Righty-right!!
There's no reason to use the synthetics just because Ronn McFarlane,
Paul O'Dette, and Nigel North use them, they sound better, last longer, and
cost less.
(I know the "sound better" part is only an opinion, but the
only-an-opinion thing hasn't seemed to slow down the gut advocates.)
Respectfully,
Joseph Mayes
On 1/28/10 8:13 AM, "Monica Hall" <mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> I wholeheartedly agree. The same is true for the baroque guitar. Away
> with all these synthetics.
>
> Monica
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Tayler" <vidan...@sbcglobal.net>
> To: "lute-cs.dartmouth.edu" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 10:00 AM
> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Switching between gut strings and synthetics?
>
>
>> It don't mean a thing
>> If it ain't got gut strings.
>> dt
>>
>>
>> At 12:52 PM 1/26/2010, you wrote:
>>> Dear lutenists,
>>>
>>> the difference of touch between those two approachs of stringing seems to
>>> be a tricky business! I had (still have!;-) problems after years of
>>> synthetics in starting with gut strings, but after getting some
>>> preliminary
>>> touch to gut strings, playing the synthetics with acceptable sound feels
>>> even more difficult than the move from synthetics to gut!
>>>
>>> Any advice? Any advice other than "stay in gut/synthetics"?
>>>
>>> Arto
>>>
>>> PS A little similiar problem arises, when you switch between single string
>>> theorbo and double course lute...
>>>
>>> PS2 recent example tries of those two
>>> gut: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgPisQNbeZc
>>> synth: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CwKBSjljnc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To get on or off this list see list information at
>>> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>>
>>
>
>
