Item 396 is a pear wood bridge 188 mm long, and 397 is a fragment 165 mm - no pictures chez moi.
There's masses of stuff for mandothingies. > There are also a prefab bridge or 2, preserved, according to Pollens > article. > RT > > > > If anyone is interested I've just uploade the best scans I can do of rather > > badly printed not very special photos of the two paper templates to:- > > > > http://perso.wanadoo.fr/tony.c/fretful/Strad389.JPG > > > > and > > > > http://perso.wanadoo.fr/tony.c/fretful/Strad390.JPG > > > > > > > > For info - > > > > > > > > 389 - length 488 mm, width at widest point 288 mm., fingerboard 311x114x90 > > (mm) > > > > Writing = "Musure per il manico del liuto al francesa vera de dudece ordine > > doppio" > > > > > > > > 390 - length 487 by 280, neckblock 52 by 105, soundhole diameter 63. > > > > Writing = "Forma per far il liuto alla Francese e il corpo dai alto due onze > > e mezza per la formatura delle corde dai de dudice ordine doppio e da li > > setti basse con li ottave e ancora se fano de dudice ordine de Corde" > > > > > > > > and "Scandello quando dai de 12 ordini le corde" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Ron Fletcher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "lute@cs.dartmouth.edu" <Lute@cs.dartmouth.edu> > > Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 8:05 PM > > Subject: RE: symm/asymm & perfect/imperfect > > > > > >> Hi Michael, > >> > >> Going back to your initial posting about lute symmetry. In the > >> Stradivari workshop on your recent trip to Italy, you saw a paper > >> template for a lute body, folded along the centre-line. > >> > >> I conjectured that such a template would indicate that the Strad's > >> lute-bodies were not made over a mold. The template would be used to > >> show whether the inner-profile of the lute body is symmetrical. That > >> every rib has the same curve and distance from the centre-line. > >> > >> Did Stradivari use a mold? > >> Were all his lutes symmetrical (equal depth and width from centre-line)? > >> > >> Surely these points still need to be clarified? The thread seems to > >> have gone off on a tangent into symmetry found in nature and quantum > >> physics...completely off-topic! > >> > >> But then again, no-one's perfect! > >> > >> Best Wishes > >> > >> Ron (UK) > >> > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Michael Thames [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: 27 May 2005 15:23 > >> To: Jon Murphy; guy_and_liz Smith; LUTELIST; Manolo Laguillo > >> Subject: Re: symm/asymm & perfect/imperfect > >> > >> A friend of mine who works at Sandia Labs tried to explain Quantum > >> Physics > >> to me over a couple bottles of wine one evening, unfortunately if I > >> can't > >> apply it in my daily life, it goes in one ear, and out the other. > >> Concerning perfection, I guess it's a state of mind, as Dr. Emoto > >> has > >> documented, ones thoughts can have an influence on ones environment. > >> Although, the Ancients have know this for eons. > >> One can perceive a lute as symmetrical, however, after a couple > >> bottles > >> of wine, or beer in Jon's case, it begins to take on a non symmetrical > >> shape, along with everything else. The exception to this rule, is found > >> in > >> historical lutes, which appear non symmetrical, prior to the > >> consumption of > >> your favorite intoxicant, then afterwards actually appears perfectly > >> symmetrical. > >> > >> Concerning the lute I was speaking more about the physical shape of > >> the > >> belly, and not the actual sound it makes. > >> You can apply the concept of imperfection ( Wabe Sabe) to many > >> things, > >> but not the conception of musical instruments. The concept is always > >> perfect, but man's execution of it is imperfect. > >> Sometimes I think lutes, guitars are like people. The really good > >> looking ones (people) are rather shallow sounding, and the not so > >> perfect > >> ones, are more interesting to listen to. > >> This is my second, naturally occurring law as applied to musical > >> instruments. The first being the rule of relative perception. > >> Michael Thames > >> www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Jon Murphy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: "guy_and_liz Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "LUTELIST" > >> <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>; "Manolo Laguillo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > >> "Michael Thames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 4:13 PM > >> Subject: Re: symm/asymm & perfect/imperfect > >> > >> > >>> Michael, > >>> > >>> I thought I'd covered my views on this topic, but I have to add my > >> comment. > >>> > >>>> Is it wrong for humans to try to achieve perfect symmetry? It > >> seems > >>> nature is trying. > >>> > >>> Nature is trying, very trying (I hope you know that English trope). > >> Can we > >>> know perfection? No. Can we aspire to it? Yes. Perfection is a goal, > >> even > >> in > >>> nature. Einstein rejected Bohr's thoughts on Quanta, saying God > >> doesn't > >> play > >>> dice. (the quote may be aprochryphal). Bringing it back to the lute, > >> your > >>> ear is the best tuning device. Even the paired courses have a diffence > >> in > >>> tonality. Nothing is perfect, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't > >> aspire to > >>> perfection. > >>> > >>> Best, Jon > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> To get on or off this list see list information at > >> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > ______________ > Roman M. Turovsky > http://polyhymnion.org/swv > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > $0 Web Hosting with up to 200MB web space, 1000 MB Transfer > 10 Personalized POP and Web E-mail Accounts, and much more. > Signup at www.doteasy.com > > > >
