Jim wrote: >Dear All: > The discussion of six-course lutes reminds me of a conversation I had a >while back with Grant Tomlinson. (Grant -- sorry in advance if I misquote >you!) > We were discussing descant lutes and he stated his strong preference for >six-courses over seven courses. His reasoning is that the bridge width on a >seven-course constricts the vibration of the top, making the instrument >less responsive as it vibrates less freely. > If we work our way back to alto and tenor lutes, perhaps this same idea >applies, although not in such an extreme manner.
This is interesting. I have recently been doing some transcribing from Vallet's lute book, especially the quartet music and have noticed that all four parts appear to be written for ten course lutes. I've been trying to imagine a ten course descant, and also to recall what Gail Gillepsie plays in the Venere Quartet. If I recall correctly it's a six course descant. So how do we approach this music? Play on larger instruments? Make a ten course descant? Just let the bass have all those low notes by itself? I'm curious as to what the current players do versus what the composer might have originally had in mind. I'd especially like to hear what the Venere Quartet (if any of them are online here) did and why they decided to make the decisions they made. Regards, Craig To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
