I'd like to take a step back from my theorising for a moment and ask medieval players what they think of playing a plectrum lute tuned for a mix of 5ths and 4ths. I recently changed my 6-c A-lute to a plectrum set-up (closer unisons, single bases) but am frustratingly unable to play and experiment till a shoulder injury heals.
This is a little radical from a 16th cent standpoint but perhaps not so odd to the single lines specialists of the yestercentury. I'm thinking of an instrument about 55cm w/ the bass note (5th course) tuned to Bb and the 4th course tuned to F. This should be sufficient for playing most tenors w/ a final on C, F or G (or transposed if nec). Would it then be possible to tune the upper three courses to a schedule of 5ths? maybe a tuning related to a rebec (or following Ganassi's suggestion that if only 3 strings are available on a viol use 5ths). We could start with an A (or G?) on the 3rd course, have our familiar D on the 2nd and a G or A on the chanterelle. As I see it, from this we could play an older plectrum style of polyphony that would divide the fingerboard into bass courses for the tenor line and upper courses for a cantus/counterpoint decoration. As much as a feel the tenorista/counterpointer is the ideal duo, I can't believe it was always possible. Not all courts or situations could afford the luxury of hiring two people --and musicians can be kind of clever sometimes. I also feel that prior to the homogenising effect of the printing press, many individual pluckers were free to make their tunings as they saw fit. My question here is: Would this set-up afford one more problems than solutions to getting greater range, a self-sufficient plectrum instrument for limited polyphony, and, furthermore, one that could be held comfortably? any ideas? Sean On Dec 1, 2006, at 2:14 AM, Anthony Hind wrote: > Dear Sean, Mark and All > I just fully realized what your explanation could imply. If you tune > down the the 5thc > on a 5c lute, then you could permanently hold the 5c as if the thumb > was a miniature capo. > If I understand you correctly, then the string tension could be less > on that diapason, which might join > the comments by Martin Shepherd on the other thread relating to > advantages of low tension on gut strings > (M.S. [LUTE] Low tension strings 29 november 2006 10:35:22), as well > as be a comfortable way of holding this > type of lute. > > On my 7c lute, I always have the 7th course permanently tuned to D > (rather than F). Now on my old student's lute, which > had a very narrow neck I was able to "toy with" either thumb-over (or > the little finger stretch), for the following frequently occurring > pattern for 7c lute(VII=F), or 8c lute (VII=F,VIII=D): > 1(c) > 2(d) > 3(d) > 7(d) = F > This makes the 7c almost equivalent to an 8c lute. > However, on my wider Martin Haycock 7c Gerle lute, thumb-over with > this pattern is nigh impossible, and > I always use the little finger stretch. > Carlos Gonzales lutemaker has suggested to the French list that > Renaissance lutes may > well have had narrower necks than most people play at present. > Therefore, my old student > lute might have been closer to Renaissance practise. However, as far > as I can make it out, > It would seem that this thumb-over position only occurs with 6 or 5c > lutes judging from paintings. > Of course this does not preclude a move between two positions (thumb- > under to thumb-over) > which might not be recorded in paintings. > > Mark > I am just thinking that the idea of the thumb-damping could perhaps > be more relevant to metal > wound strings. I think many lute players, even today, damp their > metal wound strings (with the right-hand). > However, on pure unwound gut strings the sustain almost instantly > disappears when you release the > course (I suppose this is relative, and damping could still make this > more instantaneous) . > Perhaps this may not be the case if the course is struck by a > plectrum (I have never tried), so it still could be > a position carried over from the days of plectrum use. > Today, bass oud strings appear to be metal wound. Has this always > been the case? > Your cittern example is, I feel sure, metal strung. > In fact, this is one of the reasons why some people prefer all gut, > as the basses (even without damping) don't tend > to drown the high and mid. Another reason being the overall more > homogenous sound > > This is just a secondary thought about the question, the idea remains > extremely interesting, and > obviously gives insight into thumb-over in many metal string contexts. > Regards > Anthony > > > > > Le 30 nov. 06 à 22:59, Sean Smith a écrit : > >> >> Indeed, Anthony, there are many variables involved and I don't think >> it's possible to rule it out or in. I only brought up the possible >> solution to show that the musical example itself is more vague than >> the >> graphic examples on AJN's page. >> >> Consider this scenerio: >> >> In performing a tenor and counterpoint by one's self (possibly >> exemplified by the final 2 pictures on Arthur's page) on a 5-c >> lute, it >> is entirely within reason to tune the 5th (lowest) course a 5th below >> the 4th course. If your tonic or final were now on the lowest course, >> 2nd fret then you may want to plant the thumb on that 2nd fret. This >> would be very handy for holding the lute w/out a strap. You could >> still >> hold the lute w/ while playing the dominant and sub-dominant as well >> for, say, Conde claros. >> >> With the smaller neck of the 5-c one could even reach over to the 4th >> course w/ the thumb. Effectively, one could get quite a range for the >> lowest two strings depending on how the lowest courses were tuned. >> >> Also, there was a very close organalogical overlap between the >> vihuelas >> de mano and d'arco. If a player played both instruments I'm sure there >> would be some hand position/tuning overlap as well. I am recalling a >> discussion that more or less concluded that tuning in 5ths was most >> beneficial for single line melodies and 4ths more beneficial for >> multi-line polyphony (with plenty of room for exceptions, of course) >> >> I would be more surprised if *no one* had tried this "thumb over" >> technique. To my mind, a certain number of players would use it (and >> some reject it) for as long as baseline-and-treble counterpoints >> remained popular. No harm, no foul either way. >> >> Ok, a question: is there a name for this? "Thumb over" vs "Thumb >> behind", maybe? --I seem to recall that "Thumb out" and "Thumb under" >> are taken. >> >> best regards, >> Sean >> >> >> >> >> On Nov 30, 2006, at 10:51 AM, Anthony Hind wrote: >> >>> Sean and All >>> There seem to be two questions here, the first is whether the thumb >>> was used, and >>> the example given was a plausible case of this; and the other is >>> whether there is another >>> way out. Of course if there was no way out, the case would be even >>> stronger; but then >>> there are all these images which need explaining. >>> >>> Quite another question, is whether all historic practises NEED to be >>> reproduced >>> by modern players. It might be interesting to try them out to see >>> if they were even possible? >>> In other words, this is more a question of historic reconstruction >>> and what the >>> Renaissance techniques might have been, than a call for every one to >>> click their thumbs, >>> as it were. >>> Best >>> Anthony >>> >>> >>> Le 30 nov. 06 à 19:21, Sean Smith a écrit : >>> >>>> >>>> Hello all, >>>> >>>> I don't want to get caught up in the thumb<-->no thumb debate on the >>>> 6th course but there is another way out of the fingering dilemna of >>>> Arthur's example from Francesco's Ricercar 27 (it also appears in a >>>> Paladin' Milenesa Pavana m. 12-13 and probably elsewhere). >>>> >>>> First I finger (with the 1st finger already on the F#): >>>> >>>> 2(3)---- >>>> -------- >>>> 3(4)---- >>>> 2(2)-1(1) >>>> -------- >>>> 2(2)---- >>>> >>>> The 2nd finger is a kind of hinge bar that when lifted off the 4th >>>> course, the F# is then exposed. I'll confess I haven't tried the >>>> wrap-around-thumb but it's not a position I feel comfortable in. >>>> >>>> Sean >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Nov 30, 2006, at 9:45 AM, Arthur Ness wrote: >>>> >>>>> I have put some more examples here, including two >>>>> supposed Francesco portraits, and a musical example. >>>>> And some other pictures. >>>>> >>>>> http://mysite.verizon.net/arthurjness/thumb.html >>>>> >>>>> ==ajn. >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: "Anthony Hind" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Lute Net" >>>>> <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu> >>>>> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 10:19 AM >>>>> Subject: [LUTE] Re: thumb on diapason? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Le 30 nov. 06 =E0 15:52, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a >>>>>> ecrit : >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear Anthony and all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> at the moment I do not (becaused at the moment I am >>>>>>> playing mainly >>>>>>> a ten-course instrument) and when I came to the lute >>>>>>> I tried to >>>>>>> avoid using the left thumb at all, but: it had worked >>>>>>> well for me >>>>>>> on folk and rock guitar (early nineteenth-century >>>>>>> guitar tutors are >>>>>>> said to know this technique, too) and I later learned >>>>>>> that Ganassi >>>>>>> mentions it. I suspect it works very well in chordal >>>>>>> accompaniments >>>>>>> (and possibly in a rendering of "Anji" on the >>>>>>> six-course lute) but >>>>>>> I would avoid it when playing Francesco ... >>>>>> Thank you Joachim >>>>>> But about Francesco, in the painting postulated by >>>>>> some to be of him >>>>>> (by Giulio Campi, 1525, Pinacoteca Civica, Como), >>>>>> there he is with >>>>>> his thumb "cocked" in the ready position (see >>>>>> http://le.luth.free.fr/ >>>>>> renaissance/index.html, look at collumn 4 line 3). I >>>>>> think it may >>>>>> have been argued that this could be a protrait of him >>>>>> in Lute >>>>>> Festival 2004 Lectures by Mariagrazia Carlone, >>>>>> Portraiture of >>>>>> Sixteenth-Century Lutenists, (see the juxtaposed >>>>>> comparison between >>>>>> this and a known portrait at : >>>>>> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~lsa/old/ >>>>>> Cleveland2004/Portraits.html#top). >>>>>> but I may be mistaken, and this may not be his playing >>>>>> position. >>>>>> All the best >>>>>> Anthony >>>>>>> All best, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Joachim >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Anthony Hind" <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>>> schrieb: >>>>>>>> Dear All >>>>>>>> In Lute News N=B079, P.25, we can read that >>>>>>>> "The January >>>>>>> 2006 (Vol >>>>>>>> 24, N=B0 05) issue has a paper on the technique of >>>>>>>> using the left >>>>>>>> thumb, over the edge of the neck (seen >>>>>>>> in some renaissance lute paintings)" and often >>>>>>>> seen in folk guitar >>>>>>>> techniques. I suppose the article in question was >>>>>>>> "All Fingers and >>>>>>>> Thumbs" by Yehuda Schryer (that I have not read). >>>>>>>> The Iconography on a web page run by Jean-Marie >>>>>>>> Poirier shows this >>>>>>>> clearly (http://le.luth.free.fr/pouce/index.html). >>>>>>>> Several >>>>>>> members of >>>>>>>> the French lute list have suggested that this might >>>>>>>> only have >>>>>>> been on >>>>>>>> relatively narrow-necked 5 to 6 course lutes with a >>>>>>>> semi-circular >>>>>>>> section (rather than the later wider flatter >>>>>>>> necks). It has also >>>>>>> been >>>>>>>> suggested that on the lowest courses the diapason >>>>>>>> and octave would >>>>>>>> have been very close together, to assist in this >>>>>>>> "thumb-blocking". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It almost seems as though the neck-shape is >>>>>>>> intended to fit ;in >>>>>>> to the ; >>>>>>>> curve of the hand for this technique. >>>>>>>> However, I would like to ask if any of you actually >>>>>>>> hold this >>>>>>> type of >>>>>>>> lute in this way, and whether you adopt this thumb >>>>>>>> over diapason >>>>>>>> technique. >>>>>>>> Anthony >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To get on or off this list see list information at >>>>>>>> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Dr. Joachim Ludtke >>>>>>> Fruhlingsstra=DFe 9a >>>>>>> D - 93164 Laaber >>>>>>> Tel. +49-+9498 / 905 188 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > >
