All the best to you, Sir. I wish I had money to support you -- yet, I need first, to eat. Still, I -- a flutist too -- support this orchestration. And I adore Giuseppe the Trumpeter. He is consummate. He is physically beautiful, That is what the substance of musical performance needs.

Video and sound quality is extraordinary good! Keep up the good work in these difficult times for everyone.

Thank you very much for your kind words!

They know.. Im both a traverso and recorder player..

Definitely not. Though I prefer it on metal based flute, this wooden flute is still better than a recorder in my opinion.

A couple of ideas behind this: 1, most music at the time (save for perhaps opera or other "performance" works) would have been played by amateurs in the home (that's not to say there were no professionals playing here and there, too) . Tempo was best left to the player to decide what they were capable of, especially in a time where not everyone may have had a metronome for "precision" time keeping. 2, music of that time followed fairly rigorous forms (concerto, sonata, etc). A general understanding of appropriate tempo for different types of works, forms, movements, etc., would have existed based on that, and the use of tempo indications such as "Allegro," or "Siciliano." I think tempo was more likely a way of setting a "mood," or "feeling," rather than shooting for a strict, robotic virtuosity with a set "bpm."

@@musicful85 thanks for answering...

@@musicful85 You make a lot of excellent points, but I’m not sure if they can completely answer the OP’s question. Vivaldi usually did write tempi, even for dance movements (such as in sonatas), so the lack of a tempo indication here is certainly meaningful in some way. I only wonder how.