PARA
However, as Martin tells us, "it is the Burwell lute book, which
explains that the French removed the low octave from the 11th course
because the sound of it was too "big" (not necessarily sustained) and
smothered the other strings."
Although some do consider this as an explanation after the event, of
the way some lutenists may have altered their 10c lutes to 11c without
changing the peg structure, nevertheless, this does not seem to
indicate a love of deep bass, among the later French Baroque lutenists,
which might have lead to their preferring demi-filA(c) strings.
PARA
Indeed, according to Charles Besnainou (message to the French lute
list), gimping and wrapping were well known in the embroidery trade for
several hundred years, and so the technology was at hand, if anyone had
felt a need for their use; but as Martin points out, after Playford, no
lute treaty (Burwell or Mace) even mentions these string types.
PARA
Ch.B. goes on to write, "more than a century after the invention of
wirewounds advertized in the English Dancing Master of John Playford
(Londres, 1651), we find this critical commentary in l'Art du faiseur
d'instruments (l'EncyclopA(c)die MA(c)thodique, Paris, 1785) :
A<< a|les bourdons filA(c)s ont l'inconvA(c)nient de dominer trop sur
les autres cordes, et d'en faire perdre le son final par la durA(c)e du
leur, dans les batteries de guitares. A>>
Thus as late as 1785 wire wounds (most possibly full wirewounds) are
described as overpowering the other voices and covering them completely
in their moment of decay; and this quality/defect for French Baroque Dm
music, remains, in my mind, a real problem with full wirewounds today,
and which damping does not completely allay.
PARA
On the other hand, Claude Perrault (quoted by MP), in "OUVRES DE
PYSIQUE", AMSTERDAM 1680, seems to agree with Jaroslav: of wirewounds
he says, "...c'est par cette mA-ame raison que la maniere que l'on a
inventA(c)e depuis peu de charger les cordes a boyau, rend leur son
beaucop plus fort: car le fil de metail trait..." (27).
[3]http://www.aquilacorde.com/en/researches/our-works/loading-of-gut.ht
ml?start=3
PARA
These contrasting remarks could be two different views of the same bass
string type (as Jaroslaw rightly says taste can differ), but it is also
possible that in this 1680 text, CP is talking about demi-filA(c),
while in the 1785 text, the author is talking about full-wounds.
Indeed, CP insists on the fact that this improved loudness is achieved
without any change to the tonal sound of the string, as their
vibrational structure is not altered, because the stiffness or the
flexibility of the resonating body remains unchanged.
[4]http://www.aquilacorde.com/en/researches/our-works/loading-of-gut/39
.html
PARA
Now this does sound like a demi-filA(c), whose open wire leaves the
flexibility of the gut unimpeded, thus presenting less impedance at the
bridge than the full-wound, indeed, less than that of a regular thick
gut bass, since the diameter (as with Mimmo's loaded strings) can be
thinner. The free vibratory movement of a loaded string is effectively
more like that of the pendulum (or the clapper of a bell, as in the
Perrault quote), rather than that of the tight metal spring as with the
full-wirewound. The stiffness of the full-wound seriously alters the
sound quality tending to put a break on the full resonance of the other
voices, while having good sustain themselves.
(Perhaps, as this text is dated 1680, we might be sure that wire is not
drawn thin enough to make full wirewounds; I am sure there is a note on
this in MP's text, but I was unable to find it).
PARA
MP adds that "The author refers to the new overspun bass strings giving
however the impression he is talking about a new technological strategy
for loading gut (i.e. the use of metal wire) in place of a more
traditional one."
This does seem to be indicated by another example of loading in Charles
Perrault's text, when he says that "on charge avec de la soudure
("solder") le bout des languettes des anches des orgues" (they load the
organ's metal tongues, or reed, with solder). Thus, ChP is clearly
considering methods of loading.
PARA
Nevertheless, in spite of their qualities, demi-filA(c) do not seem to
have been generally adopted until about the 1720s, around the same time
as the swan-neck was introduced, and the fashion for the fan-bracing
began to spread; all these indicate a new tendency to revel in the
basses, in keeping with what was to develop into the Galant taste for a
more underlined bass line to support a differentiated upper voice; but
these do not seem to have been qualities cherished by the later French
school, in which so much more was going on in the Mid register.
PARA
However, it is probable that the adding of two courses on a rider to
make 11c into 13c lutes which really determined the success of the
demi-filA(c). Indeed above a certain thickness (beyond 11c) the loaded
strings do tend to become a little dull, while the wire on the
demi-filA(c) can actually restore a little brightness (pure gut strings
become even more problematic on a 13c rider lute). It may thus have
become acceptable to sacrifice a little homogeneity in favour of a
better tone, which may also have corresponded to a change in taste
(although the swanneck variant might indicate that some continued to
dislike demifilA(c), using the extension for pure gut basses; unless
they were after even more bass and sustain by using it with
demi-filA(c)).
PARA
This would surely have been a break with the late French (and possibly
early German) Baroque taste, which seems to benefit from as little
tonal break as possible between the voices, while tending to explore
the Meanes, yet spurning the frequency extremes.
We can gather this from the critical remarks in Burwell, about the 12c
double-headed lute (I quote Kenneth Sparr):
"According to the Burwell Lute Tutor the double-headed lute was not
accepted for long in France and furthermore the author argues against
the views of 'English' Gaultier, who supposedly held that the length of
the strings on the double-headed lute produces a longer and bigger
sound: all the strings ought to have the same length of sound, and the
sound of a string must make room for the other; for besides the
confusion that the length of sounds produce, it also causeth a discord
(since every bass cannot make a concord with every small string). And
this is the first reason. The second evil effect that condemneth this
alternation is that the sound of these long strings is not good, and
that sound is like that of one that sings in the nose. "
[5]http://www.tabulatura.com/MESTWEB.HTM
PARA
This seems in keeping with the concept of "le bon gout franAS:ais"
developed around this time, which would favour an elegant economy over
extreme effects, while rejecting an earlier more flamboyant
"preciosite", which was perhaps still to find favour in the Cavalier
court of Charles the Ist (under the patronage Henrietta Maria of
France, sister of Louis XIII).
These paintings could evoke this difference of approach, even in
clothing (although here the date difference can account for it):
[6]http://www.er.uqam.ca/nobel/r14310/Luth/Iconographie/darthmouth.edu.
wbc/Reyn-Big.jpg
[7]http://idata.over-blog.com/2/01/43/65/Louvre-10/Louvre-10-0550.JPG
PARA
As proof of this conservative tendency, the Carolean masque under the
influence of Henrietta Maria absorbed a type of outmoded "ballet de
cour" known as "ballet A entrees" that was already judged as decadent
in France, with its increased emphasis on the visual and spectacular,
at the expense of the dramatic function.
[8]http://www.societefrancaiseshakespeare.org/document.php?id=737
H-M had herself performed in such ballets in France before coming to
England, and her role in helping perpetuate earlier transitional French
Baroque forms, is possibly non-negligeable; it was H-M who surrounded
herself with French musicians such as Jaques Gauthier, who appears in
the lists of the queen's musicians, as well as in the orchestral list
for two exravagant masques, as Musician in masques, Triumph of Peace,
1634; maker of lutes for masques, Britannia Triumphans, 1637, (Journal
of the American Musicological Society).
PARA
If H-M's presence in England may have helped preserve this older 12c
French style (Gauthier and Mace), her contacts with Holland (where she
arranged the marriage of her daughter Mary to William of Orange, and
sold her jewels to finance the Royalists), may have helped its spread
there; I believe some of her French Catholic musicians fled to Holland
during the English Civil War (although I can no longer find the
reference).
PARA
I will admit that this is my interpretation from the scraps of
information that I have been able to glean, and I am of course willing
to be put right by any serious musical historian.
Nevertheless, couldn't it be said that two competing schools of French
Baroque music developed: The French "Dm school", and the English and
Dutch ("Transitional") French school (even if the two may not have been
quite so separate as my account suggests); but the "bon gout
franAS:ais" shunning the flamboyant extremes may not have completely
won out.
PARA
There are a number of indications of the existence of a difference of
taste, as between two schools: Mace, who also adopted a form of 12c
lute (see his lute Dyphone), damned with faint praise the taste for
Bologna lutes, in this well known scene where he described Jacques
Gaultier showing him two pittiful cracked examples of Maler's art.
[9]http://www.lutesandguitars.co.uk/images/07-2005/Mace3.jpg
He concluded, "I have often seen Lutes of three or four pounds price,
far more illustrious and taking to the common eye"; but the most
telling thing, is that the teachers, Gautier and Mace do not use
Bologna lutes, while their rich amateur students apparently do.
I wonder why, this passage is widely quoted in support of the Bologna
"fad", while, I seem to hear Mace and Gautier (both lutenists and lute
makers, or designers?) chuckling at the expense of their rich student's
feeble lutes (even if this may have included the king himself).
PARA
Thus Jaroslaw is again quite correct, in insisting on variation in
taste. Some musicians and their audiences clearly went on enjoying the
less homogenous slightly bass boomy 12c lute (as the Burwell text would
have it).
Perhaps, Mace's Dyphone lute actually needed the "tut" Grace (Music's
Monument p.109), as Jaroslaw mentions, not just for the bass line but
also for the other voices, because of the strong sympathetic
resonances of this "twin" lute.
[10]http://www.tabulatura.com/mace.jpg
PARA
Well of one thing we can be sure, this Diphone lute would not have
found favour with the author of Burwell, who had already found the 12c
lute a "faute de goA>>t",
"The fourth reason [is] that there is no symmetry in proportion in the
two heads, and a lute so framed is not a lute but a bastard instrument
between a lute and a theorbo. " which almost both predicts and damns
Mace's invention in advance (although the dates of both in fact seem to
differ by only a few years).
PARA
Yet, the criticism in Burwell may well tell us more about the notions
of "bon goA>>t" held by the newer French school than any real defect in
the 12c lute. I have to admit that I have only heard one such lute
played live, but it had Charles Besnainou's ultra low impedance spring
strings on it, and I was listening more to the strings than the
instrument or the music.
PARA
However, Paul Beier told me that his 12c lute is a very elegant design,
in which each bass string increases in length by a sufficient step, so
as to keep the same string thickness across the basses. This is more or
less what Mimmo's loaded Venice achieve by a sufficient step in loading
to keep the same diameter Venice core.
PARA
Both these methods for maintaining the same effective diameter seem to
have been noted in two Italian 18th century texts (discovered recently
by Mimmo) concerning the characteristics which determine the resonance
frequency of a gut string; they both state that apart from length,
diameter, and tension, there is also the weight, or the gravity, of a
string.
I will leave Mimmo to give the details, but this is indeed in keeping
with the 12c solution, as well as a strong support for the loaded
string hypothesis.
PARA
You ask me, Jaroslaw, whether I would give up my loaded strings if they
were proved to be non-historic.
I would say that the problem, for modern interpretations of French
Baroque Dm lute music with full-wounds, is less the increased sustain
of these basses, than their impedance to the sustain of the other
voices resulting in a less singing lute sound; but it is this double
effect that ensures the smothering of the Meanes and Trebles (as l'Art
du faiseur d'instruments describes). I don't think this corresponds
well with the goals of this particular music, as I have tried to point
out.
I don't see any more musical solution for a Bologna lute of 70cm or
below. It is this consideration which makes me so happy with my Venice
loaded basses with Venice octaves and Meanes on my Warwick Frei: even
the basses sing, and the other voices also have good sustain. I believe
this would be in keeping with what we know of the goals of French
Baroque Dm music, even if it could be proved that they had never
actually existed.
PARA
Now if another bass string was to be produced that was both historic,
and had even better properties of harmonicity, I might be tempted to
change from my present loaded. Well, during his string conferences in
London, Mimmo handed around just such a string: with improved loading,
an even thinner Venice core, and a heavier but smoother loading.
When I held it across the fingers as shown on Martin's site:
[11]http://www.luteshop.co.uk/Gerle1546small.jpg
it vibrated with superb duration and trueness of shape, AND it would
bundle exactly as you point out does the string shown there.
Yes, it did instantly come to my mind that I might "upgrade" at the
same time as I could lower the diapason from 407 to 392Hz, but the
singing quality of the present basses is so good, that I don't think I
have the heart to do so now, but some time...
PARA
Now I have also been quite tempted by the type of 12c lute that Paul
Beier owns (I hope he may soon make a recording). If I was to acquire
such a lute, I might consider trying Charles' low impedance spring
strings, or George Stoppani's flexible Lang Lay ropes (of which more
later), but on a Bologna style lute, I really see no better solution
than the loaded strings.
PARA
As to silk wound silk strings, I agree that the Gansar is a possible
candidate. According to Ch B Gansar could be associated with the French
word "ganse" which is usually a cord wound round with silk sometimes
with a silk ribbon, to form a smooth rope. Such a rope should not show
high impedance at the bridge, and might have good sustain.
And do we really know what the Pistoy might have been? but that is a
different story...
Regards
Anthony
Alexander,
Well, I think this is just misunderstanding. What I was trying to do is
to show that verbal descriptions of tone colour are subjective and can
lead to misinterpretation. I purposly showed 2 extremes: mellow and
sharp only to diferentiate general tone qualities. I don't think we
have to do with a myth of sharp lute sound. On the contrary we have to
do with myth of a sweet , full ,and mellow tone quality mentioned by
some writers. We can't proove it because we don't have old strings, but
I am afraid that comparing a lute played in proper (pinky on a bridge
or behind) manner with the same lute played using modern technique
(which is neither renaissance nor baroque), and then describing the
tone characteristic would be very instructive. The only person that I
know of using this technique is Toyoshiko Satoh. When I listen to his
recordings (turning the volume up) I can hear that the quality of his
tone is very different from what we are used to. Inspite of using a
very low tension strings I can hear in the tone some kind of
"stiffness" (kind of a sound not very far from a lute stop). And no
wonder because even if your string is slack its elasticity drops down
rapidly towards the bridge (giving a little bit more wooden quality to
it - actually I never mentioned harsh tone). Nothing wrong with that!
It's just different. So ,what I was saying is that all the descriptions
of lute's sound are very subjective.
Now, I don't know what Mace comment you were thinking off. If you meant
Playford's advertissement I can't see where he mentions too long
sustain of the strings. Here is the full citation:
Advertisment (John Playford "An introduction to the skill of music",
4th edition London 1664):
"There is a late invension of strings for the basses of viols and
violins, or lutes which
sound much better and louder then the common gut string, either under
the bow or finger. It
is small wire twisted or gimped upon a gut string or upon silk. I have
made trial of
both,but those upon silk do hold best and give as good a sound. The
choise of these strings
are to be sold at Mr. Richard Hunts Instrument-seller at the Lute in
St. Pauls Alley near Pater noster Row.
Finis"
Actually he was praising newly invented wire (gimped) strings which had
much better sound quality then ordinary gut. As you see it looks like
they were looking for new string material for because gut wasn't ideal
and they liked stronger, louder tone with more sustain.
Silk strings were mentioned by Terzi (1686) as well. As for roped silk
Dowland's Gansar strings could be a candidate. Also silk strings with
silver wire - so called Grotesky strings - were well received:
"Goretsky hath an invention of lute strings covered with silver wyer,
or strings which
make a most admirable musick. Mr Boyle. [...] String of guts done
about with silver wyer makes a very sweet musick, being of Goretsky's
invention" ( 1659 ).
All in all, describtions were and are subjective, but we have our own
ears to asses if the string is good or not.
Best
Jaroslaw
from Ed Martin
I have followed this thread with great interest.
Now that Playford gets into the discussion, I recently had a great
experience. Dan Larson, lute builder and string maker, recently
acquired a treasure - an original edition of Playford's 1664 book, in
which the strings are mentioned. I recently held this beautiful book
in mint condition, and read through some of it.
Interestingly enough, Playford does not mention the strings at
all; this statement is in the very last folio, where it is an
advertisement from a merchant who happens to sell strings. In any
event, there is not general agreement that the description in this
advertisement confirms that wound strings were used. The statement
describes wire twisted or gimped upon gut or silk, which does not
necessarily describe our modern concept of a wound string.
At 06:23 AM 2/4/2010, alexander wrote:
O, my apologies, thinking Playford, writing Mace. His complaining
voice just is so loud in my head... ar
On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 07:52:19 +0000
Martin Shepherd<mar...@luteshop.co.uk> wrote:
???? Mace doesn't mention wound strings at all. You may be thinking of
the Burwell lute book, which explains that the French removed the low
octave from the 11th course because the sound of it was too "big" (not
necessarily sustained) and smothered the other strings. I know of no
lute source which mentions wound strings.
Best wishes,
Martin
???? Mace doesn't mention wound strings at all. You may be thinking of
the Burwell lute book, which explains that the French removed the low
octave from the 11th course because the sound of it was too "big" (not
necessarily sustained) and smothered the other strings. I know of no
lute source which mentions wound strings.
Best wishes,
Martin
If i may, just on two erroneous assumptions regarding the imagined
sound quality from "when Historical Correctness was the History
Itself". One has to do with the idea of the lute basses having rather
short sustain. Mersenne, who otherwise is an accepted authoritative
source on the strings (+ more), claimed that bass strings on the lutes
had sustain of "several seconds". Currently possible only with the
wound strings. Mace in his comment regarding the "new wire wound
basses", dismissed their usefulness on the same basis, as, according to
him, the "currently available basses", on long lutes had too long a
sustain already. This is one of the points which, as i understand,
keeps Mimmo Peruffo on searching for ever better answers then the
current loaded gut offers.
The second has to do with the universally accepted assumption that
playing near the bridge with the "thumb out" produces a "sharp tone" ("
Did
they like mellow or sharp tone? The RH position of most baroque lute
players
on old paintings suggests the later."). This is just an assumption, as
strange as it may be. Toyohiko Satoh demonstrates this on
baroque lute. Then there is the case of this famous picture here:
[12]http://library.csun.edu/igra/bios/graphics/aguado-d.gif
The picture is of Dionisio Aguado, who according to his contemporaries
hearing him play duets with Fernando Sor, at times had as deep and
dignified sound, as Sor did, while playing WITH FINGERNAILS with his
little finger firmly lodged behind the bridge. The critics, who
otherwise were not noticed to be ignorant or unprofessional, on
occasion compared his midrange sound to a cello! Of course then
alternating with
a "bright and clear trebles". While we can "only guess" how the long
lutes
sounded when played by all those pictured with their hand on the
bridge, the critique of Aguado's performances is available from
European news papers and magazines, available in microfilm. If the
experiment is carried to the logical conclusion, one will notice that
with the proper strings (and synthetics will not work at all in this
case, and i am not claiming this theoretically), and allowing the right
hand to play somewhat in reverse of the logic ( fingers moving slightly
away from the bridge in plucking, and actually, not quite plucking,
too, this position can be seen on Aguado's pictures), may be with the
right side of the large fingertip, while acquiring a very relaxed
stance, one will notice that the sound will not remind a harpsichord
lute stop at all. Of course, one quality that is required from
trebles in this case, is flexibility and ability to turn under the
finger (which comes with flexibility). Modern gut strings only so
slowly develop in this direction. I have a string made by Mimmo Peruffo
(about 0.6 mm), twisted of two parts, like a rope, and then polished.
This string can be kept in a "knot", not unlike the "historical"
distribution methods suggested. Of course, for a string maker to go
into production of these, a long time will pass, with changing demand
and tastes. Meanwhile, demanding
musicians are looking for solution in the lower tension ( Toyohiko
Satoh ) instead. Et
cetera... Everything flows somewhere.
The "Some early records mention
strings vibrating for up to 10 seconds after being struck: gut strings
vibrate a second or two at most, but silk vibrations can continue for
10
seconds." quote appears to be corrupted in some way, as i was the
source. The discussion was of a particular design silk strings, with
the roped silk core wound by twisted silk. There is no evidence of such
strings in Europe. A second or two - for plain gut basses.
alexander r.
On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 22:36:12 +0000
JarosAAaw Lipski<jaroslawlip...@wp.pl> wrote:
Anthony,
Thank you for a very interesting link. It looks like guqin players are
a
little bit more aware of their past then oud players or at least this
awarness is making its way.
There is nothing wrong about being little crazy or nostalgic. We must
be
crazy to spend money on such impractical things. However I don't think
that
puting a set of gut strings on a lute will transfer a player (or
listner) to
the past. It's rather a journey (as you wrote) to the new exotic
sounds.
Changing strings makes music different but it doesn't need to have
pejorative connotations. I don't think that there is anything wrong
with
enthusiasm, say, for loaded basses, or any other new type of string
providing we realize what is the reason to use them. Do we want to be
archeologists or musicians? If archeologists, one has to buy what
people say
is HIP. If musicians, one buys what suits his musical taste best.
Obviously
we can be both, but then we will be torn and tormented when new data
arrives. I wouldn't fancy throwing away loaded basses if someone
announced
one day that he has a data that contradicts existence of those strings
in
past. I would only buy them if I liked their tone. At least this is my
attitude. I am the musician in the first place.
So What is the reason for using gut?
1/Economical
Definitely not economical. However in past it could've been so. It's
difficult to compare prices from 18th century to the prices of modern
gut,
but definitely it must have been cheaper a lot. Normaly it was bought
in
bundles (as Mace and others write). If the production was really
massive it
could be the cheapest way to go then.
2/Historical
This is a good argument for those of us that love history. The only
problem
is that probably the guts we can produce at the moment aren't the same
that
were produced then.
Thiner strings were very supple - characteristique quite different from
modern HT guts.This is the citation from Martin Sheperd's site (I hope
you
don't mind Martin? [13]http://www.luteshop.co.uk/stringshistory.htm ):
"Packaging: strings were made in lengths ("knots") at least twice as
long as
was needed on the instrument. "Double knots" are presumably twice as
long.
They are then "made up" into "bundles", more knots to a bundle for thin
strings than for thicker ones. The whole issue of packaging has been
largely
ignored by modern writers but it can give vital clues as to the nature
of
the strings: all the descriptions of "knots", "bundles" and how to
extract a
string from them suggest characteristics very different from those of
modern
gut strings, which must be carefully coiled because bending round sharp
corners ruins them. The picture of testing for trueness in Gerle's book
of
1546 is one of several depictions which shows what a "knot" was like"
Do have a look at the picture of such a bundle on Martin's site .
The fact very well known but notoriously overlooked or ignored
(intentionaly?) by HIP players. Then the argument that original guts
were
better because they were stiff and this is why it was easy to play
ornaments
is not valid any more from historical point of view.
Then comes the issue of basses. We already discussed it many times so I
won't be repeating my standpoint, however I'd like to draw your
attention to
another aspect of the bass issue. One of the main arguments of gut bass
advocates is that the string doesn't ring long therefore the balance of
the
instrument is much better. Now we enter another teritory so I'll make
another point here.
3/Tonal
Tonal characteristic is something that each one of us would describe
differently. Our descriptions of how instrument in general or the
string
itself sounds is in a way a projection of our likings. For example a
person
that likes low frequences would describe an instrument set with
wirewounds
as sonorous. The tone of the very same instrument would be described as
boomy by another person who prefers higher frequencies. This is just to
say
it isn't objective.
We can hear it very clearly in some HIP interpretations. Some players
are so
afraid of boomy and unclear bass line that they develope quite
complicated
technique of dumping bass strings. Whether it is historical or not to
play
small phrases this way, can be polemicized, however playing the whole
bass
line non legato seems to be dictated rather by personal taste. Although
Mace
suggests that it actually was in use (Music's Monument p.109) however
he
describes it as a grace called "tut". Grace, not the whole technique of
playing bass line.
Then we have to ask what were the likings of people in 17 or 18
century. Did
they like mellow or sharp tone? The RH position of most baroque lute
players
on old paintings suggests the later. What were the tonal qualities of
other
plucked instruments they invented? Harpsichords, lute-harpsichords
etc....I
wouldn't say they have gentle, very subtle and sweet sound. I would
describe
them rather as sonorous with comparatively strong bass register.
I am not advocating here use of grand piano strings for lute, but I am
trying to say that describing tone quality can be very subjective.
We know that probably silk strings were used on lutes. Acording to the
author of the article on guqin silk strings: "Some early records
mention
strings vibrating for up to 10 seconds after being struck: gut strings
vibrate a second or two at most, but silk vibrations can continue for
10
seconds." So the argument that gut was highly valued for its short time
of
vibration seems to be fallacious. Morover, metal strings were used in
Italy
on theorbos with even longer vibrating time.
It can't be excluded that gut was most commonly used because it was
cheapest, less problematic than silk and easiest to obtain but not
necessarily for its tonal unsurpassable values.
4/Subtle sound qualities
This probably should be discussed together with tonal qualities,however
some
people refer to it as a special, unique characteristic of gut. Again
it's
very subjective, however I have an impression that succesful
performance
depends more on imagination and sensitivity of a musician not the
string
material used. There is nothing subtle in gut. We make it subtle by
playing
it in imaginative and subtle way.
5/ sensory sensations
Yes, this is probably the most valuable virtue of gut. Gut feels good,
gut
plays good under our fingers. It's not as slippery as nylon.
6/ecological
Good way to go for those who like everything natural. It is a nice
feeling
that the whole instrument is 100% natural.
To sum up I believe there are some important considerations in favor of
gut
use, however I wouldn't say that this is the only material suitable for
lute
strings. Unless we find with certaintenty how gut was made in past we
can't
pretend that the main reason for using it is to recreate an old,
traditional
way of playing. But even then, there is a place for new string
materials
which have some qualities that gut doesn't. Plastic sounds more
plastic,
that's obvious, but there are other adventages of using plastic.
I like history, nature and subtle things, but on the other hand we
can't
deny we are modern. So instead of concentrating on beeing 100% HIP I
prefer
to concentrate on music. I use gut but for different reasons.
Anyway,thank you for interesting thoughts. It was nice to talk to you
again
Anthony.
Best wishes
Jaroslaw
To get on or off this list see list information at
[14]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. http://tinyurl.com/ykm8wms
2. http://www.amazon.fr/gp/product/B00285HBXO/ref=dm_dp_trk17
3.
http://www.aquilacorde.com/en/researches/our-works/loading-of-gut.html?start=3
4. http://www.aquilacorde.com/en/researches/our-works/loading-of-gut/39.html
5. http://www.tabulatura.com/MESTWEB.HTM
6.
http://www.er.uqam.ca/nobel/r14310/Luth/Iconographie/darthmouth.edu.wbc/Reyn-Big.jpg
7. http://idata.over-blog.com/2/01/43/65/Louvre-10/Louvre-10-0550.JPG
8. http://www.societefrancaiseshakespeare.org/document.php?id=737
9. http://www.lutesandguitars.co.uk/images/07-2005/Mace3.jpg
10. http://www.tabulatura.com/mace.jpg
11. http://www.luteshop.co.uk/Gerle1546small.jpg
12. http://library.csun.edu/igra/bios/graphics/aguado-d.gif
13. http://www.luteshop.co.uk/stringshistory.htm
14. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
