Ray,
I think the option you really should consider
facing (even though it hurts to think about it) is to
bite the bullet and buy a real theorbo. It will sound
so much better. Also, if you make a compromise
instrument, you'll only learn to play that specific
"theorbo." Not that public opinion is everything, but
what's the point of going for the legitimate degree if
no one takes you seriously the minute you open your
case because of your rigged-up lute?
Sorry to be blunt, but there are a fair number of
snobs in early music who try to outdo each other with
the severity of their various
tuning/temperament/string material/instrument
choice/etc. fetishes. While these are all legitimate
areas of investigation, the unfortunate fact is that
there are those who will judge you more on these
factors than your playing.
(Double-stringing on a theorbo is not a bad thing,
though!)
Chris
--- William Brohinsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 9:13 PM, David Tayler
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > This is a very difficult situation that you
> describe.
> > I think the question to ask yourself, is where
> exactly you a are
> > going in your studies.
>
>
> Well, actually, where I'm going in my studies is an
> EE degree.
>
>
> > Because ultimately, the instrument you
> > describe is going to hold you back.
>
>
> What I'm describing is taking a piece of junk and
> making it the equivalent
> of a drummer's practice pad.
>
>
> >
> > Another point to consider is why the instrument is
> in its current
> > state? What does that say about the program?
>
>
> ok, two instruments are under discussion here.
>
> First, my LSO:
> I'm not intending to change the neck. All I'm
> intending to do is set it up
> with a wider nut and bridge to support more courses
> than it currently does,
> and string it single, so that I have something a
> step closer to a theorbo or
> chitarrone than I currently have, which is a
> classical guitar with reentrant
> tuning. I want to have more practice with diapasons
> than I can get with an
> 8-course doublestrung lute. I'm not in any danger of
> playing continuo for
> the English Concert in the next two months.
>
> The theorboed lute at UCONN:
> This instrument was purchased long before I started
> playing there as a
> 'townie' in the early 80's. They had three lutes
> then: this theorboed lute,
> which was broken; a 13-course baroque lute, and an
> 'elizabethan' lute,
> probably 8-course, but I can't be sure because the
> closest I got to it was
> when the alumnus who had it in hands came to play at
> a few of our rehersals
> and a concert. That lute is still in the hands of
> an alumnus, although I
> don't know if it is the same person. The baroque
> lute is about, probably
> available, but while I'd be willing to spend a year
> or two learning dminor
> tuning and such, I'm really looking to develop some
> continuo ability. That
> leaves the disabled theorboed lute. It has been 26
> years since I last saw
> it, and my memory isn't so good that I remember
> exactly what the broken part
> was, but I doubt that it is unrepairable, and the
> 'cello maker is good
> enough, and good enough a friend, that I'm pretty
> sure we can get it
> functional again. This may allow putting on a new,
> longer neck for the
> diapasons. I don't know yet.
>
> Frankly, I won't know for sure until I see it. In
> the mean time, I'm looking
> to gain some facility with picking out diapasons. I
> suppose I could restring
> the guitar with all A and low E strings and tune
> them for six steps, and
> just practice with my thumb, but that's kind of
> purposeless, since I'll need
> to be able to find the right diapasons while still
> dealing with the top
> courses.
>
>
> > After you test those issues, it is perfectly
> reasonable in one sense
> > to restring it single.
> > But it is not what in another sense what you
> deserve. Sadly, it is
> > tough to get started when the admission ticket is
> so steep.
> > Good luck!
> > dt
> >
>
> It is hard to say what I deserve, although it is
> nice to think that I
> deserve an excellent instrument and a chance to play
> it. Some day, perhaps,
> with an EE degree, rather than "just" 35 years
> experience as an electronics
> technician, that can happen. The admission ticket
> does, indeed, seem steep
> at this point!
>
> So, in review, what I'm asking is this:
> Admitting that the result is going to be
> sub-optimum, what string length
> should I shoot for that will allow single stringing
> this EMS LSO with single
> courses, at some pitch, which I will call an A
> theorbo for the sake of
> argument, but might be anything, as long as it
> allows fingering the top six
> courses (eight should actually be fingerable) and a
> set of diapasons enough
> to simulate a theorbo's string spacing?
>
> If the true and just answer is that I'm a dunce and
> shouldn't consider
> attempting to get a feel for playing with diapasons
> in the two months I have
> before audition time, so be it. At this point,
> though, I'm not seeking to
> produce a perfect tone nor a perfect reproduction of
> a theorbo. Nor am I
> going to spend money (in short supply) and time (in
> shorter supply) trying
> to make a real theorbo out of the LSO. That, I'm
> going to save against the
> chance that I can convince the director of the
> Collegium that I could be
> trusted with the college's theorboed lute, repair
> and refurbish it and then
> undertake to learn to play it effectively.
>
> ray
>
> --
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at
>
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>
