Lutenists tend stay away from lutes with moving neck joints.....
> >> I'm afraid you are wrong! > >> Howard wrote... >> They would be dysfunctional because the ANGLE OF >THE NECK MAKES THE ACTION >> TOO HIGH, right? Which is to say that you can't change >the angle of the >> neck to the plane of the top without changing the action > > Howard, the fatal flaw in your theory is, your assuming that the neck > joined at the body can't move, only the nut end can move. > Michael Thames > www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Howard Posner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu> > Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 6:17 PM > Subject: Re: Built-in action? > > >> Michael Thames wrote: >> >>> One >>> could angle the neck in any direction, north , south, east, and west, up > or >>> down whatever, and still , in all those angles, one could simply > maintain a >>> constant height of the string over the frets. >> >> I wrote: >> >>> This is geometrically impossible, and you must be talking about a > different >>> angle from the one everyone else is talking about. They're talking about >>> changing the angle of the neck to the plane of the top. Imagine a > triangle >>> in which point A is the bridge, point B is any fret, point C is the nut, > and >>> point D is a point on the string directly above above point B. You can't >>> move point C without changing the distance between points B and D. >> >> Michael Thames wrote: >> >>> I'm afraid you are wrong! >> >> If I am, so are you, because your next sentence agrees with what I wrote. >> >>> If your referring to a working functional >>> instrument, extreme neck angles at some point would be dysfunctional. >> >> They would be dysfunctional because the ANGLE OF THE NECK MAKES THE ACTION >> TOO HIGH, right? Which is to say that you can't change the angle of the >> neck to the plane of the top without changing the action. >> >> This happens all the time: the force of the strings over time pulls the > neck >> forward, raising the nut and increasing the depth of the triangle I >> described, so the action is higher. >> >>> However, in theory or on paper it works doesn't it ? Just look at > Humphrey's >>> guitar, and keep imagining more and more of an angle, but instead of > moving >>> the neck to change the angle you move the top, which is what he did. >> >> If we're talking about the same instruments, he also builds up the >> fingerboard to bring it closer to the strings. Indeed, I usually hear > about >> this style of building as "the raised fingerboard." >> >> HP >> >> ________________ http://polyhymnion.org ___________________________________________________________ $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 To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
