Oh dear, I hoped no-one would spot that on the net! Thanks Anthony! Oh well... The piece is the most boring ever - I've no idea why I thought it suitable! The university asked me to record a CD of a small selection of their instruments. No repairs were made to the instruments, they were just strung up, and I only got a couple of hours to get used to the instruments. The sound recording was also very poor. The string spacing on the Buchenberg was very comfortable, but the strings were more or less just lying on the frets. I couldn't play the first course without getting that zing. Horrible.
Don't buy the CD! It was about ten years ago, when I had hair! I've no idea about little-finger marks on the soundboard. I just remember being cold and getting a horrible sound. Never thought I'd see that again! Rob www.rmguitar.info -----Original Message----- From: Anthony Hind [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 17 December 2007 12:40 To: T. Diehl-Peshkur; baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: RH on the bridge? Theo and Rob A thought came to me, that a playable lute, even in a museum does get played by modern lutists, who might leave their traces on the lute. I noticed that Rob played a number of instruments at the EDINBURGH UNIVERSITY COLLECTION OF HISTORIC MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS. Although, did you play them long enough to leave such a trace, Rob? There is a CD of Rob's recordings, mainly on guitare, but also Dowland on the Buchenberg. Here Rob is playing on the Matheus Buchenberg/ Rome/early 17th century Rob McKillop playing * Shoes Rare and Good in All - Lilt Ladie An Gordoun (from the Straloch MS, NLS Adv.MS.5.2.18 c 1627-29) [ Real video ] Click on http://tinyurl.com/yunqyg Web page details at http://tinyurl.com/2yw6tr The indications are that "The sound-board is stained with finger grease along the lower side of the rose and at the upper end of the upper side of the rose, indicating the right hand playing position most often used." Rob obviously had a close look at this, so would you say this was reasonably clear, Rob? I imagine you would have tried to put your hand, as close as possible to that original position? Those old lutes have quite a different tone from modern instruments, the age of the wood no doubt. Regards Anthony Le 17 déc. 07 à 12:35, T. Diehl-Peshkur a écrit : > Hello Anthony et al, > I am very interested in this topic that is presently being > discussed, but it > reminds me a lot > of the so-called =8Ccanals' on Mars that everyone insisted they > saw, even > though there was nothing there. > Looking at the pictures here coldly and without any prejudice one > way or > another, I see nothing of the > clarity in the points you mention. > > In fact all have vast areas of wear for various distances from the > bridge, > not particularized to just one small area. > The newly discovered lute you show has so many scrapings along the > soundboard from repairs and bridge > adjustments that I could never say from the pictures anything about > what is > going on there. > > It is highly laudable to discuss these issues, please don't get me > wrong. > But I think we are going too far in > assumptions. > > For me anyway, much more evidence comes from a more general > standpoint: > Playing nearer the bridge with the 11 course instruments: yes- > that's clear > in a general way by the pictorial evidence, > and I think all using gut will agree to that unequivocally in terms > of the > kind of sound one can produce. > However it only works when you don't need/require the ring finger. > Once the ring finger is needed for arpeggios or special situations, > the > pinky near the bridge placement > simply doesn't work. Even then, however, just moving a little bit > away from > the bridge is enough for a useful sound from the ring finger (for > me: 1-2 > cm). > And in later music there are enough examples where you have to- or > otherwise > stated, where the top players probably just did it anyway. > As devil's advocate: We also have no idea if these lutes could have > been > owned by rank amateurs, who played three or four ditties on them > constantly, > or had poor techniques. Not every old instrument is useful or > beautiful or > informative just because it is old. > I often suspect that the very best instruments, played by the top > players > disappeared first- played to shreds during their lifetime > of performances and travel across Europe. > > I think going further than these =8Ctypes' of general statements, > based solely > on pics (and not the actual thicknesses of the worn out areas > on the soundboard) is just too conjectural. > Just my 2 cents of course, and positively meant! > Cheers, > Theo > > > > From: Anthony Hind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:08:34 +0100 > To: Robert Barto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu> > Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: RH on the bridge? > > Robert > I looked at the photos again, and noticed another variation apart > from the one you mentionned which was as follows: > >> "Only the first is really close to the bridge. (1 and 3 are >> relatively close): >> 1) The first is the Hans Frei in Bologna; Matthias Fux/R=C3=B6m 1683' >> http://www.aquilacorde.com/kremsmuenster1.JPG >> 3) The third has no label >> http://www.aquilacorde.com/kremsmuenster3.JPG >> >> 2 and 4 really not close to the bridge : >> >> 2) The second is a 'Magno dieffopruchar a venetia/1604 Matthias Fux/ >> R=C3=B6m. Kays. May- / Hoff-Lautenmacher in Wien 1685/ >> zuegericht' >> http://www.aquilacorde.com/kremsmuenster2.JPG >> >> 4) The fourth is 'Jakob Wei=CE'/Lauthen-und Gei-/17 genmacher in >> Saltzburg'. 13 course lute with broken bass rider >> http://www.aquilacorde.com/kremsmuenster4.JPG >> >> But no sign of on the bridge or behind as one sees on many >> portraits and instruments." RB > > > First, I wonder whether this variation above is sufficient to > consider it as relating to two different techniques: thumb completely > out, thumb not completely out (but perhaps not in). other > explanations seem possible. > > However, what surprises me, is that the last two (3 & 4) seem to > have a very precise fixed finger position: > > 3) The third has no label > http://www.aquilacorde.com/kremsmuenster3.JPG > > 4) The fourth is 'Jakob Wei=CE'/Lauthen-und Gei-/17 genmacher in > Saltzburg'. 13 course lute with broken bass rider > http://www.aquilacorde.com/kremsmuenster4.JPG > > This would seem to imply that any sound variation would be obtained > by swivelling the hand, but keeping the little finger firmly placed; > while the first two show a longish patch showing a more variable > little finger position: > > 1) The first is the Hans Frei in Bologna; Matthias Fux/R=C3=B6m 1683' > http://www.aquilacorde.com/kremsmuenster1.JPG > > 2) The second is a 'Magno dieffopruchar a venetia/1604 Matthias Fux/ > R=C3=B6m. Kays. May- / Hoff-Lautenmacher in Wien 1685/ > zuegericht' > http://www.aquilacorde.com/kremsmuenster2.JPG > > This could show that sound variation was obtained by a movement on > the soundboard, the finger not fixed. > > However, this interpretation implies that the lute was played by only > one person. Can we be sure about that? Might the lutes 1 & 2 have > been played by more than one person, but the lutes 3 and 4 by only > one? > The fact that there is no break in the moveable position could > indicate that it WAS the same player. > > If the two positions: close to the bridge (1 and 3), but not so close > to the bridge (2 and 4), could perhaps be explained by a player > adapting to string type or tension or because of hand size, or > perhaps thumb out (1 & 3), not so far out (2 & 4); however, the fixed > finger (3 & 4), moveable finger (1&2) difference, can't be given such > an explanation, and must surely imply two different playing > techniques. > > The problem is that the little finger swivel, or glide techniques do > not correspond to the "close to the bridge less close to the bridge > position". > It would have been easier to fathom had there been a coincidence > between the two. Then we would clearly have two globally different > techniques. > Anthony > > > Le 16 dec. 07 =E0 21:55, Robert Barto a ecrit : > >> 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 > > > > --
