Monteverdi, madrigals and voice-crossing

Hi everybody.

I've learnt from various sources that voicecrossing in a choral texture is to be avoided, unless the alternative would result in more severe errors in voice leading.

Yet as I study this madrigal "Si Ch'io Vorrire Morire" by Monteverdi (attached), I see him frequently crossing the first tenor and alto, first and second tenor, and second tenor and bass. What is, or was, the rationale for such voice crossing, which I presumed was to be avoided?

I love the sound of this madrigal, it's so expressive with those suspensionchains from m. 15 to ca m. 25 and "Deh stringe mi" in m. 49. You should get a recording of this one, because the score is all too sparse with regards to dynamics and phrasing.

But you knew that.

Anyway, I'd appreciate any thoughts on the matter.

Monteverdi - Si Ch'io vorrei morire.MID

Monteverdi - Si Ch'io vorrei morire.pdf

Monteverdi - Si Ch'io vorrei morire.mus

I'm no expert on counterpoint, but I don't understand what's wrong with voice crossing (unless it's excessive). Doesn't it actually create a more polyphonic experience than the rather "blockish" constantly-one-voice-beneath-the-other? The whole point of counterpoint is, after all, to create a feeling/illusion of independent (well, to some degree) voices. Also, when we made Palestrina-style counterpoint exercises we were even encouraged to cross voices occasionally. I haven't yet heard a good reason why crossing voices is a bad thing.

P.s. In any case, Monteverdi certainly wasn't an orthodox composer. He was the bad boy of his time, who constantly did "forbidden" things.

Here is what I think...

It is true that often in strict counterpoint exercises voice crossing is generally not considered good since it could reduce the sense of register and line, but in practice the composer may use it carefully when he decides it is appropriate - for development of the line in the respective voice and interest - after all, in reality singers' voices have some timbral difference (also, consider the sense for direction of sound).

Also, the counterpoint rules have been theoretically systematized after Monteverdi's time and I believe he mostly relied on his aesthetic sense (probably more than one would today). If memory serves, there are some voice crossing examples in Fux's Study of Counterpoint.

Finally, some theorists and teachers don't forbid crossing strictly, as Gardener already mentioned. For example, here.

Voice crossing is fine (to a point), and should be used when you want to keep a melodic line within the same voice. It's much like when you are writing for horns and need to finish a line within the same horn.

Exactly. Probably one reason that some teachers forbid it so strictly is to prevent students from developing habits of using it extensively with no care.

AFAIK the avoidance of voice-crossing is mostly relevant in homophonic chorale-style writing. In true polyphony it has always been rather common, and I would conjecture that there are very few texts on counterpoint that forbid it. In, for instance, the idiom of Bach chorales, that rule has some validity (although in practice it mostly applies to situations where an outer voice would be involved; alto and tenor in four-part writing often cross rather freely), but in Monteverdi or even Palestrina, it just doesn't. You have to remember that every "rule" you learn is merely a generalization drawn from the body of music within a particular idiom. It doesn't necessarily hold up at all in a different idiom. This particular generalization quite simply isn't accurate in the style we're talking about here.

On a different but related topic, keep in mind that the things you typically study in basic counterpoint are ultimately derived from the prima pratica style as usually exemplified by Palestrina. The stile moderno of Monteverdi or Caccini was rather different, and quite self-consciously so. Monteverdi's madrigals, though of course worth studying in their own right, are not the best place to look for examples of Palestrina-style tendencies. Expect a lot of rules to be broken from that perspective.