----- Original Message ----- From: Martin Shepherd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: 01 May 2004 13:49 Subject: Re: top two courses single on baroque lute
Dear Kenneth, I can't answer the last part of your question, but just to clarify what you say about the conversion of renaissance lutes into baroque lutes: Imagine you have a 10c lute with a single first course, all the rest double, and no treble rider - so you have 19 pegs in the pegbox. If you want to convert it to an 11c lute you can do a minimal conversion job as follows: 1. Add a treble rider to get an extra peg, and use a single 2nd course to get another peg. You now have enough pegs. 2. The neck is only wide enough for 10 courses, so make an overhanging nut so the 11th course runs off the fingerboard. 3. Add an extension to the bridge on the bass side (or replace it) for the 11th course. Some paintings show 11c lutes with a double 2nd and all 11 courses on the fingerboard - presumably these were either built originally as 11c lutes, or were the result of more drastic conversion involving replacing the neck and pegbox. I also wonder about the single 11th course (upper octave only) used by some of the French school (but not Mouton) - although Mary Burwell describes it as being for acoustic reasons (the sound of the low octave 11th was "too big") it also occurs to me that using a single string means one less peg is required. By the way, has anyone in modern times played with this stringing? As to why 13c lutes had single seconds (and whether they always did) I leave it to others to speculate. Mace's 12c lute had double strings throughout but I'm not sure how widespread this was - perhaps an expert on the iconography of 12c lutes could enlighten us (any comments, David?). Best wishes, Martin ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: 01 May 2004 11:50 Subject: top two courses single on baroque lute > Can anybody give an explanation why the the top two courses are single on the > baroque lute? Certainly converting renaissance lutes into baroque > configurations by adding an additional top course (and additional diapason courses) > seems logical enough, but I'm wondering why keeping the top two courses single > remained a feature on all baroque lutes thereafter. > > Thanks, > > Kenneth Be > Cleveland, Ohio > > --
