This tuning used by Danyel is in the Traficante system fefhc / dcf - in frets from the highest to the lowest course 5 4 5 7 2 / 3 2 5.
An interesting point is always - the ambitus from the lowest to the highest course: here 33 semitones - the ambitus from the 6th to the 1st course: here 23 semitones - the ambitus from 6th to the lowest course: here 10 semitones Compared with the 10c lute VT (ffeff / cbcc): 31 / 24 / 7 11c lute NAO (dfedf / ccbcc): 29 / 20 / 9 13c lute NAO (dfedf / ccbccbc): 32 / 20 / 12 - only 1 semitone more than a 10-course lute!!! And the bass rider normally extends the string length around one fret... 14c Archlute (ffeff / cbccbccc): 38 / 24 / 14 So the ambitus from the 6th to the 1st course is only 1 semitone smaller - and the lowest course is only 1 semitone lower than a lowered 10th course to Bb (if I think in g). Let us assume to think the 1st string in g', the courses are in g’ d’ bb f Bb Ab / F Eb Bb (compared to the "normal" tuning of g’ d’ a f c G / F D C) If we let the 1st course in tune, the 2nd is ok, the 3rd has to be changed + 1 semitone the 4th is ok, the 5th has to be changed - 2 semitones the 6th has to be changed + 1 semitone the 7th is ok, the 8th has to be changed - 1 semitone the 9th has to be changed - 2 semitones So we see - as normally if you take the tunings of the same 10-15 years - that the change is not really very big: only 2 semitones down or 1 semitone up! I think that the gaps of the string diameters were not as fine as today (we have gaps from 0.02, 0.03 or 0.04 mm today!!!). So this very, very fine feeling for a little bit different tension could be a modern phenomen. I think these different tunings like Danyel's or the different accords nouveaux used in one decade seem to be very well possible with the old strings - and if we play today with good gut, also in the basses. And I think it's the pragmatic way: The 1st course is more or less "as high as possible" (at least at the beginning of the 17th century) - so the lower courses have to be tuned to other than the "normal" tone. And: The tuning pitch at least for solo lute music is IMO a modern phenomen. So the Traficante-system who is a relative one is the more convincing system for me than absolute note names. Andreas Am 25.10.2011 um 18:28 schrieb Daniel Winheld: > I vote for the "sensible compromise"- g stays "g" (easy!) and a low Bb. B > flat was used by other lute composers- see some of Nicolas Vallet's pieces- > he has the 10th course CC scoradature'd down to low Bb in at least three > pieces in his "Secret des Muses". He also wrote for 9 course lute, so a low C > on the 9th could obviously go down. Pushing the envelope has always been the > norm; and when one end of the envelope is already at the tearing point it's > the other end that has to give. Is this the John Danyel piece "Mrs Anne > Grene her leaves bee greene" based on the song "The Leaves be Greene?" > > There is an English Lute Society edition of Danyel's complete lute works, and > that one is printed as per the original and re-intabulated (if that is the > right term) by Martin Shepherd into standard tuning. Works very well that > way- but I haven't had the courage to re-tune my archlute (no 9 or 10 course > lutes in the house) to try the original. The editor's opinion is that the > actual pitches go 1/2 step lower than the "sensible compromise" i.e., f# 1st > and AA 9th. > > Dan > > On Oct 25, 2011, at 4:21 AM, Mathias Rösel wrote: > >> Dear Everybody, >> >> not sure if this has been discussed before, as the archives are unavailable >> currently. In John Danyels 1606 publication, there is a piece on the last >> pages (22-3) with a special lute tuning. It is a solo piece (variations on >> Greensleeves), and Danyel gives a chart with the intervals, but no pitches. >> >> Translated into pitch, the tuning would possibly be: >> >> 1. B4 - F#4 - D4 - A3 - D3 - C3 | A2 - G2 - D2 >> Or >> 2. E4 - B3 - G3 - D3 - G2 - F2 | D2 - C2 - G1 >> Or >> 3. D4 - A3 - F3 - C3 - F2 - Eb2 | C2 - Bb1 - F1 >> >> The first line is based on the lowest bass string on lutes at the time (C2). >> In that case, the 1st course would be higher (and thinner) than gut strings >> can be made for a G-lute with VSL of about 58-63 cm. >> >> The 2nd and 3rd lines are based on the lowest bass strings for the >> chitarrone or the archlute. In that case, the 1st course has the pitch of a >> tenor lute. Played with the 1st course as B4, the variations on Greensleeves >> would be in C-major, and played with the 1st course as E4, the variations >> would be in F-major. >> >> Of course, one might argue that somewhere in the middle is a sensible >> compromise, i. e. 1st course G4 with the 9th course Bb1. That way, however, >> Danyel's Greensleeves would be in A-flat-major. A bit awkward for 1606 IMO. >> >> My questions are: >> >> 1. Is there evidence of very small 9c lutes (about 50 cm VSL) in Britain >> around 1600? (First line of tuning) >> >> 2. Is there evidence of theorboed 9c lutes (not to speak of Britain around >> 1600)? (2nd and 3rd lines of tuning) >> >> Mathias >> >> >> >> >> To get on or off this list see list information at >> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > >
