Dear All
After reading Mimmo Peruffo's interesting article, I find that it
explains an improvement, I obtained by changing my stringing, in an
experiment I described at http://tinyurl.com/2husza.
I would like to discuss various points raised by MP in the light of
my experiment, but I do realize that I have much less experience in
using different types of gut stringing than many other people on this
list, and also I have no experience at all in stringing varied types
of instruments. It is not clear that all instruments respond
identically to each way of stringing.
It is even possible that some lutes that are naturally slightly dull,
could respond well to PVF carbon strings, which MP says "are much too
bright in comparison with any type of gut string"; and some PVF (KF)
might be slightly less bright than others, especially when treated by
David Tayler's sand-papering technique. Other lutes that are
particularly bright, might not respond so well to Venice gut, and
prefer Pistoys.
Furthermore, room acoustics may play a role, and general problems of
the context in which one might be called on to play, such as D V
Ooijen's fishing trip, sea-port, lute expedition.
Therefore, please take this into account, and take what I say here
almost as a tentative question.
CUT-OFF POINTS:
I notice that among the questions raised by Mimmo Peruffo, there is
the necessity of using three different types of strings (Trebles,
Meanes, and Basses), and that finding the right cut-off point between
string types, is essential for having a smooth passage from one type
to another (homogenous overall sound). That was exactly what I had
found in my experiment with my particular lute.
MEANES:
He suggests the following specific 'historically" based break-off
points for these string types:
- Treble strings (Dowland’s and Mace’s Trebles; i.e. Romans, Minikins
etc), i.e. the first three courses of both Renaissance and Baroque
lutes.
- Mid register (4th and 5th courses, Dowland’s Meanes, which he
divides in Small and Great Meanes; i.e. Gansars).
- Low register (from the 6th course down, the Basses; Lyons,
Pistoys, Catlins).
In the experiment mentioned above, I was looking for a remedy for
what had seemed to me to be exactly a situation of this type, where
the break between string types had seemed wrong, and the passage
therefore across these strings was not smooth.
The break I had had between the Trebles and Meanes came between the
5th and the 4th (rather than the 4th and 3rd). I had Trebles from the
4th up (and even the 5th were Larson Lyons which are stiffish).
I felt intuitively that the 5th and 4th should be of the same type,
however, neither Lyons nor Pistoy exist down to 0,70. I tried using
treble types down to the 5th, but it did not sound right, although
the transition was smoother. Eventually I discovered that Venice
Aquila Meane diapasons do go down to 0,70, and can therefore be used
on the 4th. There is no doubt that switching over to Venice on the
5th and 4th made the passage across the lute smoother. While their
suppleness improved the higher frequency response at the harmonics. I
do think these strings are ideal for that use (Meanes), at least on
my 60 cm 440 Hz diapason Martin Haycock Gerle Lute.
BASSES:
I later changed the the 6th Pistoy, to Venice, and while that gave an
overall brighter sound, it was slightly less obvious that it was an
improvement, it was rather an alternative sound, but it did not
particularly effect the smooth passage across the lute strings.
Previously, for the Basses, I had a gimped Pistoy string + octave on
the 7th and a simple Pistoy + octave on the 6th. This was probably
closer to the ideal quoted from MP above, since both gimped and
Pistoys are in fact Pistoys, and thus among the basses quoted by MP
above.
Pistoy Basses are tresses (with three elements), rather than twines
(two elements). Venice Meanes are twines. One would expect Pistoys to
be slightly more bass orientated than the Venice, and indeed that
seems true, and this should be a good quality for the set of bass
strings.
In other words, Venice could be ideal for the Meanes, and Pistoys for
the Basses.
Another solution for basses could be to adopt loaded Venice strings
on 7 and 6. The loading would tend to damp the higher frequencies,
and allow a smaller diameter. This might be an interesting and
historical solution. MP gives very good arguments in favour of such a
solution, but for the moment no such string is being marketed, and
Gimped (which is a different way of loading a string) remains
probably the best compromise, better than wound strings.
Note that Charles Besnaiou CNRS "telephone twist" nylon or nylgut,
might be good solutions for those who choose synthetics but don't
want wirewounds. Carlos Gonzales, lutemaker, also mentioned carbon-
wound-carbons. I have no idea what these might be, but for those
using KF, it might be an interesting solution.
OCTAVE/UNISON BREAK:
I also had octave pairings on the Basses, 7th to 6th; but then Unison
pairings from 5th to 2nd (Meanes to Trebles). This raises another
question :
Mimmo Peruffo and Martin Shepherd clearly agree that "William Barley
(A New Booke of Tabliture, 1596) recommends using octaves on 4th, 5th
and 6th. John Johnson, Francis Cutting and Anthony Holborne hint
that, in the second half of the 16th century in England, the use of
octaves was not at all uncommon."
Thus while my choice of unison on the 5th is plausible for a late 7c
lute, as the lute shape is of an early type, that of a Gerle, it
might have been better to remain with an octave on the 5th.
However, wouldn't a unison-to-octave break, in the middle of the
Meanes (5th to 4th), contradict the idea that the Meanes stringing
should be homogenous. Would it not be better, to either have unisons
on 5c and 4c, as I have at present , or octaves on both these
courses? In other words, if I adopted octaves on 5c perhaps I should
also do so on 4c. I won't in fact do that, as at present the sound
seems really well balanced as it is. The Venice do seem to have
enough high frequency presence without octaves.
However, perhaps, I am overgeneralizing, or confusing two issues, as
Dowland does describe a break between the 5th and 4th Meanes, "which
he divides into Small and Great Meanes; i.e. Gansars" ducks or
geese?). However, MP does not, I think, enlarge on that issue.
TREBLES:
Another problem concerns the Trebles. MP says "This kind of string
also needs a low degree of twist, as well as other expediencies, to
reach a high breaking point and resistance to abrasion.
For the second and third courses it is appropriate to moderately
increase the amount of twist and leave out the ‘reinforcing’
chemical treatment: we need to start increasing the suppleness a bit,
sacrificing a bit of tensile resistance, which is not quite as
critical as for the trebles, here."
In other words the 1c should be even stiffer than the other trebles
(3c and 2c). Many people use Nylgut on these Treble courses, rather
than changing strings regularly. Indeed MP says "Nylgut: thin strings
sound very close to gut, but do not quite compare by increasing
diameters. "
So they are alright on Trebles, but not on Meanes.
However, clearly nylgut is not stiff, and can cause a problem by
thinning out on the top string, while this is not so on the 3rd and
2nd courses. Thus they do follow the criteria set by MP for 3c and
2c, but not for 1c.
It would be ideal if MP could bring back his ultra strong gut top
strings. They had the strength of nylon.
Meanwhile a few people are trying Titanium Nylon on this course. It
seems this would be of a lower density than nylgut therefore thicker
on a 1c, but less flexible. It is supposed to be brighter than nylon,
which MP says is dull. "T2 strings have a polished, smooth feel
analogous to nylon, but with a slightly brighter tone and increased
projection. "
One problem for some may be that they have "an attractive,
translucent purple hue", therefore very unistoric?
It seems this sort of stringing may have been destined for fishing to
allow detection by various sea creatures that tend to swallow both
nylon and carbon with disastrous effects.
I found Mimmo Peruffo's article food for thought, and I hope that MP
will find a way of making both strong stiff trebles, and loaded
Venice strings available, even if in small quantities.
I have not discussed the interesting issue of equal to the touch
tension, or the question of the relation between octave and diapason
tension also raised in this paper.
I know that my discussion of stringing on my own lute, is not
necessarily applicable to others.
Lutes do vary, and also player's techniques. However, several other
players who knew my lute prior to these changes, have found these to
have been for the better.
Best regards
Anthony
Le 1 nov. 07 à 22:47, Mimmo Peruffo a écrit :
Dear all,
just a new work on the lute historical stringings:
http://www.aquilacorde.com/lutes.htm
Maybe it help to open some new excange of ideas...
Ciao
Mimmo
--
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
