Dear Arto
I found that varnished treble gut (which I think Sofracob may
be) was more scratchy than plain or oiled gut; but also some makes are
slightly rounder sounding (Baldock Cathedral, in particular) or
brighter than others. The bright ones tend to emphasize scratchiness.
However, the thickness of the treble strings also seems to play a role:
the thinner they are the more scratchy they are (you can't "dig into"
them so well). This is why I lowered the diapason from 415 to 407, so
that I could use a 0,44 top string on my 70 cm Baroque lute. I would
have preferred to go even lower, but I would have had to change all my
strings.
The fact of having two single courses on 1 and 2, must play a role,
here (compared say to a 10c lute), although I am not sure what the
effect might be.
I did also notice that my change of technique for Baroque lute playing
(thumb-in to thumb-out), initially, seemed to make my top strings sound
more scratchy, until I realized I was not "digging-in" to the trebles
strings sufficiently. The sound improved, as soon as I realized that.
I think I now play flatter on the treble strings (see Mouton) and less
sidewards on than I played Renaissance lute. I don't know whether that
makes sense to you.
Since then, over the months the sound has become less scratchy by
degrees, with no particular conscious effort on my part.
Having said that, have you recorded your renaissance lute with the Zoom
recorder?
It could be that it would be just as scratchy.
Not because you play in a scratchy way, but the problem with the Zoom
is that you need to record very close, if you don't want preamp noise;
but then you will amplify all finger noises. I think Rob and Martin
mentioned this when they began to use their Zoom recorders.
Best wishes
Anthony
Dear baroque lutenists,
I made a triple test (and perhaps unluckily also published it?): I
played
an instrument very new to me, an 11 courser by Lars Joenssson 1993. The
lute is strung by gut. And I used a new Zoom Q3 to record my test. So
there
were three to me new and quite vague parameters: the instrument, the
strings, the recorder equipment... :-/
A couple of questions:
1) The gut strings seem to be ("hear to be") quite noisy. The piece I
play
doesn't use the 1st string at all, but that is even more noisy... Is
that
the nature of gut strings? The strings of the lute are probably
"Sobrakof".
The seller could not tell me the string properties, diameter or
tension.
They feel quite light. Much lighter than the synthetics I am used to.
And I
am used - as a continuo player - to play by quite "heavy a hand"...
2) I recorded the test in the "PCM 44.1kHz 16bit" of the Q3, then
edited
the beginning and the end off by Quicktime, and finally "exported" the
piece from Quicktime by the same 44.1kHz 16bit. The sound is really
quite
rough. Perhaps it really is so also in real life? I really don't
know...
The test is in
[1]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5k6DJ3HL1Cc
and also in Vimeo
[2]http://www.vimeo.com/8221336
I do not know what their systems are to publish the files I sent.
All the best,
Arto
PS 1: It really is dark in wintertime here in Finland, and the lights
in
my work room are not too bright either ;-)
PS 2: I just wait, how "62Konrad" will comment... ;-)
To get on or off this list see list information at
[3]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5k6DJ3HL1Cc
2. http://www.vimeo.com/8221336
3. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
