今年的天寒得晚，冬至將臨，才零星下過兩場雨。白天一如既往的明媚溫暖，只有在夜晚，從忘記関緊的窗戶逼進的涼氣，讓人想起穿上襪子，才想起冬天。夜裏濕潤的薄寒，在這個季節，卻似彌足珍貴。有些很鍾愛的碟，對環境的要求卻很苛刻，凡常人心浮躁，難以放來聼，這時候倒是心境恰如其分的詮釋。

Thomas Binkley，1932-1995，魯特琴師和早期音樂學者，1964年領德國慕尼黑早期音樂組 Studio der Fruehen Musik (Early Music Quartet) 錄製了一輯《布蘭詩歌》，摒棄了歌劇弦管，清簡樸素，始終是我最愛。

Tempus transit gelidum
mundus renovatur,
verque redit floridum,
forma rebus datur.
avis modulatur,
modulans letatur
lucidior
et lenior
aeriam serenatur;
iam florea,
iam frondea
silva comis densatur.

Ludunt super gramina
virgines decore,
quarum nova carmina
dulci sonant ore.
annuunt favore
voluchres canore,
favent et odore
telllus picta flore.
cor igitur
et scingitur
et tangitur amore,
virginitues et avibus
strepentibus sonore.

Tendit modo recia
puer pharetratus;
cui deorum curia
prebet famulatus,
cuius dominatus
nimium est latus,
per hunc triumphatus
sum et sauciatus:
pugnaveram
et fueram
in primis reluctatus,
sed iterum
per puerum
sum veneri prostatus.

Unam, huius vulnere
saucius, amavi,
quam sub firmo federe
michi copulavi.
fidem, quam iuravi,
numquam violavi;
rei tam suavi
totum me dicavi
quam dulcia
sunt basia
puelle!
iam gustavi:
nec cinnanum
et balsamum
esset tam dulce favi!

Thomas Binkley: Tempus Transit Gelidum (Carmina Burana)

1990年重版的CD唱片插頁上，他寫道：

在六十年代初，對早期音樂的研習更加注重旋律上的細節：混淆正確和錯誤的音符如同混淆現實與虛構。那時候我們不僅不像現在這樣願意接受一支樂曲可以存在不同的版本、並且每個版本同樣具有相當的藝術價值和可信度，更缺乏即興演奏所需要的對中古樂器及其技巧的熟知。事實上，那時候我們對中古樂器幾乎一無所知，沒有人願意參照中世紀的演奏範例，早期音樂全部使用近代樂器和演奏規則，並認爲製造美麗的音色比製造有特色的樂符更重要。其實，重要的原始素材就在我們面前，只不過都被我們忽略了：我指的是整個中世紀修辭學體系。那時候我們剛剛開始探索和認知由一種樂器對整篇樂曲的色彩能到達什麽程度的影響。直到決定放棄採用文藝復興時期音樂形式的時候，我們才終于取得了一個飛躍：從某些東南亞、中東和北非的音樂形式中我們找到了範曲，那是一種以單部音色為基礎、產生于嚴謹的美學理論的樂器搭配方式，在廣泛的程度上可以應用于西方音樂。我們從未試圖單純效仿東方音樂，而是在探索重現中世紀音樂的過程中得到了一種似乎被“濾”過的西洋樂。

In the early 1960s early-music specialists greatly concerned about the details of the melodies: the ambiguity of right notes versus wrong notes was regarded as being similar to the ambiguity that exists between fact and fiction. At that time we did not easily accept as we do now, that there could be multiple versions of a piece of music, each with equal artistic merit and historical credibility. There was no clear understanding regarding the details of instruments and their playing techniques, so important in devising an improvisatory performance style. Indeed, very little was actually known about medieval instruments. No one performing medieval music at that time was willing to trust the performance paradigms of the Middle Ages, everyone employed instruments from more recent times and applied modern “quality control” to performance standards, believing that it was more virtuous to make a beautiful sound (whatever that may be) than to select interesting notes to play. Although an important original source for historical performance was readily available, we did not recognize it: I am thinking of the whole complex of medieval rhetoric. At that time we were just beginning to understand to what extend the characteristics of an instrument condition the tonal picture. When we stopped projecting Renaissance musical characteristics back into the Middle Ages we made a great leap forward: our new models were found in selected practices from South-East Asia, the Middle East and North Africa, music based upon monophony and instrumental applications growing out of a serious aesthetic theory which in very general terms could be applied to Western music. We never directly imitated Eastern music, but passed what we had learned through what might be termed a “Western filter” in an attempt to recreate the lost art of medieval instrumental performance.