As far as I know, relatively few pieces were written for an 8-c lute. (Sorry, I know there are some but forget who specified exactly 8-courses) Many pieces were written for a 7-c where the lowest note was either an F or a D starting with Adriaenssen and the Siena ms. in the 1580's and continuing through Dowland.
Keeping a 7th course tuned at _either_ D or F is nice. Tuning that course up or down between the two is problematic in that the string will either be slack or tight - or both if you choose a diameter to split the difference. That's why our modern 8-c is a nice compromise instrument for both kinds of 7-c pieces. The 10-c, of course, solves a lot of those problems but had not been made popular in the 16th century. When Dowland - and Molinaro, for example - used notes beyond the 6th course they often had stricter counterpoint in mind and probably preferred the closer control of the fingered course. Although Vallet, on the other hand, used the same compass of notes (except the low C), he didn't mind less control over the free-ringing basses. Styles were changing and probably overlapped for various reasons in the first few years of the 17th century. There were a lot of instruments in play during that period (1580's - 1610-ish) and a lot of styles (continental, personal, compositional, purpose) so it's hard to answer your question with any exactness. I would also imagine people played what they had and worked their bass strings to the material as best they could - not everyone could upgrade as each new fad and book appeared. Sean On Aug 20, 2014, at 8:42 PM, Herbert Ward wrote: What is the extent and nature of the historical liturature which is playable on an 8-course Renassiance lute, but not on a 7-course? In other words, is a 7-course instrument a workable subsitute for an 8-course? This assumes the 7-course lutenist is willing to retune his 7th course between pieces. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
