Le 6 déc. 07 à 21:22, Daniel Winheld a écrit :
Anthony, I read Mimmo's text carefully twice; (halfheimers, the
brain glass is still half full) so I remember the different nuances
of the different string specs & applications- no false impressions
created.
Dan, I am sure many people did, but writing this down as a message to
you had the dual purpose of apologizing if anyone had been lead
astray, and clarifying my own ideas. That last is becoming more
necessary, as time goes by ...
In any case It's very good to know how all the different string
types work- even if we go off by 50 or so years one direction or
the other on the various lute-string combinations while working it
out. My own 13 course rider thing (An ancient Bob Lundberg
original; a semi/quasi-Hoffmann) has worn everything from snarly
old Pyramids that sounded like a bad sitar to plain gut so thick
you could use it to anchor a tugboat, and everything in between-
including Lyon & Healy harp strings, Dan Larson gimps, MP's first
generation loads, and at this point the almost default position of
Savarez copper overspuns w/nylgut octaves- possibly the least
unsatisfactory compromise for an old lute that by present levels of
excellence is not up to minimal standard anyway. One interesting
product I've used for some time is the KFC (karbon-fibre gut) by
Savarez- looks like plain gut embalmed in carbon fiber (KF)
material, as they claim it to be. Sounds pretty good, very stable,
but too stiff and thick past about 1.20 mm or so. Worked well on my
old 8 course bass lute at 72 cm sl.
Yes, I think experimentation is essential. Each lute (and each
lutist) seems to respond well to slightly different stringing. If you
don't try you will never know. Lutists and lute makers in past times
may have been quite conservative, but without some experimentation,
there would never have been any change in string technology. Quite
probably different music types, even of the same period, might also
work better with slightly different stringing and or lute types.
Yes KFC does seem to be the best carbon type (or so every one
reports). Even a purist like Jacob Heringman uses it on the 5th
course in difficult conditions, but I thought as it became thinner,
it also became more metallic (you seem to be saying the contrary,
perhaps both extremes, too thick and too thin, are to be avoided).
Someone recently told me that the overall effect is accumulative when
you use a type of string. The more you use, the more the quality/
defect is exaggerated. Thus the more plastic you use the more
plasticky the sound becomes, and the more gut you use the more -------
y, it becomes (I don't really know what expression to use here, so I
will allow anyone to fill in the slot, according to their attitude to
"gut").
I could make a parallel with types of capacitor in a preamp. Some are
insulated with various plastics, some with paper, some with mica, the
material is clearly audible, and the more of them you have of the
same type, the more obvious this becomes. In that particular case, I
almost always mix and match to avoid any one defect. With my lute, I
do tend the otherway, but that is a matter of taste and relates to
the conditions in which I play.
So it looks like we will eventually have access to mixing and
matching (and mis-matching) all the relevant string/instrument
categories in an informed and occasionally humorous ways. Loaded
fundamentals with Titanium octaves on your six-course, anyone?
I have one top string to try. Interestingly, for a synthetic, you
need 0,47 to have the same tension as gut 0,42. This should mean a
good finger/string contact. I will try to report when I have time to
do the test. Although, I suspect one string will not have a very
marked effect. One French lutist is using carbon mids and Titanium-
Nylon tops. I am not sure what basses, or what octaves, but he
reports that it is better than the previous material he tried.
On the other thread, "standard 8 course lute" , it became obvious
that there were several contradictory conditions and aims that
lutists have to contend with, so each lutist just has to find his own
particular level of compromise.
This is bound to result in many different configurations and
experiments, which no doubt are good for us all.
Yes I agree with you, much variation is possible, so long as we know
what we are doing (and what compromises we are making), and we don't
fool ourselves more than is necessary. A little self fooling will
always be present, and as you imply, the more serious we are, the
more in danger we are, of self-foolery. It is never possible to
completely reconstruct. The closest we can often get is sometimes a
sort of metaphor, as it can only be a tiny part of the complete
reality and its context. Nevertheless, to be able to try those loaded
strings, which we see in that Charles Mouton portrait http://
tinyurl.com/2bfzat, while attempting to interpret his tablature,
should be a very interesting experience (particularly if you and your
audience are also wearing his reconstructed wig, to reduce room
acoustic reflections, ancient acoustic damping system?)
But I think certain musician/composers, such as Mouton, were really
searching into the potential of their lutes, and making them "speak",
for this type of composer, the closer you are to the instrument and
the string types, the better. Some other composers, might have worked
in a more abastract way, and transposition to the modern guitare
could be a possibilty, even if cretainly not my preference, but
Mouton on a modern guitare ... ?
"However, this is not the point I want to develop, here. I am just
looking at MP's findings, as one would the research of an
archeologist, trying to reconstruct the technology of a certain
period. This could simply be viewed as "pure" research aimed at
broadening our knowledge of the conditions in which musicians played
at a particular period and leave it at that (as for example when
archeologists managed to revive the technology of flint knapping,
which has no obvious immediate modern use).
Personally, I have always had a passion for archeology, and I love
the texture and sound of gut strings, so I take pleasure in both
aspects of this research."
There are primitive technology nuts out there who are indeed
reconstructing different flintknapping styles to conform to
different materials and periods, and then using the results in the
field. The following site has forums (fora?) on flint knapping,
primitive archery, ethnomusicology, shelters, etc.
I have to admit that I watch all those archeological programmes with
a little reconstruction in them. I remember, a fairly recent
reconstruction of a Celtic war chariot with amazing floating
suspension, so that the charioteer could both veer at pace and be
able to throw a lance, or fire an arrow from straight position.
Sounds like the most recent from of computerized C-----n hydraulic
suspension (I suppose I should be careful not to advertise).
One of my friends made a televison program with a flint knapping
demonstration from a scientist at the CNRS, and now you tell me that
there are archers out there trying all this out. In fact the last
time I went to a knife shop, they persuaded me to buy a Japanese
Ceramic knife. I suppose that is pretty close to going back to a
flint blade, and for many years, I believe Obsidian, used by stone
age warriors, was the sharpest material known to man. "Because of the
lack of crystal structure, obsidian blade edges can reach almost
molecular thinness, leading to its (...) modern use as surgical
scalpel blades."
http://b16.ezboard.com/bpaleoplanet69529
I am occasionally amused by deja-vu experiences I encounter in the
archery community when discussions about different historic
bowstrings, their material, construction techniques, and their
applications to different bows and bow types get rather animated.
Seems I've just had a similar discussion somewhere else....
Dan, I myself wondered how much the ancient technology of Yew bow
making could tell us about the conditions in which Yew lutes were
made (in a previous thread), but Martin Shepherd seemed to think I
was barking up the wrong tree (Yew or otherwise). I thought the
natural spring qualities of the yew wood, described so well, on those
archery sites, might have been put to some acoustic use, but
apparently not.
Anyway, thanks so much for your post, the more information the
better- please keep it up. Dan
Thanks for your comments
Anthony
--
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
