Do you guys like Larry Brown's lutes? im looking at his Venere G Lute 8c. On 4/1/08, Bruno Correia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Martin, > > What about the shape of the lute? Does it alter the sound? I mean for > instance, a Hieber shape versus a Frei. > > Regards. > > > 2008/4/1, Edward Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > Rob, > > > > If you want G at 440, 59 cm is the longest mensur you can have, or you > > will > > be upset with premature string breakage. If you want 64 cm, the treble > > should be at F. > > > > Of course, the limit can be pushed much higher for nylon or other > > synthetics. But for gut, in our modern times we seem to want a longer > > mensur at a higher pitch, and this just does not work, as it contradicts > > the properties of gut. > > > > I have a performance coming up this weekend, on 11 course lute, at 415, > > F. The mensur is short, at 67 cm. It works fine, and trebles have been > > lasting for about 2 months. If I used my longer baroque lute at 70 cm, > I > > am lucky, very lucky indeed, to last 1 day. > > > > So, if you want a g-lute at 440 with gut, 59 is the upper > > limit. Otherwise, you must go nylon trebles if you want to go longer, > or > > be willing to put a new treble on very, very frequently. > > > > My opinion is that in the old renaissance and baroque days, lutes were > > pitched much lower than we are doing today. Why are we trying to push > the > > upper limits in terms of pitch? We seem to be so boxed in at 440 vs 415 > > vs > > 392. > > > > For instance, on my 70 cm lute, I have moved it from 415 to a = about > > 400. Now, since I lowered the pitch, a gut treble lasts for months, > > again. And, without regard to string type, in my opinion, lutes sound > > their best when pitched at where they should be. Even with synthetics, > if > > you try to go 64 cm at 440, even any synthetic treble, in my opinion, > may > > sound very "mousy" & thin (I speak from experience with 64 cm lutes). > > > > In the old times, they did not have a clue or concern about a= 460, 440, > > 415, 392, or 350, or anything else. They had an instrument, and strung > it > > up, and pitched it where it should be, depending on the instrument. Why > > does your singer "have to be" at 440? Cannot he/she adapt to the > tuning? > > > > These are not my rules.... they are natures rules. The property of gut > is > > what it is, and we cannot exceed that. So, if you want gut at 440, you > > must go shorter. > > > > In my opinion, the multi ribs vs wide ribs sounds no differently. What > > does matter is who builds the lute. > > > > Go for it! > > > > > > > > ed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 08:38 PM 4/1/2008 +0100, Rob MacKillop wrote: > > >I'm thinking of getting a 7c in G at 440 - is 64cms the longest length > > >possible? I have big hands and find small lutes uncomfortable. I'm > > thinking > > >of it principally for Dowland's chromatic fantasies but also > accompanying > > a > > >singer in songs from Dowland's first three books (all for > seven-course), > > and > > >need to be at 440. How stable will be the pitch at 440? Gut strings > would > > be > > >preferable, but might well opt for nylgut for the first course if it > > keeps > > >breaking. What diameters and tensions would you suggest? > > > > > >Also on relatively small lutes (not baroque) such as a 7c, what > > difference > > >in tone might one expect from a multi-ribbed back as opposed to wide > > ribs? > > > > > >Rob MacKillop > > > > > >-- > > > > > > >To get on or off this list see list information at > > >http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > > > > > > > >-- > > >No virus found in this incoming message. > > >Checked by AVG. > > >Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.2/1353 - Release Date: > > 3/31/2008 > > >6:21 PM > > > > > > > > Edward Martin > > 2817 East 2nd Street > > Duluth, Minnesota 55812 > > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > voice: (218) 728-1202 > > > > > > > > > > > -- >
--
