straight fingerboard, you

mostly get a mechanical click and little else.

3 The theory is based on the premise that the

word 'harm. duples' is either a misprint, or a

spurious debriS, left over from some other
work, or mistakenly inserted in here. It also

a s s u m e s that the first diamond shape d'

should have a sharp in front of it, and the next
one should have a natural. In other words. to
make the theory work. one must assume that
the printed score contains th ree different
misprints. A rather fanciful pretension. unless
one had some primary source material to back

up the claim.

4 There is no other instance in the entire output

of Villa-Lobos which is even Similar to this. Not

in the gUitar. not in the cello or in any other
.
string instrument he wrote for.
5 There is no explanation why. in this particular
instance. Villa-Lobos would choose to depart
from his usual inSistence. as Michael Jaffee
described. on a strong tonal centre at the
conclusion of a piece. and introduce an off-the
wall usage of microtonality which is neither
explained nor notated properly.
Mr Tolly did not specify who was the author of
the theory, back then in 1979. and I assumed
that it was just one of those outrageous things.

interesting to contemplate for a while. but surely

the work of a practical joker. Why. if you believed
this you would believe anything!
A couple of years later. I received from Alan
Goldspiel. a graduate student at the Hartt College
of Music. an extended article cum term-paper
dealing with the solo guitar music of Villa-Lobos.
Among other. Mr Goldspiel says:
Another effect that appears only once in Villa
Lobos' writing is the bi-tone. This is present in
the last two measures of Etu de #2. However,
there seems to be much controversy as to the
correct notes to play because there is a marking

for bi-tones as well as harmonics. It has been

found that tradition usually becomes a viable
solution in cases such as these9.

I fully accepted Mr Goldspiel's final conclusion.

and we exchanged several communications on

this subject at the time. I am still at a quandary

to understand why the pizzo m.g. indication is
accepted a priori as an indication for bi-tones.

Like Kevin Tolly before him. Alan Goldspiel did

not specify who was the person responsible for

this theory. A controversy was apparently in the

a i r. g e n erated b y someone. s o m e w h e r e .
expounding o n the idea and. apparently. finding

basis. always running into a blank stare When J

.
inquired as to the source of the idea.
The cat came finally out of the bag with. the
publication of Abel Carlevaro's extensive analYSis

presents a faCSimile fragment of a manuscrip t

w h i c h , he s a y s , is 'Vi l l a - Lobos' o r i g inal
manuscript' and which was given to him by the
composer 10,

Example 2 (facsimile extract)

Clearly. the fragment describes the passage in

q u e s t i o n i n bi-tones. with a footno te In

Portuguese explaining the procedure. In the

preceding text, Carlevaro says:
For the finale of the study (Etude N o. 2).
reference should be made to what Villa-Lobos
wrote about its last bars. He explained to me
that notes written (diamond shape) were given
that indication to show they should be slightly
off pitch. The performance technique explains
why: while playing F sharp with the right-hand.
finger 1 of the left-hand plucks the same string.
along its length over the fingerboard. Since the
edition was in French VilIa-Lobos indicated
'pizzo m.g, (main gauche). The sound produced
is close to D Sharp, The following note is not
quite a D natural. and the last note is very
close to C sharp,
An eye-witness testimony such as this is a most
v a l u a b l e s o u r c e of information. I n many
instances, while researching music of earlier
t i m e s w e h a v e built w h o l e structures of
conjectures. hypotheses and conclusions on

much less than that given by Carlevaro. In all

cases though. the careful historian must weigh

the value of such testimonies and judge to what

extent they truly represent an eye-witness report.
or the propagation of ideas which originated With
t h e w i t n e s s himself. We cannot call Anna
Magdalena to task. for example. and demand
c l a r i f i c a t i o n s on this o r that fragment of

information contained in her manuscripts of the

music of J S Bach. But in the cae of a living
au thor. we certainly c a n ask m re deta iled
of claims
information and some substantiat
which cannot be supported by the av H able

?
:

. evidence.
In short: pending further clarification and
explanation by Mr Carlevaro. I must propose th at
his testimony in this matter, as it stands noW. is
too far -fetched to be believed. Here is what's
wrong with Carlevaro's assertions:
He says that the frap;ment is an 'extract of VtUa-

L",j.,'

,ij ;"./ (JA.4o.sut-f. I. H

See..,

1-0

r.../:;

that this is an autograph. when he mentions in

the preceding paragraph that 'Villa-Lobos wrote

about its last bars'.

The problem with this is that the facsimile
fragment used by Carlevaro is not in the hand of
Heitor Villa-Lobos. Here is a facsimile of the first

tw o pages from the au t o graph manuscript of

Et u d e No. 5, a s a dvertised for sale b y the

Massachusetts antiqu ari an dealer J. Lubrano11:

Facsimile (Lubrano)

And here is another Villa-Lobos autograph

manuscript sample, of a fragment from Etude No.

11. from the archives of the Villa-Lobos Museum
in Rio de Janeirol2.
y

:m-,

Bot h these facsimiles a re atteste

authentic. The first by one of the most

antiquarians experts working today. The

MS. w as authenticated b y the c

Villa-Lobos's musical nachlass who

should know what his handwriting looks

One does not need to be a handwrit ing
see that both the Lubrano and the Mu

samples have many features in commo n. and

be easily accepted to have been written in the

same hand. that of Heitor Villa-Lobos. The shape
of the G clef. accidentals. dynamic markings.

accents, the precision drawing of beams, barlines

and barre extension markings as if done with a
ruler. A careful analysis would in fact reveal some
difference in these two MSS.. but I am sure they
are the kind of variants one can expect in th
writing of anyone.
The Carlevaro fragment. on the other hand,
s h o w s major d i f f e r e n c e s f r o m the t.wo

autographs.

a The C Clef is missing from the beginning of the

line. Usually. Villa-Lobos did not use this sort

of shorthand.
b T h e s h a p e o f the accidentals i s en tirel y
'
different. being narrower and slanting a bit ,
compared to Villa-Lobos's accidentals, whidi

are drawn vertically straight and are relatively

much wider.
c Beams. bar lines and barre extension lines are

Lobos.For example:

drawn freehand and rather sloppily.

d Verbal textual markings. such as the raIl.. the
barre Roman numerals. the written footnote. and

t h e mg and md indications. certainly were

written by a different hand from that which
inscribed the title and Signature of Etude No.5
in the Lubrano sample.

Carlevaro seems to imply that this manuscript is

the one used for preparing the Eschig edition. since
it contains French language markings.
If

this

is in fact

correct.

we

need

some

e x p l a n a tion why the acciden t a l s o n the d '

diamon d - shape notes, a s well a s the written
footnote did not make it into the Eschig edition.
and why that edition contains the word harm.

duples. which is entirely missing here.

The alleged use of bi-tones in this instance

simply does not work.Even students of Maestro

Carlevaro, those who accept his Wisdom in other
matters, usually ignore his teaching in this regard.
For example:
A rather extensive discussion of the 12 Etudes
w a s p o s t e d on De cember 1 1 ,

1992 by Mark

Basinski on the claSSical guitar newsgroup on the

Internet13 Basmski says:
As part of my studies With Abel Carlevaro, I went
over all 12 of the Villa-Lobos Etudes With him .

Carlevaro worked With Villa-Lobos extensively in

1 Never happened.Carlevaro made it up out

whole cloth.

2 The manuscript in question originated in

hand of a third, yet unknown party, and it
that party who duped Carlevaro to believe
this was Villa-Lobos' idea.

3 Villa-Lobos did in fact present Carlevaro With

fair-copy of the Etude in question, prepared by

student, amanuensis. professional copyist Of

whoever, without knowing that it containect

fingering a n d n o t a t i o n a l ideas whic h are

contrary to his own.

.
4 Villa-Lobos did in fact entertain the idea of hi.

tones at some point in the 20 years between

their composition a n d h i s meeting witb
C afl e v a r o . It could h a v e been a sertoua
consideration, as microtonality was much 10 the

air in the late 20s, or it could have been intended

as a practical joke.When it came time to send

them to the publisher, or even. perhaps after

receiving the first galley proofs. the composer
changed his mind.

The major aspect of the Carlevaro SchOol of

Guitar, so often touted by his supporters, Is ita

miimte attention to technical and anatomic

details of music performance.A similar attention ICI
'
detail
is
not
apparent
in
Carlev aro

Rio i n t h e early 40s (he p r e m i e r e d the 5

pronouncements on his personal history and

manuscripts for Etudes 1-5 and for Prelude 1.In

Therefore. his description of the procedure to

and clear about Villa-Lobos' intentions for these

information to Villa-Lobos. calls for some questiODl

Preludes),

and Villa-Lobos g a v e h i m

the

my work With Carlevaro. he was quite forthright

his relationships with SegOvia and Villa-Lob

plat

the finale of Etude No.2 and his attribution of thJa

pieces ...Some of the divergencies between the

as it stands now.Should Maestro Carlevaro detgll

p u b lished version and the manuscrip t s in

to favour us With a more plausible explanation,

Carlevaro's possession may be due to actual

differences in whatever material Villa-Lobos later
submitted to Max Eschig (since Carlevaro has
had these MSS.since about 1942, HVL must
have given some other copy to Eschig in the early
50s for publication) .The HVL manuscript in

which would have to include submitting hi.

manuscripts of Vill a - L o b o s to a det ail ed

examination and analysis. we will be in a better

pOSition to accept bi-tones in Etude No.2. however

far-fetched it seems now.The frustration level d

thousands of guitar students who attempt to

play

Carlevaro's possession is quite clear and easy to

these bizarre bi-tones. will certainly decrease

read. and the variances listed for Etudes 1-5 are

tremendously.

clearly indicated therein.There are many obvious

Now. after all is said and done, how do I go about

typographical errors in the Eschig publication,

performing this passage? Bream. obviously. figured

most of which (but not all) were corrected in the

recent re-issue ( s upervised by F r e d No a d ) .
Carlevaro's 'Master Class' book (published b y
ChantereUe) covers many o f these differences

it out with no difficulty, Without ever speaking to

me about this. As I said at the beginning. it is so
clear that it amazes me t h a t it should be

misconstrued by anyone.But before I lay it out. let

also. but again, not all.For this reason. I wanted

me share with you s o m e o b s e r v a t i o n s of a

to p u t together my own 'd e f i n i t i v e ' l i s t o f

professional publisher as it relates to this issue.

corrections ... Etude 2 ...- For last 2 8ths of

m26 and 1st 8th of m27, ...(here Basinski
explains the bi-tone procedure) ...This is a
pretty weird and not-quite-in-tune effect, and
doesn't come close to working unless m26 is
played decrescendo to pp.I just play the lower
note on the 2nd string ...
Obviously,

Mr Basinski

does

not

accept

Carlevaro's explanation in this regard a s a viable

option for performance.
One may propose several postulates to explain
this bizarre interpretation of the music of Villa20

Villa-Lobos wrote the 12 Etudes sometimes in the

late 20s.The dateline Paris. 1929. was finally

affixed to the manuscript. as is evident from the

Lubrano facsimile above. During those years.

Editions Max Eschig published many works by

Villa-Lobos. but none of his gUitar music.This

came to be only after the war.As is obvious froID

the differences between the Musica Viva and the

Eschig editions. everything was newly re-en graved

in Paris.That would have required the publisher to

send the composer galley proofs. on which to
indicate corrections.Often. an engraved page looks

e n t irely dif ferent to the c o m p oser than his

were exchanged between publisher and com

manuscript of the same piece. New ideas come to

during t h o s e years, and what changes

mind and alterations and emendations are a

emendations were requested by the composer

natural outcome of the process. Many publishers

time. The proponents of the bi-tones theory wo

a c t ually charge t h e c o mposer st111 monetary

have us think that the printed edition cont ai n

penalties for Author's Alterations. It is annoying.

a n d costly. to change the engraving drastically.
once you have paid the engraver for the work.

three misprints and a spurious textual instruCtion.

for double harmonics, and the textual explanatio n

of bi-tones which is included in the Carlevaro'

manuscript had been erroneously omitted. Now, If

In the case of Etude No.2. a simple perusal of the

page will reveal that some alterations have taken

you a c c e p t in p rinciple t h a t misprint s and

p l a c e at the end of the Etude. The Bouchard

omiSSions had occurred, it is equally reasonable to

engraving. for whatever misprints it contains. is a

assume that the missing indications and text were

highly professional job. in the best traditions of

deliberately removed, at the insis tence of the

composer, and that the statement harm. duples,

E u r o p e a n mu sic e n g r a v i n g . The b a r Rom an

numeral (IX). the barre extension lines. the m d

and m.g. indications. are certainly p art of the

original eng raving. They are very neatly and

precisely engraved. in perfect parallel with the
m usical stave. The indications pizzo and harm.
duples on the other hand. are. or could be later

e mend ations which were. mo s t probably. not

carried out by the engraver Bouchard. but rather
by someone else at the publisher's or printer's.

missing from the Carlevaro manuscript, was

inserted here, also at the behest of the composer,

Both theories are equally plausible. Hence, until

such time we can find irrefutable evidence as to the

composer's final inten tions. the r e s o u r ce ful

performer must deCide the issue on the basis o

sound mUSical reasons and a deep knowledge of.

the style of Heitor Villa-Lobos. Julian Bream ha
no difficulty doing just that.

These words are not pasted in (or engraved on a

Abel Carlevaro. Guitar Master Class vol. III. Heidelber

metal plate as the case may have been) parallel to

the musical line, but are skewed at a small degree.
It is significant that the two words contained in the
harm. duples statement are skewed independently

of each other.

Chanterelle Verlag, 1987 ECH-713, p.12.

tech n ical workout man ual jor all guitarists, Heidelber

Chanterelle Verlag. 1993, No. ECH 730. p.125.
3

These visual aspec ts of the printed page can

word pizzo was a later addition requested by the

composer. and it was simply placed by whoever

Corghl.

4
5

aSSignment is based on the dating of Andres Segovia',

meaning with the harm. duples instruction is to be

Preface to the edition (New York. January. 1953) and on the

1953 copyright date of Etude No. 1. However, at the bottom

removed? simply away from it. And the obvious

of the last page in my copy of the first edition. there is the

direction is to the left. to the beginning of the

following note: Paris. Imp. MOUNOT Janv. 1957.

6

in a r a p id piZZic a t o with the right hand, the

traditional sonidos apagados we all know how to
do.

f o l l o w e d by a short c a d e n c e in double

harmonics in a marked rallentando.

edition of these etudes, page 93, Basically, the

pitches are indicated by Villa-Lobos at pitch, 1.e. to
play them, you take the upper line (should have
been d iamond shape notes as well) on the 2nd
string,

b e g inning at the 7th fret as o c t a v e

h a r m o nics, and t h e b o t t o m l i n e is p l ayed a s

natural harmonics o n the 3rd a n d 5 th strings.
If in fact Villa-Lobos ever contemplated bi-tones
for this passage, he must have changed his mind
after his meeting with Carlevaro in 1949. When it
came time to bring them out in print, the process
must have taken from 1952 when Eschig registered
c o p y righ t t o the first set of eleven p r eludes.
through 1953 when they registered copyright to
Etude No. I, and until the actual printing date of

1957. We may never know how many sets of proofs

22

This is not the only instance in the solo guitar music

Villa-Lobos printed by Eschig, where a normal black note Is

used for an obvious harmonic sound.

Jacques Chaine. The Orphee Data-base oj Guitar Records,

Columbus. 1990.
8

Michael Jaffee. 'Harmony in the solo guitar music of Heltor;

Villa-Lobos', ariicle in the Guitar Review. No. 29. June 1966,

To get the proper idea of how to execute the

d o u b l e harmonics, see Frederick Noad's new

d'Andrt!s SegOvia. Parts, Editions Max Eschig. 1953. p.5.

It is customary to assign the publication date of 1953 to the

Oxford U n iv e r s i t y P r e s s. 1 9 9 2 . p . 59. f o o t n o t e . Thi,

page. To where should the pizzo go. if the clash of

passage should entail an ascending A Major scale

Heltor V illa-Lobos. Douze Etudes pour Guitare, Prefac

12 Etudes. See for example: Simon Wright. Vil/a-Lobos

made the correction. in the wrong location on the

mea s u r e . Then, the p r o p e r e x e c u t io n of the

See: John Schneider, The Contemporary Guitar; Berkel

University of California Press, 1985. pp.126-130. Schnd

mentions the names of Kroll. Kagel. Brouwer. Biberian

generate a number of plausible speculations. the

most obvious of which is the probability that the

Ricardo Iznaola, Kitharologus. The path to vi rtuo sity,

pp.18-22.
9

Alan Goldspiel. Heltor Villa-Lobos (1 887-1 959). Apresentatlon

oj Aspects oj Compo s i t i o n al Style with Relat i on to
interpretation as illustrated through the published works Jot

gUitar. Hartford, 1981. I

am

not sure if this paper. present

to me in private. was published anywhere.

10 Carlevaro. Guitar Master Class vol. 1II. Op. cit. Used

permission.

11 J & J Lubrano, Catalogue 3 6 . Musical Autographs

manuscripts. 39 Hollenbeck Ave, Great Barrington,

01230. Item number 160 Is deSCribed as follows: Estu

No. 5 para Gu ltarra. Autograph musical manuscrl

signed and dated Paris 1929 . .. price $2500. Used

permission.

12 As reproduced in: Turibio Santos, Heltor Vil/a-Lobos and

Guitar. Translated by Victoria Forde and Graham Wa

Goortnacloona. Wise Owl Music. 1985. Originally publish

by the Museu Villa-Lobos in 1975. p.21.

13 At the t ime, I w a s not on l i n e with the Internet. I

indebted to Kerry Alt for sharing with me a copy of

electronic ariicle.