@ Alexander, Of course it is just as possible to alter dynamics and tone colour using thumb under. The end result will allways be different though. I suppose the luters of old started playing in bigger rooms towards the end of the 16th c. They would have found that the general playing position of TO could produce a little more volume, whereas TU would be more practical for smaller rooms. The dryer tone of TO would perhaps be considered too harsh for close listening. Which brings me to the following: Perhaps players using TU should be miked closer than the Thumbouters. ;-)
Lex Op 18 mrt 2010, om 04:13 heeft Alexander Batov het volgende geschreven: > Absolutely! And let's not forget that perhaps most (if not, indeed, all) > 'professional' lutenists from c. 1600 on also played chitarrone / theorbo and > guitar where thumb-out is simply far more superior for the sheer flexibility > of it, for a wider variety of sound dynamics and of tone colour that it > allows to produce by shifting the hand towards and away from the bridge. How > could all this be taken away from at least 150 years of lute and guitar > playing (i.e. c. 1600 - 1750) is difficult to imagine, if only thumb-in had > remained ... > > Alexander > > Robison, John wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> Just a few comments to add: >> In addition to Dowland, Gregory Howet also played thumb-out; my >> ancient article on Sebastian Ochsenkuhn (American Lute Society Journal, >> 1982) points out that Ochsenkuhn (1558) is seen playing thumb out >> (perhaps because his lute looks pretty large), and Bakfark is also >> shown playing thumb out. I have played both ways (with no guitar >> background), and I think that thumb out is just as good (sometimes >> better) for the repertory c. 1600 . . . >> John O. Robison > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
