Charlie,
I don't have Nigel's book in front of me at the
moment, but I seem to recall that part of his
rationale for recommending theorbo as a first
instrument for guitarists was not only because it was
single-strung, but also that it was commonly played
with nails.
This was the accepted mode of thinking regarding
the instrument a few years ago, but recent research
seems to suggest that many theorbos were often, if not
even usually, double-strung like lutes. (Diego
Cantalupe plays one of these on his new Kapsperger,
Libro Terzo CD.) This in turn suggests a no-nails
approach, (Piccinini, notwithstanding) offering the
would-be lutenist little incentive aside from the
guitar-like tuning to start here.
I don't think a thumb-under, no-nail, renaissance
technique is all that hard for a classical guitarist
to learn, by the way.
Chris
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> The passage you are thinking of from Nigel North's
> book is page 18. He
> writes: "Modern guitarists should note that the
> theorbo is an ideal
> instrument for them to attempt as it has none of the
> problems caused by the
> double courses of the lute."
>
> This echoes the advice he gave me when I was first
> learning to play lute
> and considering going to IU. It seems to conflict
> with the other passage,
> but I believe the other passage is for somebody who
> has never played any
> plucked instrument, in which case it would probably
> be true that a lute
> would be best.
>
> Charlie
>
>
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at
>
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
