Historically double fret loops seem to have been the norm; there was an
exchange of emails on this topic some time ago - see the archives.
Other than Thomas Mace, who mentions single loops but when explaining
how to tie the fret knot describes the normal double loop, I'm not
aware of any other evidence for single loops. Single loops seem to
have been a sort of continuation of (modern) guitar practice of a
single (here fixed) fret which early modern lutenists (mostly
ex-guitarists) copied and seem reluctant to discard........
It has been speculated that double frets create buzzing but in fact the
gut closest to the finger takes most of the heavy wear and soon beds
down leaving the second gut to keep a clean take-off for considerably
longer than a single loop. In addition, being double the length of a
single loop, the double loop also has twice the elongation(stretch) for
he same tie force and allows it to be tied lower (ie closer to the nut)
as Mace advises and then pulled up to ensure a very secure position.
Try it!
MH
From: William Samson <willsam...@yahoo.co.uk>
To: "lute@cs.dartmouth.edu" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, 31 August 2011, 13:19
Subject: [LUTE] Re: long strings?
I wonder how many of today's lutenists are using double gut frets?
It
would seem that until the time of Thomas Mace (who I think was the
first to mention the use of single frets), and maybe for some time
after that double frets were the norm. Players who have used them
will
probably tell you that they do affect the quality of sound produced.
So - In our search for an authentic playing experience and sound,
shouldn't the use of double frets be high on our priority list? In
case you are unfamiliar with the double fret knot, it is described at
David van Edwards's website -
[1][1]http://www.vanedwards.co.uk/fretknot.htm
Bill
From: sterling price <[2]spiffys84...@yahoo.com>
To: Garry Warber <[3]garrywar...@hughes.net>;
"[4]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu"
<[5]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, 31 August 2011, 7:30
Subject: [LUTE] Re: long strings?
As any good luthier will tell you today, hide glue is still
superior
to
modern glue for several reasons.
--Sterling
Subject: [LUTE] Re: long strings?
Or, As I enjoy assuming, the "old ones" used the best they had, and
if
they'd had epoxy glue and nylon strings that's what they'd have
used... :-)
Things can get endlessly circular in these beliefs. I just like
how
well
the early music is written! The stuff plays itself without a lot
of
"interpretive gimmicks." I'm all for re-creating their sound as
close
as we
can, for others. For myself, a totally modern lute is just
ducky...
:-)
Garry
-----Original Message-----
From: Roman Turovsky
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 7:27 AM
To: Martyn Hodgson ; [1][2][6]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu ; andy butler
Subject: [LUTE] Re: long strings?
There is a great likelihood that "our" gut is rather acoustically
different
from "their".
Lets not forget to use the honest modifier "approximation of".
RT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martyn Hodgson" <[2][3][7]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk>
To: <[3][4][8]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>; "andy butler"
<[4][5][9]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk>
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 7:01 AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: long strings?
>
> The superiority of gut is chiefly that it was the material used
by
the
> Old Ones. If we have any pretensions to attempting to reproduce
the
> sounds these early lutenist composers expected and their
auditors
> heard, it is necessary to employ the same string materials.
>
> MH
> --- On Tue, 30/8/11, andy butler
<[5][6][10]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk>
wrote:
>
> From: andy butler <[6][7][11]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk>
> Subject: [LUTE] Re: long strings?
> To: [7][8][12]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
> Date: Tuesday, 30 August, 2011, 9:27
>
> David van Ooijen wrote:
> > The basses are shortish, so a higher tuning would be better,
> actually.
> > If the instrument is tuned to g', gut diapassons are possible
(if
> cost
> > is an issue use fret gut, it really is so much better than any
of
the
> > modern materials), otherwise carbon or metal-wounds seem to be
the
> > best option.
> Beginner's questions.
> Is the superiority of gut down to the shorter sustain time
> that someone mentioned earlier?
> Is string damping really unpopular? (unnecessary?)
> andy
> To get on or off this list see list information at
>
[1][8][9][13]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>
> --
>
> References
>
> 1.
[9][10][14]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>
>
--
References
1. mailto:[11][15]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
2. mailto:[12][16]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
3. mailto:[13][17]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
4. mailto:[14][18]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
5. mailto:[15][19]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
6. mailto:[16][20]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
7. mailto:[17][21]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
8. [18][22]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
9. [19][23]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. [24]http://www.vanedwards.co.uk/fretknot.htm
2. mailto:[25]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
3. mailto:[26]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
4. mailto:[27]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
5. mailto:[28]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
6. mailto:[29]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
7. mailto:[30]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
8. mailto:[31]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
9. [32]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
10. [33]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
11. mailto:[34]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
12. mailto:[35]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
13. mailto:[36]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
14. mailto:[37]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
15. mailto:[38]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
16. mailto:[39]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
17. mailto:[40]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
18. [41]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
19. [42]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. http://www.vanedwards.co.uk/fretknot.htm
2. mailto:spiffys84...@yahoo.com
3. mailto:garrywar...@hughes.net
4. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
5. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
6. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
7. mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
8. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
9. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
10. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
11. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
12. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
13. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
14. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
15. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
16. mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
17. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
18. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
19. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
20. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
21. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
22. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
23. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
24. http://www.vanedwards.co.uk/fretknot.htm
25. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
26. mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
27. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
28. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
29. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
30. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
31. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
32. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
33. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
34. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
35. mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
36. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
37. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
38. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
39. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
40. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
41. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
42. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
