Dear Marion, you are certainly right in saying that many of us draw artificial boundaries for ourselves that restrict our playing. You may string and play any instrument the way and kind you wish to play and have fun. But the issue I try to pursue is, rather, which way the instrument in question was strung and played during its hey-day. There are two approaches, at least. Martyn suggests definition by usage which is why he says the instrument is a guitar (six courses = possible guitar playing). My approach follows rather traditional lines in that I try to observe constructional features that the instrument has in common with other instruments of the time (six courses, shell-like body, etc = mandora). Cheers, Mathias > Unfortunately the luthier who made the instrument or owner who > ordered the instrument is not here to clarify why it was ordered > or what was played on it. The beauty of a six-course instrument > (and also with instruments that have more strings) is that you > can tune them so many different ways to play so many different > kinds of music. One needs to be careful not to put too much > tension on the bridge, but respecting that constraint the instrument > in question could be used in many different ways. It is what > you make it. I think we draw artificial boundaries for oursleves > that restrict our playing. > > I already have enough lutes and guitars. > If it were my instrument, I would tune it like a laud or a > mandlino lombardo ottavo. Some baroque music is easier to > play in this tuning. Try it, you'll like it.
> > In my opinion how it could be used is more important than what you call it. > that would indeed be the case, if some of the names were synonymous. > However, each name stands for a certain tuning, stringing, kind of > playing, and repertoire. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
