Dear Andreas, You might be interested to read Mersenne in his Harmonie Universelle of 1636 (I don't know whether there is an English translation available) where he speaks of the choice of diameter of strings for the lute firstly in relation to the length of the instrument and then proportionately going up from the bass calculated according to the intervals. He seems to stop at the second-course. He also refers the reader to the table he has drawn up for ''l'Épinette'' which he says shows the correct ratio the strings of every instrument should abide by (Traité des Instrumens à chordes, pp. 50-51 and pp.120-122).
Best, Matthew > On Aug 31, 2017, at 6:05, Andreas Schlegel <lute.cor...@sunrise.ch> wrote: > > Dear Matthew, > > Thanks for your quotation. There are two separate points: > > 1. The historic recommendation to tune the top-course as high as it will go > without breaking, and > 2. equal tension / proportionality of strings (Mace) > > To 1: > This recommendation is typical for the 16th century. But not for the 17th and > 18th century. We can observe that continuo instruments are constucted as long > as possible: see the arciliuto Romano with 73 cm for the g' (and in the Roman > pitch) or the tiorba with at least 87 cm. The solo instruments can be shorter > (and in consequence the chanterelle is not so close to the breaking point) > and so it's possible to use f.ex. the d-major tuning and to tune the > chanterelle and the 4th course one semi tone higher without changing a string > or tune all other strings one semi tone lower. > > To 2: > We know "special tunings" from the 16th century up to the Mandora literature > of the end of the 18th century (and even for baroque guitar). In the 16th > century we know for instance the tuning for the "Judentanz" with the splitted > 4th course: > Quint sayten: 1. course, normal, f.inst. a1 = a1 > Gesang sayten: 2. course, normally e1 = e1 > Mittel sayten: 3. course, normally b = b > klein Brumer: 4. course, normally g = e/g#' -3/+1 ST > Mitl Brumer: 5. course, normally d = e +2 ST > Groß Brumer: 6. course, normally A = not used > see: > http://www.accordsnouveaux.ch/de/Autoren/Schlegel/Judentanz/Judentanz.html > The translation will come... > > Or Heckel's "Leyrer zug" with ffdef > Quint seyten: 1. course, normal, f.inst. a1 = a1 > Gesang seyten: 2. course, normally e1 = e1 > Mittel seyten: 3. course, normally b = b > klein Bumhart: 4. course, normally g = g# +1 ST > Mittel Bumhart: 5. course, normally d = e +2 ST > Groß Bumhart: 6. course, normally A = H +2 ST > > As already said: +/- 2 ST is "normal" - and we can't read from "change your > string", but "ziech Erstlich den Mitlern Brumer…" etc. So the normal string > will be tuned to a different tone. > > In the period from 1624 until at least 1650 (in some regions also later) it > was a normal thing to use different tunings. Not only on the lute: The Lyra > viol and the Mandore and even later the baroque guitar are tuned in very > different ways. > See: > http://www.accordsnouveaux.ch/de/DownloadD/files/Stimmungsdatenbank_kurz.pdf > or - more detailled: > http://www.accordsnouveaux.ch/de/DownloadD/files/Stimmungsdatenbank_ganz.pdf > And I don't know any advice to change strings. > > The statement of Mace was written in 1676, when the nouvel accord ordinaire > (NAO) became the "normal" tuning and the other tunings were no longer in use. > Mace was a "fan" of the dedff tuning (Flat-French-Tuning) and defended it > against the NAO. > If you choose one single tuning, it's very simple to oberve the basic idea of > equal tension / proportionality of strings. I can read Mace's statement as a > quintessence of the time, when the change of tunings led to different > tensions: Take one tuning - and you can observe the equal tension. > > But the fact remains: There was a time in which the use of different tunings > was normal. And I don't know any advice from that period to change strings > for the different tunings. So I had to ask me: How is it possible to play > with different tunings without changing strings? > And I detected that the historically correct playing technique with thumb out > and the little finger really at the bridge is a very big help - at least for > me - to handle the different tensions. > Mace is of course right: It's much more comfortable to play on a lute with > equal tension (or is it feeling?). But there was a time in which different > tunings and their possibilities were more important than equal tension. > > All the best, > > Andreas To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
