I am extremely sceptical about this claim, if only for the insignificant change in pitch which would be achieved by an additional depression of say 0.5mm (ie from stopping the string without bottoming to the fingerboard and fully depressed) . By way of an example: the increase in string length of a 64cm string depressed at half its length by 0.5mm is only about 0.0008mm! (Pythagorus theorem: square root of [320x320+0.5x0.5]) ie an increase of a mere 0.000125% .............. can any human ear detect this?
MH --- On Wed, 18/3/09, damian dlugolecki <dam...@teleport.com> wrote: From: damian dlugolecki <dam...@teleport.com> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Hi guys, nylon frets... To: "Martyn Hodgson" <hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk>, lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Wednesday, 18 March, 2009, 5:17 PM One touches the strings with much less pressure than say, the guitar. There is no need to push the string down so that it touches the fingerboard. I find that I can adjust my touch to compensate for notes that with more pressure, would sound sharp. When I first encountered the need to fret my lute with thicker frets I was a bit alarmed as well, but believe me, playing a lute with thicker frets has no disadvantages whatever. I consulted with the maker, Andy Rutherford at this time and he agreed that the lute played and sounded beautifully and did not want to tamper with nut any more than what he had done. So I joined this thread to counter the notion that somehow large frets are a bad thing. DD Not really true that thicker frets have 'no drawback' - the use of thinner frets (but still graduated by the same amount from lowest to highest) allows the lute to be set more 'fine' than with thicker frets ie the distance required to depress the string to the fingerboard is less. Conversely, if one so desired, the use of even thicker frets (but still with the same amount of overall graduation) would result in a very significant increase in the distance required to depress a string and concomitant difficulties of execution. MH --- On Wed, 18/3/09, damian dlugolecki <[1]dam...@teleport.com> wrote: From: damian dlugolecki <[2]dam...@teleport.com> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Hi guys, nylon frets... To: "Martyn Hodgson" <[3]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk>, [4]l...@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Wednesday, 18 March, 2009, 3:47 AM The projection of the string is determined by the height of the nut and the holes in the bridge. If the neck has a set or slight warp, thicker frets will be called for and that thickness will be determined by the projection of the strings. I used to use much thinner frets but as Dan Winheld has noted, there is no drawback whatever to using thicker frets. Cordially, Damian Why don't you try a much thinner 9th fret (say 0.50mm) which not only fits with Dowland's fretting advice (the principal historic source of fret sizes) but would also enable you to have smaller lower frets, say down to 0.90mm and thereby set the lute 'fine'? MH --- On Tue, 17/3/09, damian dlugolecki <[1][1][5]dam...@teleport.com> wrote: From: damian dlugolecki <[2][2][6]dam...@teleport.com> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Hi guys, nylon frets... To: "Daniel Winheld" <[3][7]dwinh...@comcast.net>, [4][8]l...@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Tuesday, 17 March, 2009, 3:52 AM "Using the thinnest frets that you can get away with" is a basic premise for fretting, but there are many lutes where the neck has set (but hopefully not twisted) where heavy frets are called for. My baroque lute represents just such an instance where everything is fine except that much thicker frets are called for and more care in selecting sizes to taper up to the 10th fret. Here is the fret scheme for my lute: frets 1,2,3 1.25 mm 4,5 1.20 " 6 1.10 " 7 1.05 " 8 1.00 " 9 .95 " 10 .85 " So if you find you need heavier frets, do not be alarmed. My lute plays beautifully, there is no undue wear on the strings on the finger board, and everything is in tune. You may have to invest in some fret gut, but like tuning, it's part of the job. Damian Please visit my web site at www.damianstrings.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Winheld" <[3][5][9]dwinh...@comcast.net> To: <[4][6][10]l...@cs.dartmouth.edu> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 11:57 AM Subject: [LUTE] Re: Hi guys, nylon frets... > Dana- this seems like excellent advice & cautions in regard to nylon > frets. In line with that, I would also advise noting what the neck > and fingerboard are made of- ebony fingerboard with ebony veneered > neck would seem to be best; in any case the hardest, toughest woods > possible would be in order. > Anything else, especially if the lute is of some value, could be > counter productive so why not go with the easier, safer, and in any > case better sounding traditional alternative? > > That said, I would also advise the thinnest frets that you could get > away with. Dowland's advice seems appropriate here; he starts with > 4th course for the first two frets (.85 - .90 mm), next two of 3rd > course size, (.70-ish) 5th & 6th fret, 2nd course; and the rest > trebles. > > Also single frets would be best; while the traditional doubles are > rarely used by modern lutenists anyway, only gut doubles will "bed > down" properly for cleanest sound. Attempting to get enough tension > for tightness, and for the fret to lie flat near the fingerboard > edges at the first fret position with 1.15 nylon would take two > gorillas with vice grip pliers. And a titanium neck with carbon > fingerboard. > > Dan > > >> Nylon can be made to work, but it even more of a pain in the proverbial >> than gut. It is stronger than most neck woods and will leave an >> indentation; some like that, it marks where the fret goes. Others dislike >> it for the same reason, get it wrong and you are stuck. The knots are >> prickly, and burning them makes noxious smoke which you really shouldnt >> inhale. >> >> Nylon is probably longer lasting than gut, but not forever, I have had >> nylon frets break. >> >> I switched to gut a long time ago and far prefer it. >> >> The first fret is particularly challenging as you have so little room >> above it to use in stretching the knot tighter; I always found pliers >> necesary on the first fret; leave the ends long enough that you can grip >> away from the knot, then wrap a length around the jaws, you dont want to >> be squashing the nylon to get a grip anywhere near the knot. >> -- >> Dana Emery > > -- > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > [5][7][11]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > -- References 1. mailto:[8][12]dam...@teleport.com 2. mailto:[9][13]dam...@teleport.com 3. [10][14]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dwinh...@comcas t.net 4. [11][15]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=l...@cs.dartmou th.edu 5. [12][16]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. [17]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dam...@teleport.com 2. [18]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dam...@teleport.com 3. [19]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dwinh...@comcast.net 4. [20]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=l...@cs.dartmouth.edu 5. [21]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dwinh...@comcast.net 6. [22]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=l...@cs.dartmouth.edu 7. [23]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html 8. [24]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dam...@teleport.com 9. [25]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dam...@teleport.com 10. [26]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dwinh...@comcast.net 11. [27]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=l...@cs.dartmouth.edu 12. [28]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dam...@teleport.com 2. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dam...@teleport.com 3. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk 4. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=l...@cs.dartmouth.edu 5. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dam...@teleport.com 6. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dam...@teleport.com 7. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dwinh...@comcast.net 8. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=l...@cs.dartmouth.edu 9. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dwinh...@comcast.net 10. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=l...@cs.dartmouth.edu 11. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html 12. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dam...@teleport.com 13. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dam...@teleport.com 14. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dwinh...@comcast.net 15. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=l...@cs.dartmouth.edu 16. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html 17. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dam...@teleport.com 18. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dam...@teleport.com 19. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dwinh...@comcast.net 20. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=l...@cs.dartmouth.edu 21. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dwinh...@comcast.net 22. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=l...@cs.dartmouth.edu 23. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html 24. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dam...@teleport.com 25. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dam...@teleport.com 26. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dwinh...@comcast.net 27. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=l...@cs.dartmouth.edu 28. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html