Howard
It is the same for double fretting. Mace says that single frets are
ideal, and then only tells us how to double fret.
Well, I have to say I can find no fault with the double fretting on
my new lute, not a buzz anywhere to be heard.
I suppose we should look wider at instructions in all manner of other
disciplines to try to see if there is a pattern in this, and if so
what it means.
Could it be that the instructor feels that some new idea, is probably
better (or at least catching on) but not having adopted it, he fears
he may be judged as old fashioned?
This is the sort of thing you still see in new theses, when a young
research person has just heard of some new theory, but does not want
to get bogged down for another year researching it.
They tend to try to give an impression that they are giving it much
thought, but in fact, they have not really completely come to grips
with it.
Just my musings...
Anthony
Le 18 juin 08 à 23:24, howard posner a écrit :
On Jun 18, 2008, at 1:58 PM, Jean-Marie Poirier wrote:
Anyway, the bulk of historical evidence is clearly in favour of a
more or less equal temperament when considering fretted instruments
like lutes or viols,
As far as I know, the historical evidence consists mostly of:
1) Actual instructions for fretting the instruments, which describe
unequal temperament;
2) Theorists implying equal fretting; and
3) Metal-fretted instruments all in unequal temperament.
It's difficult to reconcile the second category with the other two.
--
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
