[LUTE] Re: standing position for playing
Dear Dan, Can you give us a page reference? I don't remember this bit. But it really strikes a chord with me - if I play the (6c) lute standing, and improvising, I find myself wandering round the room! I wonder why? Mark Wheeler does some nifty sprinting from one side of the stage to the other, but I guess he's just trying to present a moving target (sorry Mark, couldn't resist...). Best to All, Martin Daniel Winheld wrote: --_-1014788422==_ma===Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii ; format=flowed Thomas Mace, Musicke's Monument. He extolls the wonderful advantages of playing not just while standing, but walking around. Says it frees the mind for improvising. And why limit lute playing to just standing, walking, or even running? I hope Roman doesn't mind my posting this from his website: To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: French baroque lute music
Thank you, Mathias, for these precious informations. I could find the CD of Amazon.de and ordered it right away. Any further indication where I could find the German study you mention? Nancy, how could that past article in the LSA Journal be made available to us (or at least, I could I get an electronic copy)? Kindest regards, Luca Mathias Rösel on 10-12-2007 12:07 wrote: damian dlugolecki [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: Can anyone point me to studies of 'rhetorique', Andreas Schlegel wrote an enlightening study on the Rhetorique, called Was ich von der Rhetorique lernte (what I learned from the Rhetorique), if memory serves. It's in German, but perhaps translation have been made availble by now. use of modes, Regarding French baroque music, this seems to be superfluous. Modes were not used any more once major / minor keys turned up. or any other formal studies of the music of the Gaultiers, Gallot, Mouton et alia? et alii, that is, I suppose. One study that at once springs to mind is George Torres on the impact of French poetics on 17th century pieces de luth (Journal of the Lute Society of America XXX/1997, p. 25-41). Another is the booklet of Catherine Liddel's CD La Belle voilée, which brilliantly explains how French baroque lute pieces work. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings
Every classical guitarist I know carries a small swatch of sandpaper in his of her guitar case for smoothing fingertips. I'm surprised that this is at all contoversial. #600 wet and dry is a very fine grain sandpaper. How often do you play modern guitar, Rob? It seems to me that if you play 2 to 4 hours a day on nylon strings without nails calluses are inevitable. But maybe I'm an anatomical oddity in more ways than one. It's true that I have to be careful to smooth out my fingertips to play lute. An unfortunate fact of life if one continues to play guitar as well as lute, at least for me. Gary - Original Message - From: Rob [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'gary digman' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'lutelist' lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Monday, December 10, 2007 1:45 AM Subject: RE: [LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings Calluses? Sandpaper? Mimic nails? Is that a common experience? I must say, Gary, that I've been playing without nails for almost 20 years, and my finger tips are very soft and smooth. Sandpaper?! Must be my blue blood - never done a day's work in my life. HRH Rob www.rmguitar.info -Original Message- From: gary digman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 December 2007 09:29 To: lutelist Subject: [LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings I play guitar (modern and baroque) without nails. It's true that some techniques such as tremolo become much more diffcult without nails, but my tremolo was never my strong suit anyway. I just got tired of constantly messing with nails, trying to get them shaped right, etc. Since I started playing lute, I kissed the nails goodbye. So far I've not regretted it. The fingers develop calluses, which have to be sandpapered (#600 wet and dry) smooth, but mimic the attack of nails on the guitar. Gary - Original Message - From: Alexander Batov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lute list lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2007 7:43 AM Subject: [LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings On Sunday, December 09, 2007 3:06 PM LGS-Europe[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: .. Nails/no nails have a similar effect on compositions; guitar players may notice differences between Giuliani and Sor resulting from their use/no use of nails. (Hmm, authentic Lobos on gut. ;-) ) It'll take one good player to disproof this. In a similar vein, most of the 5-course guitar music, for example, was very much likely played with nails anyway ... but how many modern performers play it like this (I mean on the 'baroque' guitar)? - Perhaps a few. At the same time there are some good ones who play with or without nails. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.17/1179 - Release Date: 12/9/2007 11:06 AM -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.17/1179 - Release Date: 12/9/2007 11:06 AM
[LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings
I've been playing without nails for at least 30 years, and I play only metal-strung instruments. I have light calluses on my right hand, nothing like those on the left, but it never occurred to me to sand the right-hand fingers. Maybe I'll try it when I haven't got any concerts coming up. What do you see as the advantages, Gary? GDR On Dec 11, 2007, at 11:09 AM, gary digman wrote: Every classical guitarist I know carries a small swatch of sandpaper in his of her guitar case for smoothing fingertips. I'm surprised that this is at all contoversial. #600 wet and dry is a very fine grain sandpaper. How often do you play modern guitar, Rob? It seems to me that if you play 2 to 4 hours a day on nylon strings without nails calluses are inevitable. But maybe I'm an anatomical oddity in more ways than one. It's true that I have to be careful to smooth out my fingertips to play lute. An unfortunate fact of life if one continues to play guitar as well as lute, at least for me. Gary - Original Message - From: Rob [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'gary digman' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'lutelist' lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Monday, December 10, 2007 1:45 AM Subject: RE: [LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings Calluses? Sandpaper? Mimic nails? Is that a common experience? I must say, Gary, that I've been playing without nails for almost 20 years, and my finger tips are very soft and smooth. Sandpaper?! Must be my blue blood - never done a day's work in my life. HRH Rob www.rmguitar.info -Original Message- From: gary digman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 December 2007 09:29 To: lutelist Subject: [LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings I play guitar (modern and baroque) without nails. It's true that some techniques such as tremolo become much more diffcult without nails, but my tremolo was never my strong suit anyway. I just got tired of constantly messing with nails, trying to get them shaped right, etc. Since I started playing lute, I kissed the nails goodbye. So far I've not regretted it. The fingers develop calluses, which have to be sandpapered (#600 wet and dry) smooth, but mimic the attack of nails on the guitar. Gary - Original Message - From: Alexander Batov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lute list lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2007 7:43 AM Subject: [LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings On Sunday, December 09, 2007 3:06 PM LGS- Europe[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: .. Nails/no nails have a similar effect on compositions; guitar players may notice differences between Giuliani and Sor resulting from their use/no use of nails. (Hmm, authentic Lobos on gut. ;-) ) It'll take one good player to disproof this. In a similar vein, most of the 5-course guitar music, for example, was very much likely played with nails anyway ... but how many modern performers play it like this (I mean on the 'baroque' guitar)? - Perhaps a few. At the same time there are some good ones who play with or without nails. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.17/1179 - Release Date: 12/9/2007 11:06 AM -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.17/1179 - Release Date: 12/9/2007 11:06 AM
[LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings
Calluses have a tendency to get rough. Sanding them smooths them out resulting in a cleaner sound. Roughness can excite unintended harmonics causing a less focused sound from the string, like pulling a fine tooth comb across the string. Gary - Original Message - From: Gregory Doc Rossi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lutelist lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 2:46 AM Subject: [LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings I've been playing without nails for at least 30 years, and I play only metal-strung instruments. I have light calluses on my right hand, nothing like those on the left, but it never occurred to me to sand the right-hand fingers. Maybe I'll try it when I haven't got any concerts coming up. What do you see as the advantages, Gary? GDR On Dec 11, 2007, at 11:09 AM, gary digman wrote: Every classical guitarist I know carries a small swatch of sandpaper in his of her guitar case for smoothing fingertips. I'm surprised that this is at all contoversial. #600 wet and dry is a very fine grain sandpaper. How often do you play modern guitar, Rob? It seems to me that if you play 2 to 4 hours a day on nylon strings without nails calluses are inevitable. But maybe I'm an anatomical oddity in more ways than one. It's true that I have to be careful to smooth out my fingertips to play lute. An unfortunate fact of life if one continues to play guitar as well as lute, at least for me. Gary - Original Message - From: Rob [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'gary digman' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'lutelist' lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Monday, December 10, 2007 1:45 AM Subject: RE: [LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings Calluses? Sandpaper? Mimic nails? Is that a common experience? I must say, Gary, that I've been playing without nails for almost 20 years, and my finger tips are very soft and smooth. Sandpaper?! Must be my blue blood - never done a day's work in my life. HRH Rob www.rmguitar.info -Original Message- From: gary digman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 December 2007 09:29 To: lutelist Subject: [LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings I play guitar (modern and baroque) without nails. It's true that some techniques such as tremolo become much more diffcult without nails, but my tremolo was never my strong suit anyway. I just got tired of constantly messing with nails, trying to get them shaped right, etc. Since I started playing lute, I kissed the nails goodbye. So far I've not regretted it. The fingers develop calluses, which have to be sandpapered (#600 wet and dry) smooth, but mimic the attack of nails on the guitar. Gary - Original Message - From: Alexander Batov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lute list lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2007 7:43 AM Subject: [LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings On Sunday, December 09, 2007 3:06 PM LGS- Europe[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: .. Nails/no nails have a similar effect on compositions; guitar players may notice differences between Giuliani and Sor resulting from their use/no use of nails. (Hmm, authentic Lobos on gut. ;-) ) It'll take one good player to disproof this. In a similar vein, most of the 5-course guitar music, for example, was very much likely played with nails anyway ... but how many modern performers play it like this (I mean on the 'baroque' guitar)? - Perhaps a few. At the same time there are some good ones who play with or without nails. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.17/1179 - Release Date: 12/9/2007 11:06 AM -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.17/1179 - Release Date: 12/9/2007 11:06 AM -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.17/1179 - Release Date: 12/9/2007 11:06 AM
[LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings
- Original Message - From: LGS-Europe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2007 4:19 PM Subject: [LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings Perhaps OT on the lute-list either way, but I mentioned Sor and Giuliani, not baroque guitar music. Neither did I write one cannot play one kind of music with or without nails, just that you may notice the differences. Well it's simply because of your pre-conditioned approach to their music. You know (or you believe you know) that Sor wasn't using nails (i.e. because he or somebody else wrote about this or whatever). Did Piccinini, Castaldi, Robert de Visee, Weiss etc etc use nails or no nails? Can you spot that through their music? I very much doubt you can. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Count Bergen
Yet another question for the Collective Wisdom: I've been trying to find out something about Comte Bergen who has a few pieces listed in Vienna MS 1078. Does anyone know anything about who he was? I wonder if there might be some information about him in Per Ketil Farstad's thesis. One of the first pieces I played when I picked up the classical guitar was a bouree in C-major by count Bergen. This was one of the pieces that pointed me to the lute and it is still favourite of mine. I have never played it or heard it played on the lu, though... Are To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings
Weiss does mention that playing with nails is acceptable on the theorbo but not on the lute (I don't have the exact quote to hand) MH LGS-Europe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps OT on the lute-list either way, but I mentioned Sor and Giuliani, not baroque guitar music. Neither did I write one cannot play one kind of music with or without nails, just that you may notice the differences. Well it's simply because of your pre-conditioned approach to their music. You know (or you believe you know) that Sor wasn't using nails (i.e. because he or somebody else wrote about this or whatever). Did Piccinini, Castaldi, Robert de Visee, Weiss etc etc use nails or no nails? Can you spot that through their music? I very much doubt you can. I'm sure I cannot. I mentioned Sor and Giuliani, not theorbo music. David To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Sent from Yahoo! #45; a smarter inbox. --
[LUTE] Re: transposing archlute
Dear Howard Posner,
Thank you for your considerate reply. On reflection, when I've a bit of time
I will, in fact, tunnel into my archives and dig out some the sources I had in
mind (especially those suggesting Roman pitch at around 400 rather than 380).
To an extent some are identified in my early FoMRHI paper ('The sizes and
pitches of Italian archlutes' FoMRHI Quarterly 32 July 1983) which first
speculated on transposing archlutes, archlute pitches and the like.
It seems to me that much of the problem about pitches , especially in the
17thC and especially in Italy, is the heavy, if understandable, reliance on
church organ pitches and, to some extent, statements by such as those by Doni
(eg relating pitch between Naples, Rome. Lombardy/Florence and Venice in
discrete semitone steps). Domestic music making, especially with lutes, might
well have not reflected such a significant and discrete variation. Indeed, from
the relatively small sample of extant Italian archlutes (including the liuto
attiorbato), the sizes of archlutes did not seem to vary so very much across
Italy suggesting rather more uniformity in domestic/chamber pitch than for
large church organs.
Martyn Hodgson
howard posner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 10, 2007, at 12:56 AM, Martyn Hodgson wrote:
As said: I don't really see why I should go to the considerable
trouble of listing the many scholarly papers and books which have
dealt with this question in depth (Haynes is but one) since Ellis's
pioneering work was published in 1880. Especially so when the
point being made was simply that there was not just one 17th/18th C
Roman pitch, rather than trying to identify what these pitches
actially were. Perhaps you disagree? - in which case, since it is
far easier to disprove a proposition than to test it by numerous
examples, I await your reply proving that there was only ever one
pitch used in Rome during this period (say, 1600 - 1750)..
No thanks. You made a statement that seemed to challenge
conventional wisdom about Roman pitch. I just wondered whether the
statement might have been occasioned by specific information.
Evidently it wasn't. I won't waste any more of your time.
On Dec 10, 2007, at 7:17 AM, Martyn Hodgson wrote:
Indeed and this is the very point I wished to put across to those
who appear to think there was some such thing as an established
'roman' pitch.
MH
LGS-Europe wrote:
And I forgot the best quote from the Grove article:
The concept of a precise and universal relation between notation
and pitch
was alien to most Western musicians, and there was no specific term
for
pitch itself before 1800.
One does not follow from the other. Every organ, cornetto and
recorder built in Rome in the 1650's might have been constructed to
play at A=387.6547498904 regardless of whether the builder had a word
for pitch.
--
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
-
Support the World Aids Awareness campaign this month with Yahoo! for Good
--
[LUTE] Re: standing position for playing
Sorry Martin, I can only recall that I did read it in a friend's copy many years ago. Although I don't have an eidetic memory (I have the other kind) it did strike me very strongly. I hope someone else on the list can jump in, verify my recollection and pin down the quote. The most spectacular non-seated performance by a real musician on a plucked, fretted instrument was a performance I once witnessed at the old Yoshi's restaurant Jazz club in Oakland, CA. An elderly blues virtuoso (forget his name- idiotic memory working as normal) had a wireless solid body electric. After some normal hopping around, he exited the front door of the club, walked around the parking lot, came in through the back door from the kitchen, still playing in synch with the rest of the band, and proceeded to do front and back rolls- somersaults- guitar in hands and playing all the while. Breathtakingly agile, coordinated, and musical too; reminded me of martial arts training (much younger) where we did front rolls holding wooden staffs and feeling good if we could roll and come up staff in hand without dropping it or impaling ourselves. Didn't some of the French players run a string from a peg at the base of the lute to the peg near the neck/body joint where one might also anchor the 10th fret, if tied, to hook onto a coat button for standing play? Dear Dan, Can you give us a page reference? I don't remember this bit. But it really strikes a chord with me - if I play the (6c) lute standing, and improvising, I find myself wandering round the room! I wonder why? Mark Wheeler does some nifty sprinting from one side of the stage to the other, but I guess he's just trying to present a moving target (sorry Mark, couldn't resist...). Thomas Mace, Musicke's Monument. He extolls the wonderful advantages of playing not just while standing, but walking around. Says it frees the mind for improvising. And why limit lute playing to just standing, walking, or even running? I hope Roman doesn't mind my posting this from his website: -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: standing position for playing
Buddy Guy does that often, and even before wireless he did it with very long cables. RT - Original Message - From: Daniel Winheld [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 11:29 AM Subject: [LUTE] Re: standing position for playing Sorry Martin, I can only recall that I did read it in a friend's copy many years ago. Although I don't have an eidetic memory (I have the other kind) it did strike me very strongly. I hope someone else on the list can jump in, verify my recollection and pin down the quote. The most spectacular non-seated performance by a real musician on a plucked, fretted instrument was a performance I once witnessed at the old Yoshi's restaurant Jazz club in Oakland, CA. An elderly blues virtuoso (forget his name- idiotic memory working as normal) had a wireless solid body electric. After some normal hopping around, he exited the front door of the club, walked around the parking lot, came in through the back door from the kitchen, still playing in synch with the rest of the band, and proceeded to do front and back rolls- somersaults- guitar in hands and playing all the while. Breathtakingly agile, coordinated, and musical too; reminded me of martial arts training (much younger) where we did front rolls holding wooden staffs and feeling good if we could roll and come up staff in hand without dropping it or impaling ourselves. Didn't some of the French players run a string from a peg at the base of the lute to the peg near the neck/body joint where one might also anchor the 10th fret, if tied, to hook onto a coat button for standing play? Dear Dan, Can you give us a page reference? I don't remember this bit. But it really strikes a chord with me - if I play the (6c) lute standing, and improvising, I find myself wandering round the room! I wonder why? Mark Wheeler does some nifty sprinting from one side of the stage to the other, but I guess he's just trying to present a moving target (sorry Mark, couldn't resist...). Thomas Mace, Musicke's Monument. He extolls the wonderful advantages of playing not just while standing, but walking around. Says it frees the mind for improvising. And why limit lute playing to just standing, walking, or even running? I hope Roman doesn't mind my posting this from his website: -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: baroque lute pitch
Rob Felicitations on the latest arrival in your lutherie. I hope it is proving just as you hoped, or even better. I can't answer your question, but I will pick up one point from your message later, and raise a question myself about that. I just wanted to react to the initial part of your message. I will be waiting little longer, not before the end of Febuary, beginning of March, but such lutes are worth waiting for. Regards Anthony Le 10 déc. 07 à 10:10, Rob a écrit : And I look forward to picking that lute up tomorrow! I am far from being an expert in the area of string tensions, lengths, pitches and breaking points, but I find myself reflecting on how dm tuning came about by LOWERING the tension of the first course from viel ton, as French players started the search for a more resonant instrument. Some of the lower courses were raised in tension. As we know, there were over thirty (I read it somewhere many years ago) different tunings during the first half of the 17th century, most of which involved the first course or two being lowered. Do comments about raising the first course to just below breaking point actually come from France at this period? Rob www.rmguitar.info -Original Message- From: Martin Shepherd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 December 2007 08:57 To: Lute Net Subject: [LUTE] Re: baroque lute pitch Dear All, I assume, at least as a starting point, that baroque lutes had a a first course tuned reasonably close to breaking point just like renaissance lutes (Mimmo has an argument that the limiting factor on a baroque lute is actually the 5th course because it is too thin to be anything other than plain gut, so it's important to keep it as thin as possible). If you take g' at a'=440 as a reasonable pitch for a 60cm string length - and I find a good gut string is fine at that pitch - then the equivalent for f' is about 67cm and for e' about 71cm. So I have no problem tuning a baroque lute to f' at a'=415, as long as the string length is less than about 71cm. In fact the lute I have just finished for Rob MacKillop is only 69cm, so a bit more into the comfort zone. Best wishes, Martin David Rastall wrote: On Dec 8, 2007, at 9:37 AM, Edward Martin wrote: I have an 11 course 67.5 cm mensur, tuned at 415. I also have a 70.5 cm mensur lute, tuned at around 405-410 (I would like to tune at 415, but it is too long to accommodate a treble). Hi Ed, I'm surprised to hear you say that 70.5 cm is too long for 415. My 13-course is 75.5 cm and it's quite comfortable at 415. It's not strung in gut, though. In fact, I've never had gut strings on this lute. I've been thinking lately about changing over to gut on this lute. Would gut trebles really be that uncomfortable at 75.5? David Rastall [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: standing position for playing
Charles, Yes, I play while standing very often. The size of a lute doesn't matter (maybe except a big theorbo). This is quite a comfortable position except you tend to move much more which is not often seen as appropriate by the audience. Besides I am not sure what is the influence of this position on the projection - you stand above sitting people and the lute is lightly tilted towards the ceiling (you don't have the piece of strap that you normally seat on) so that the sound goes above their heads. Probably Roman could say something more about this problem. Regards Jarosław -Original Message- From: Charles Browne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 12:59 AM To: Lutelist Subject: [LUTE] standing position for playing Dear All, I was fascinated to watch Andrew Maginley at the recent Lute Society meeting as he played the baroque lute while standing. I have been trying this over the last two weeks with an archlute and a swanneck baroque lute and it is quite an interesting experience. I have found it much easier than I thought although the low ceiling in our cottage now has pockmarks all over! The archlute is easier to hold than the baroque lute due, in part, to the relative shallowness of the archlute bowl. The lute strap has a short 'tail' on which I usually sit and I tuck this end through a belt-loop on my trousers. The physical balance is easier to maintain and I do not feel so stiff after playing, presumably because I am standing upright and can move a little. Could these callisthenics be regarded as 'Playing a short exercise? No, perhaps not! I wondered whether there are others who have converted from the sitting position and who observations about their own experiences? best wishes Charles To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: standing position for playing
My strap is looped around 2 of the trebleside pegs, and that prevents uptilting. Anyway, I was equally inaudible to the back rows sitting or standing. RT - Original Message - From: Jarosław Lipski [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Lute' lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 12:01 PM Subject: [LUTE] Re: standing position for playing Charles, Yes, I play while standing very often. The size of a lute doesn't matter (maybe except a big theorbo). This is quite a comfortable position except you tend to move much more which is not often seen as appropriate by the audience. Besides I am not sure what is the influence of this position on the projection - you stand above sitting people and the lute is lightly tilted towards the ceiling (you don't have the piece of strap that you normally seat on) so that the sound goes above their heads. Probably Roman could say something more about this problem. Regards Jarosław -Original Message- From: Charles Browne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 12:59 AM To: Lutelist Subject: [LUTE] standing position for playing Dear All, I was fascinated to watch Andrew Maginley at the recent Lute Society meeting as he played the baroque lute while standing. I have been trying this over the last two weeks with an archlute and a swanneck baroque lute and it is quite an interesting experience. I have found it much easier than I thought although the low ceiling in our cottage now has pockmarks all over! The archlute is easier to hold than the baroque lute due, in part, to the relative shallowness of the archlute bowl. The lute strap has a short 'tail' on which I usually sit and I tuck this end through a belt-loop on my trousers. The physical balance is easier to maintain and I do not feel so stiff after playing, presumably because I am standing upright and can move a little. Could these callisthenics be regarded as 'Playing a short exercise? No, perhaps not! I wondered whether there are others who have converted from the sitting position and who observations about their own experiences? best wishes Charles To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: standing position for playing
--- Jaros³aw Lipski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Besides I am not sure what is the influence of this position on the projection - you stand above sitting people and the lute is lightly tilted towards the ceiling (you don't have the piece of strap that you normally seat on) so that the sound goes above their heads. I actually think it helps with projection. When using a music stand, you can put it much lower so that the sound goes over it. When you sit, you may also have the music pretty low, but standing up gives you an additional benefit; the stand can be even lower and you can physically bend down if you have trouble reading a section. As for moving around - I've never gotten a complaint from anyone saying that it was inappropriate but, as I mentioned in a previous post, many folks have told me how much they enjoy watching my dancing even though I don't do it consciously. Chris Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: la bella strings
I used La Bella for for the last two years, after many years of experience with Pyramid. I heard no noticeable difference, but did not expect much from nylon. I use copper wound so can't comment on the silver. I followed the recommendations on the LaBella website for my lute length, as well as had a chat with them over the phone to confirm. Basically no problems. I've since moved on to PVF (polyvinyl flouride) from Boston Catlines ([EMAIL PROTECTED] ) for the top four courses, which have a somewhat brighter sound. I still use nylon for the bottom 3 octaves (on an 8-course) steve On Dec 11, 2007, at 8:11 AM, Nigel Solomon wrote: Does anybody have any experience of La Bella strings for lute (particularly nylon and silver wound)? 1.How do they compare with, say, Pyramid, Kurschner? 2. How do you calculate the tension (particulalry wound strings)? The prices beat any European strings. Nigel To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: standing position for playing
You may be called upon to stand and play guitar, mandora or theorbo, archlute in any of various opera productions, so it is good to know how to do this and play from memory. Also, if sing, you pretty much have to stand. An ultra light neck is very handy for this especially on theorbos, archlutes, and it of course makes a big difference when sitting down as well. All my big instruments have ultra light necks. dt To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: standing position for playing
On 12/11/2007, David Tayler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All my big instruments have ultra light necks. Lucky you! :-) Arto PS I just bought a Dunlop guitar strap to my archlute... To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings
Sorry, Gary, I didn't think I was being critical, and I hope you don't think I was. Certainly classical guitarists use paper everyday to smooth their nails, but I never thought they did it to their skin as well. But it's not how you get your sound that matters, ultimately, but what sound you get and how expressive you are with it. Again, no criticism. I was just surprised to hear that players sandpaper the skin of their fingertips. Using the touch pad of my laptop everyday probably has the same effect! BTW, on a weekly basis I probably play gut, nylon and steel strings. Still no calluses. I must pluck very lightly... Rob www.rmguitar.info -Original Message- From: gary digman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 11 December 2007 10:09 To: lutelist Subject: [LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings Every classical guitarist I know carries a small swatch of sandpaper in his of her guitar case for smoothing fingertips. I'm surprised that this is at all contoversial. #600 wet and dry is a very fine grain sandpaper. How often do you play modern guitar, Rob? It seems to me that if you play 2 to 4 hours a day on nylon strings without nails calluses are inevitable. But maybe I'm an anatomical oddity in more ways than one. It's true that I have to be careful to smooth out my fingertips to play lute. An unfortunate fact of life if one continues to play guitar as well as lute, at least for me. Gary - Original Message - From: Rob [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'gary digman' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'lutelist' lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Monday, December 10, 2007 1:45 AM Subject: RE: [LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings Calluses? Sandpaper? Mimic nails? Is that a common experience? I must say, Gary, that I've been playing without nails for almost 20 years, and my finger tips are very soft and smooth. Sandpaper?! Must be my blue blood - never done a day's work in my life. HRH Rob www.rmguitar.info -Original Message- From: gary digman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 December 2007 09:29 To: lutelist Subject: [LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings I play guitar (modern and baroque) without nails. It's true that some techniques such as tremolo become much more diffcult without nails, but my tremolo was never my strong suit anyway. I just got tired of constantly messing with nails, trying to get them shaped right, etc. Since I started playing lute, I kissed the nails goodbye. So far I've not regretted it. The fingers develop calluses, which have to be sandpapered (#600 wet and dry) smooth, but mimic the attack of nails on the guitar. Gary - Original Message - From: Alexander Batov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lute list lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2007 7:43 AM Subject: [LUTE] Re: Swanneck + loaded strings On Sunday, December 09, 2007 3:06 PM LGS-Europe[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: .. Nails/no nails have a similar effect on compositions; guitar players may notice differences between Giuliani and Sor resulting from their use/no use of nails. (Hmm, authentic Lobos on gut. ;-) ) It'll take one good player to disproof this. In a similar vein, most of the 5-course guitar music, for example, was very much likely played with nails anyway ... but how many modern performers play it like this (I mean on the 'baroque' guitar)? - Perhaps a few. At the same time there are some good ones who play with or without nails. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.17/1179 - Release Date: 12/9/2007 11:06 AM -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.17/1179 - Release Date: 12/9/2007 11:06 AM
[LUTE] Re: la bella strings
Not quite answering your question...but, I used La Bella gut 19th-C guitar strings, the lightly varnished ones, and I thought they were very good quality. Rob www.rmguitar.info -Original Message- From: Steve Bryson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 11 December 2007 19:35 To: Nigel Solomon Cc: Steve Bryson; lute list Subject: [LUTE] Re: la bella strings I used La Bella for for the last two years, after many years of experience with Pyramid. I heard no noticeable difference, but did not expect much from nylon. I use copper wound so can't comment on the silver. I followed the recommendations on the LaBella website for my lute length, as well as had a chat with them over the phone to confirm. Basically no problems. I've since moved on to PVF (polyvinyl flouride) from Boston Catlines ([EMAIL PROTECTED] ) for the top four courses, which have a somewhat brighter sound. I still use nylon for the bottom 3 octaves (on an 8-course) steve On Dec 11, 2007, at 8:11 AM, Nigel Solomon wrote: Does anybody have any experience of La Bella strings for lute (particularly nylon and silver wound)? 1.How do they compare with, say, Pyramid, Kurschner? 2. How do you calculate the tension (particulalry wound strings)? The prices beat any European strings. Nigel To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
