Le 16 déc. 07 à 21:55, Robert Barto a écrit :
Anthony,
Thank you very much for these pictures.
What's actually interesting about them is how two are close to the
bridge
and two are not. Only the first is really close to the bridge. (1
and 3 are
relatively close, 2 and 4 really not.) But no sign of on the bridge or
behind as one sees on many portraits and instruments.
So what does this tell us?
Robert
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Robert
You must really thank Mimmo Peruffo, for taking the photos. He
fortunately sent me the one of the Frei with the lace around it
because I had mentioned the lace around the Charles Mouton lute, in
another thread. As I found this extremely interesting, both for the
hand position, but also because I didn't know of that Frei lute, of
course I communicated with him about it, and he told me that he was
going to place three more of these photos on his site.
As the questioned raised here was rh position, and I wasn't sure
everyone would see Mimmo's page (he is constantly updating it with
new research), I thought I should send them to the list, as they
clearly are highly significant.
I would not consider myself expert enough to answer your questions,
which I realize you are no doubt asking to yourself, rather than
expecting an immediate reply.
However, these marks would seem to imply, as you are suggesting, some
variation in playing position (although nevertheless towards the
bridge area, if not on it).
Now, if we were looking at marks made by modern players, we could
suppose that this might be due to variation in string types, or
tensions. However, was there sufficient variation in string type (or
string tension or tuning) at the time to account for such a variation?
Did all players use loaded bass strings, or perhaps some use ropes,
of some type?
I have heard players who use relatively low tension stringing say
that they play much closer to the bridge.
Study of the bridge holes, as no doubt MP is doing (or has done),
might possibly answer that sort of question.
Perhaps, if these lutes were always played by the same person (can we
be sure of that?), we could suppose that individual hand size or
stretch might explain this. Does such variation occur for modern
players who adopt the near the bridge position?
One might also suppose that players of the period were searching for
the best position for their touch, strings, and lute. They would not
be just trying to adopt an "ideal" authentic or historically correct
earlier position, which possibly can lead to more standardization
than ever existed previously.
Presumably, unless there was a strict universal position imposed by
a method (such as perhaps, at one time a "Segovia rh finger position"
on the guitar) some variation, both regional, and individual could
develop.
Do you think the "on the bridge position" could be another variation
that just does not happen to occur in these four lutes, or could it
be that the lutist posing found it instinctively more comfortable to
put his finger on the bridge (perhaps to avoid marking the
soundboard, if the pose was very long)?
These are just a few thoughts that spring to mind, but perhaps MP has
read your message, if so he can certainly put forward more informed
explanations than I can.
Anthony
