Well said. Of all my lutes, the bigger ones sound better and play more easily for most music. But with current adherance to 440Hz (and even higher in modern ochestras) a small lute is a neccecity for those who want to play in g'. The standard of a g'-lute of 59cm is a modern one borne out of practicality, nothing historical about that.
David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Martin Shepherd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu> Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 10:28 PM Subject: [LUTE] Re: Frei body renaissance lute > Dear All, > > As Jacob's recordings using his Frei instrument demonstrate, there is no > reason why one should not play almost any Renaissance lute music on a > "long" lute - it's just a question of technique. As a maker, I am > constantly beseiged by people who say they cannot possibly play on a > string length greater than 58cm, yet want a 10c lute. Difficult > stretches are difficult on a 60cm lute, they are still difficult on a > 67cm lute. I know people's hands differ in many ways, but I have small > hands and I can stretch from 2nd to 7th fret on a 67cm+ instrument (as > required in Dowland's Lachrimae and Solus cum sola pavans), not to > mention playing the famous Bb chord (barre on third fret, h1d2f4d6) on a > 76cm lute. BTW, POD's hands are even smaller than mine.... > > What's so magic about "Frei", anyway? We have precious few surviving > instruments by him, they are rather different from each other, and it is > hard to assess at this distance of time why he was famous in his own > time. In England, in modern times, I suspect it was because one of his > instruments ended up in the Warwick museum and was therefore more easily > available for study. This lute was the model for Jacob's lute, and even > in (current) 11c form it is about 69.5cm, longer for a 6c (original) form. > > Apart from stretches, it occurs to me that another reason people want a > short lute is because they want it to be "in G". Historical pitch is a > minefield, but it is highly likely that when Dowland regarded his lute > as being in G, it was a G at least a tone below modern pitch, possibly a > minor third. With lutes, it is important to keep the pitch as high as > possible for a given string length, but given the smallest gut string > which could be made (about .43mm according to modern guesswork) and the > maximum likely tension (perhaps about 40N according to other completely > different modern guesswork), longer lutes of 65-70cm would be tuned much > lower than modern pitch, even though still nominally "in G". The > association between a note name and a specific pitch level is in any > case a modern idea which would have been completely unfamiliar to > Dowland et al. > > Martin > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >
