Herb, There is more to it than that. Your description assumes that the top of the neck is in a straight line with the soundboard. Actually, on some lutes the neck tilts back a fraction. That brings the line of the strings closer to parallel with the neck to make the action more even from the top of the neck to the bottom without placing the strings too close to the soundboard at the bridge. And, as Gernot points out, the strings can be of quite different diameters, with gut bass strings being quite fat. That requires the luthier to either cant the neck towards the bass side, tilt the bridge towards the treble, or both. I've just finished fussing with a lute I built in which the action was wrong and required remedial work. It was quite a learning experience, and I have much greater appreciation for a lute in which the action is good. These instruments seem simple at first, but when you start measuring and comparing one to another, you find that there is a great deal of subtle variation that a luthier can put in to alter the sound and playing properties. Building a basic lute wasn't that hard for me, but I'm finding that building a good lute is a challenge. I didn't get there with this lute; perhaps with the next one.
Tim > > >---- Original Message ---- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu >Subject: RE: Built-in action? >Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 14:35:13 -0500 (CDT) > >> >>I have a regard for the dedication and talent of luthiers, >>who build fine instruments from unformed chunks of wood. >> >>Nevertheless, I do not quite understand why they are >>credited with the action of a lute. >> >>The luthier's work merely determines where the _bottoms_ >>of the frets are. >> >>The action depends on where the _tops_ of the frets are, >>which is controlled by the person who chooses the fret >>diameters. >> >> >> >>To get on or off this list see list information at >>http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >>
