Thanks kindly, everyone! It's what I suspected, but the comparative rarity of an "ordinary" lute in reentrant tuning sent my looking for some verification. Cheers, tom > Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 20:17:25 +0200 > To: mar...@luteshop.co.uk; lute@cs.dartmouth.edu > From: jmpoiri...@wanadoo.fr > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Besard's Novus Partus > > " Nous appelons celui-ci "Nouveau Luth" non parce qu'il aurait une forme (construction) nouvelle, mais seulement `a cause du nouvel accord, qui n'est pas ingrat selon l'opinion de maintes (personnes). C'est nous qui l'avons invente un jour. S'il differe peu en accord du theorbe (comme on l'appelle), pourtant bien avant de connaitre cet instrument j'accordais souvent le luth de cette maniere, mieux apte pour la musique de n'importe quelle voix. Et ce seulement parce que (par rapport `a l'accord ordinaire) la basse frappe l'oreille de fac,on plus claire, sonore et nette. Pourtant pour cet accord il est absolument necessaire de composer de morceaux speciaux." > > Voici la traduction du passage de Besard proposee par Dimitri Goldobine... > > Re-best, ;-) > > Jean-Marie > -------------- > > >I think Besard explains the Nova Testudo in his preface - can someone > >help with the text? As I remember it is top two courses down an octave, > >like the theorbo. > > > >M > >On 21/05/2014 18:10, Thomas Walker wrote: > >> Hello all-- > >> Do any of you have a view(s) on what instrument Besard wanted for his > >> Nova Testudo? The other lutes seem pretty clearly to be 9 or 10 course > >> instruments a 4th apart. The top lute, to me, looks like he's assuming > >> reentrant tuning. I'm tempted to think of Castaldi's tiorbino, but > >> that seems less likely outside of Italy that early in the 17th c. > >> Thoughts? > >> Thanks kindly, > >> Thomas Walker, Jr. > >> > >> -- > >> > >> > >> To get on or off this list see list information at > >> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > > > >
--
