[LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
Thanks Denys for reminding me that there is no evidence for what
Lundberg claims - but is the "cabinet of curiosities" idea pure
speculation? I'm not even sure where I got it from, so apologies to all
for mentioning it (knowing how these things can quickly take on the
status of "fact" when they are complete fabrication!). Do we really
know anything solid about this lute? Is Georg Gerle any relation of
Hans Gerle of Nuremberg, who published lute tablature? I rather thought
he was, but is there any solid evidence?
Best wishes,
Martin
On 22/04/2012 21:09, Denys Stephens wrote:
Dear Martin,
The question of the heritage of the Gerle lute is very interesting. I can't
help feeling that Robert Lundberg rather muddied the waters by stating
in his book that it was built in 1580 and that 'it is thought to illustrate
what they felt the earlier instruments looked like' without offering any
evidence or argument to support that idea. I don't profess to know the
definitive answer myself, but I note that Stephen Barber& Sandi Harris
consider it to be a genuine 6 course lute:
http://www.lutesandguitars.co.uk/htm/cat01.htm
And by way of analogy, Gibson still build reissues of their 1930's
flat top guitars, and still know exactly how they were made because
plenty of the now treasured originals are still around. It seems plausible
that similar considerations would apply to 16c lutes. The oldest lute in my
own collection was built in 1978 and is showing no signs of failing in any
way
just yet. Hopefully it's good for at least another 30 years...
So I would be interested to know whether there is any other evidence
that supports Lundberg's view on the Gerle, or if it was just an opinion
of his that has transmuted itself into a fact.
Best wishes,
Denys
-Original Message-
From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf
Of Martin Shepherd
Sent: 22 April 2012 19:35
To: Lute List
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
Thanks for your vote of confidence, Martyn, but it worries me that we
modern makers are too slavish in our adherence to a few (perhaps rather
atypical) historical lutes. Obviously I think it's important to study
the evidence we do have, but as I'm making a Gerle at the moment I'm
acutely aware of the fact that it's not really a "proper" 6c lute
because of the circumstances of its commission for a "cabinet of
curiousities". There was nothing exotic or curious about a lute in
1580, so perhaps the motivation for its inclusion was that it was made
of ivory (as I think were other objects in the cabinet). One could even
argue that it was not made to be played!
Difficult business, lutemaking
Best wishes,
Martin
On 22/04/2012 15:44, Martyn Hodgson wrote:
Hi Bill,
There are many difficulties with bringing early ('historical') lutes
back into use: some of the very real aspects of fragility have been
touched on. But it also depends on what we mean by an 'historical'
instrument since leaving aside one class of lute (more later), almost
all the earliest lutes have been converted to later forms (with a few
exceptions such as the Gerle) with many more courses and it's pretty
clear that even at the time these had limited shelf life if kept at
tension and regularly played (eg Mace's advice to take off and repair
the belly as being something that one might expect to have to do - or
have done). Indeed, it may be that, counter -intuitively, the more
ornamental instruments may be better candidates for modern playing (eg
the more ornate Tielke lutes) since they may have endured only light
use and been kept safe as decorative objects - but one doubts if any
collection would allow them to be strung up and played since a premium
is placed on such objects by museum curators as ornate artistic
artefacts (look at how the V&A treated their instrument collection all
for the sake of few frocks) and these are protected like the crown
jewels.
So what we are left with is a sort of self-selected group of
instruments, often in a very poor state and very much changed, to
attempt to bring back to some sort of playing condition. Personally,
because so much of such a re-incarnation is highly speculative, I
would far prefer to see these instruments conserved in their present
state for research and future generations.
However, on the bright side, I'm not so sure that there are no active
'historical' (ie old) lutes. Leaving aside the old instruments which
have been rebirthed (such as Bailes's probable original gallichon
converted to an 11 course lute or even Lindberg's re-invention of a
Rauwolf lute) there are in fact some lutes which are in playable
condition: some 18th century mandoras! I've had the privilege of
playing a couple (a Stautinger and Anon) but, for safety, strung at
lower tension than I use
[LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
Dear Ned, Yes, the "Messiah" is more or less unmodified I think, though it is certainly not "in active use" - as far as I know, all instruments in the Hill collection at the Ashmolean were donated under the strict condition that they are never to be played! Also, it is pretty hard to convincingly "de-modify" a historical bowed instrument, since most of these instruments have had their soundboards considerably thinned out! Any other offers for Strads in active use in original condition? All the best, Sam On 21 April 2012 23:57, Edward Mast wrote: > I think one or two may have survived un-modified (perhaps the "Messiah"?). > Also, Yo Yo Ma 'de-modified' one of his strad cellos (I believe I've read > this), reconfiguring it as a Baroque instrument. (How much of a shame the > modifications are depends upon who you're talking with, of course). > -Ned > On Apr 21, 2012, at 5:00 PM, Sam Chapman wrote: > >> Just for the record, I don't think any of those Stradivarius violins >> are in anything like their original condition. Which is a real shame. >> >> All the best, >> >> Sam >> >> On 20 April 2012 20:23, Herbert Ward wrote: >>> >>> According to Wikipedia, there are many Strativarius violins >>> in active use today: >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stradivarius_instruments >>> >>> But I never hear of anyone playing a historical lute routinely. >>> In fact, it seems rare for anyone to even handle one. >>> >>> Is this because the thin soundboard becomes fragile with age? >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> >>> To get on or off this list see list information at >>> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >> >> >> >> -- >> Sam Chapman >> Oetlingerstrasse 65 >> 4057 Basel >> (0041) 79 530 39 91 >> >> > -- Sam Chapman Oetlingerstrasse 65 4057 Basel (0041) 79 530 39 91
[LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
I have 2 "old lutes" , a 10-course lute by James Mackie (1980), and a 13-course BVurkholtzer model by Richard Berg (1984). Both sound great, and have required some "surgery" through the times. ed At 07:30 AM 4/22/2012, Martin Shepherd wrote: >Dear All, > >As far as violins are concerned, I'm sure the reason we're still >playing instruments built in the 17th C (albeit now radically >rebuilt) is that since it first appeared in the 16th C, the violin >has not only changed little (it still has four strings, for >instance) it has also been in constant use. Lutes passed out of use >altogether, so the only instruments which survived were those which >were valuable for non-musical reasons such as being made of valuable >materials (ivory, ebony, etc) and/or were pretty enough that people >wanted to hang them on the wall as decoration. It's such a shame we >don't have any surviving lutes from before the middle of the 16th C. > >Lutes are delicate, so even those which have been "restored" to >playable condition have had major surgery to achieve this state - >the Rauwolf lute owned by Jacob Lindberg being a good example. > >The oldest lute I still own is my no.2 (7c, 67.3cm, with a yew >back), whose labels says "November 1982", so it's coming up to its >30th birthday. I don't think it has changed much over the years, >and (almost uniquely) has never had a loose bar, so the soundboard >has never been lifted. If anything it seems to have got better >through the years, as seems to be usual with lutes. It has been >well used (not thrashed) for all of that time. I also have nos 3 >(6c, 53.5cm, 1983) and 4 (6c, 60cm, 1985) and they are also in >continuous use and seem to have if anything improved with age. All >three feature on my website soundfiles. > >I'm optimistic that lutes being made now will have a long future >ahead of them, as long as people want to play them. > >Best wishes, > >Martin > >On 22/04/2012 08:09, William Samson wrote: >> I agree with most of the comments you make, Chris. >> >> I have a couple of lutes that are between 30 and 40 years old - one of >> them (with a Sitka spruce soundboard) sounded better when new and now >> sounds quite harsh in comparison to its earlier state. The other one >> (Swiss pine soundboard) has improved with age and although the bridge >> had to be glued back on a few years ago, I find it is easier now to >> produce a nice tone from it than when it was new. The caveat is, of >> course, that all this is quite subjective and my technique has changed >> radically over the past 40 years - from guitar technique with nails, >> guitar technique without nails, pinky-down-thumb-inside technique, and >> nowadays the thumb creeping outside and also playing closer to the >> bridge to emulate how I think the old ones played their lutes in the >> 17th century. >> >> Where I take issue, though, is that as far as I can tell Mace doesn't >> advocate regular replacement of the soundboard. He does, however, give >> instructions on how to carefully remove the soundboard, repair loose >> bars, cracks etc, and glue it back down satisfactorily once repairs are >> done. >> >> I keep hearing stories of lutes, just a decade or two old, having their >> soundboards replaced with brand new ones. I can't understand the >> motivation behind this unless the old soundboard was made of very poor >> wood or very badly made. Generally speaking, though, I find that the >> older soundboards are made from better wood, with a tighter grain, than >> is generally available nowadays. My gut feeling is that the tone and >> response of the instrument is dominated by the soundboard, so replacing >> a soundboard with a new one could radically alter the way the >> instrument sounds. I wonder what seemingly irreparable soundboard >> faults cause players to throw away the whole soundboard in exchange for >> a new one? >> >> Anyway, if you are thinking of replacing your soundboard, I'll happily >> pay postage and packing expenses if you'll send your old one to me :) >> >> Bill >> From: Christopher Stetson >> To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu >> Sent: Sunday, 22 April 2012, 2:59 >> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes? >> Hi, everyone, >> I've been waiting for one of the luthiers on the list to reply, but >> since they haven't, I'll toss in that it's my understanding that the >> physical forces of strings pulling on the glued-down bridges of >> lutes, >> which then torque the bridge against the very thin soundboard, are >> quite different from those of strings pushing down on violin bridges, >> which transmit the force downward onto the more robust, carved >> soundboards, all of which results in lutes tending to come apart more >> quickly than violins do. Also, I believe that in t
[LUTE] Re: historical lutes?
Dear All,
I tend to agree with Martin. And calling two unaltered surviving 6
course lutes (Gerle, Dieffopruchar) "evidence" is probably pushing
statistics a bit too far, especially if you consider how many lutes
(and we tend to know how many) were built in those distant years.
I had to raise a question a few times: having rather big hands I simply
cannot play a typical Gerle reproduction. I often met researchers
explaing that those were the "authentic" measures (string distance).
Difficult business lutemaking, indeed.
Luca
Denys Stephens on 22/04/12 22.09 wrote:
Dear Martin,
The question of the heritage of the Gerle lute is very interesting. I can't
help feeling that Robert Lundberg rather muddied the waters by stating
in his book that it was built in 1580 and that 'it is thought to illustrate
what they felt the earlier instruments looked like' without offering any
evidence or argument to support that idea. I don't profess to know the
definitive answer myself, but I note that Stephen Barber & Sandi Harris
consider it to be a genuine 6 course lute:
[1]http://www.lutesandguitars.co.uk/htm/cat01.htm
And by way of analogy, Gibson still build reissues of their 1930's
flat top guitars, and still know exactly how they were made because
plenty of the now treasured originals are still around. It seems plausible
that similar considerations would apply to 16c lutes. The oldest lute in my
own collection was built in 1978 and is showing no signs of failing in any
way
just yet. Hopefully it's good for at least another 30 years...
So I would be interested to know whether there is any other evidence
that supports Lundberg's view on the Gerle, or if it was just an opinion
of his that has transmuted itself into a fact.
Best wishes,
Denys
-Original Message-
From: [2]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [[3]mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Beha
lf
Of Martin Shepherd
Sent: 22 April 2012 19:35
To: Lute List
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
Thanks for your vote of confidence, Martyn, but it worries me that we
modern makers are too slavish in our adherence to a few (perhaps rather
atypical) historical lutes. Obviously I think it's important to study
the evidence we do have, but as I'm making a Gerle at the moment I'm
acutely aware of the fact that it's not really a "proper" 6c lute
because of the circumstances of its commission for a "cabinet of
curiousities". There was nothing exotic or curious about a lute in
1580, so perhaps the motivation for its inclusion was that it was made
of ivory (as I think were other objects in the cabinet). One could even
argue that it was not made to be played!
Difficult business, lutemaking
Best wishes,
Martin
On 22/04/2012 15:44, Martyn Hodgson wrote:
Hi Bill,
There are many difficulties with bringing early ('historical') lutes
back into use: some of the very real aspects of fragility have been
touched on. But it also depends on what we mean by an 'historical'
instrument since leaving aside one class of lute (more later), almost
all the earliest lutes have been converted to later forms (with a few
exceptions such as the Gerle) with many more courses and it's pretty
clear that even at the time these had limited shelf life if kept at
tension and regularly played (eg Mace's advice to take off and repair
the belly as being something that one might expect to have to do - or
have done). Indeed, it may be that, counter -intuitively, the more
ornamental instruments may be better candidates for modern playing (eg
the more ornate Tielke lutes) since they may have endured only light
use and been kept safe as decorative objects - but one doubts if any
collection would allow them to be strung up and played since a premium
is placed on such objects by museum curators as ornate artistic
artefacts (look at how the V&A treated their instrument collection all
for the sake of few frocks) and these are protected like the crown
jewels.
So what we are left with is a sort of self-selected group of
instruments, often in a very poor state and very much changed, to
attempt to bring back to some sort of playing condition. Personally,
because so much of such a re-incarnation is highly speculative, I
would far prefer to see these instruments conserved in their present
state for research and future generations.
However, on the bright side, I'm not so sure that there are no active
'historical' (ie old) lutes. Leaving aside the old instruments which
have been rebirthed (such as Bailes's probable original gallichon
converted to an 11 course lute or even Lindberg's re-invention of a
Rauwolf lute) there are in fact some lutes which are in playable
condition: some 18th century mandoras! I've had the privilege of
playing a couple (a Stautinger and Anon) but, for safety, strung at
lower tension than I use on a modern reco
[LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
Dear Martin,
The question of the heritage of the Gerle lute is very interesting. I can't
help feeling that Robert Lundberg rather muddied the waters by stating
in his book that it was built in 1580 and that 'it is thought to illustrate
what they felt the earlier instruments looked like' without offering any
evidence or argument to support that idea. I don't profess to know the
definitive answer myself, but I note that Stephen Barber & Sandi Harris
consider it to be a genuine 6 course lute:
http://www.lutesandguitars.co.uk/htm/cat01.htm
And by way of analogy, Gibson still build reissues of their 1930's
flat top guitars, and still know exactly how they were made because
plenty of the now treasured originals are still around. It seems plausible
that similar considerations would apply to 16c lutes. The oldest lute in my
own collection was built in 1978 and is showing no signs of failing in any
way
just yet. Hopefully it's good for at least another 30 years...
So I would be interested to know whether there is any other evidence
that supports Lundberg's view on the Gerle, or if it was just an opinion
of his that has transmuted itself into a fact.
Best wishes,
Denys
-Original Message-
From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf
Of Martin Shepherd
Sent: 22 April 2012 19:35
To: Lute List
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
Thanks for your vote of confidence, Martyn, but it worries me that we
modern makers are too slavish in our adherence to a few (perhaps rather
atypical) historical lutes. Obviously I think it's important to study
the evidence we do have, but as I'm making a Gerle at the moment I'm
acutely aware of the fact that it's not really a "proper" 6c lute
because of the circumstances of its commission for a "cabinet of
curiousities". There was nothing exotic or curious about a lute in
1580, so perhaps the motivation for its inclusion was that it was made
of ivory (as I think were other objects in the cabinet). One could even
argue that it was not made to be played!
Difficult business, lutemaking
Best wishes,
Martin
On 22/04/2012 15:44, Martyn Hodgson wrote:
> Hi Bill,
>
> There are many difficulties with bringing early ('historical') lutes
> back into use: some of the very real aspects of fragility have been
> touched on. But it also depends on what we mean by an 'historical'
> instrument since leaving aside one class of lute (more later), almost
> all the earliest lutes have been converted to later forms (with a few
> exceptions such as the Gerle) with many more courses and it's pretty
> clear that even at the time these had limited shelf life if kept at
> tension and regularly played (eg Mace's advice to take off and repair
> the belly as being something that one might expect to have to do - or
> have done). Indeed, it may be that, counter -intuitively, the more
> ornamental instruments may be better candidates for modern playing (eg
> the more ornate Tielke lutes) since they may have endured only light
> use and been kept safe as decorative objects - but one doubts if any
> collection would allow them to be strung up and played since a premium
> is placed on such objects by museum curators as ornate artistic
> artefacts (look at how the V&A treated their instrument collection all
> for the sake of few frocks) and these are protected like the crown
> jewels.
>
> So what we are left with is a sort of self-selected group of
> instruments, often in a very poor state and very much changed, to
> attempt to bring back to some sort of playing condition. Personally,
> because so much of such a re-incarnation is highly speculative, I
> would far prefer to see these instruments conserved in their present
> state for research and future generations.
>
> However, on the bright side, I'm not so sure that there are no active
> 'historical' (ie old) lutes. Leaving aside the old instruments which
> have been rebirthed (such as Bailes's probable original gallichon
> converted to an 11 course lute or even Lindberg's re-invention of a
> Rauwolf lute) there are in fact some lutes which are in playable
> condition: some 18th century mandoras! I've had the privilege of
> playing a couple (a Stautinger and Anon) but, for safety, strung at
> lower tension than I use on a modern reconstruction. Both instruments
> were playable and, indeed, I think would have been able to take
> significantly higher tensions. In both cases the only significant
> 'restoration' which would be necessary to put them back into everyday
> practical use would be to reset the neck which had lifted a little.
> However even this modest move I would nowadays resist - far preferring
> to see old lutes conserved (there are so very few compared with
> fiddles) and allowed to be copied.
>
> Some of the reason
[LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
Thanks for your vote of confidence, Martyn, but it worries me that we
modern makers are too slavish in our adherence to a few (perhaps rather
atypical) historical lutes. Obviously I think it's important to study
the evidence we do have, but as I'm making a Gerle at the moment I'm
acutely aware of the fact that it's not really a "proper" 6c lute
because of the circumstances of its commission for a "cabinet of
curiousities". There was nothing exotic or curious about a lute in
1580, so perhaps the motivation for its inclusion was that it was made
of ivory (as I think were other objects in the cabinet). One could even
argue that it was not made to be played!
Difficult business, lutemaking
Best wishes,
Martin
On 22/04/2012 15:44, Martyn Hodgson wrote:
Hi Bill,
There are many difficulties with bringing early ('historical') lutes
back into use: some of the very real aspects of fragility have been
touched on. But it also depends on what we mean by an 'historical'
instrument since leaving aside one class of lute (more later), almost
all the earliest lutes have been converted to later forms (with a few
exceptions such as the Gerle) with many more courses and it's pretty
clear that even at the time these had limited shelf life if kept at
tension and regularly played (eg Mace's advice to take off and repair
the belly as being something that one might expect to have to do - or
have done). Indeed, it may be that, counter -intuitively, the more
ornamental instruments may be better candidates for modern playing (eg
the more ornate Tielke lutes) since they may have endured only light
use and been kept safe as decorative objects - but one doubts if any
collection would allow them to be strung up and played since a premium
is placed on such objects by museum curators as ornate artistic
artefacts (look at how the V&A treated their instrument collection all
for the sake of few frocks) and these are protected like the crown
jewels.
So what we are left with is a sort of self-selected group of
instruments, often in a very poor state and very much changed, to
attempt to bring back to some sort of playing condition. Personally,
because so much of such a re-incarnation is highly speculative, I
would far prefer to see these instruments conserved in their present
state for research and future generations.
However, on the bright side, I'm not so sure that there are no active
'historical' (ie old) lutes. Leaving aside the old instruments which
have been rebirthed (such as Bailes's probable original gallichon
converted to an 11 course lute or even Lindberg's re-invention of a
Rauwolf lute) there are in fact some lutes which are in playable
condition: some 18th century mandoras! I've had the privilege of
playing a couple (a Stautinger and Anon) but, for safety, strung at
lower tension than I use on a modern reconstruction. Both instruments
were playable and, indeed, I think would have been able to take
significantly higher tensions. In both cases the only significant
'restoration' which would be necessary to put them back into everyday
practical use would be to reset the neck which had lifted a little.
However even this modest move I would nowadays resist - far preferring
to see old lutes conserved (there are so very few compared with
fiddles) and allowed to be copied.
Some of the reasons for violin survival have also been mentioned but
one is, I believe, that the domed construction is enormously strong
and, like the the arched bridge, is able to withstand much larger
forces before major distortion. Nevertheless, some flat belied
instruments can be succesfully restored to playing condition:
witness the harpsichord. But even with these, although the soundboards
are often horribly distorted, the heavy framing on all but the lightest
of Italian instruments allows such restringing. Indeed, when I first
played in ensemble with Peter Holman I remember with amazement how he
used to cart his original Kirkman (unrestored - with treble cheek
lifted to boot) around in a van. But in truth the renasissance of the
modern harpsichord probably owes more to makers who eschewed the
Pleyels, Gobles, etc and sought to copy historic models than to
restringing a few old instruments.
So all power to modern makers like Martin who seek out original
specimens from which to base their instruments - and shame on those
collections and collectors who do not allow open access to their
historic instruments for this purpose.
regards
Martyn
--- On Sun, 22/4/12, William Samson wrote:
From: William Samson
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
To: "Christopher Stetson"
Cc: "Lute List"
Date: Sunday, 22 April, 2012, 8:09
I agree with most
[LUTE] Re: Testing NNG's and back to the old love, the renaissance 10-courser...
Very strange! And thanks for recording, Adam. It seems to be in double speed. In my computer the video plays correctly. Arto On 22/04/12 18:30, Edward Mast wrote: Messed up? That's just Arto playing his funk/Renaissance arrangements after drinking five cups of espresso. -Ned On Apr 22, 2012, at 11:03 AM, Adam Olsen wrote: Haha, it even plays the video I uploaded doubly messed up. Every other video I watch seems to be fine. Very weird! On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Adam Olsen wrote: Ok, so this morning, my computer just will not play this video correctly. It played all the other ones I've been looking at just fine, but it really messes this one up. However, the way it messes it up is pretty interesting and fun, so I recorded it with my phone and uploaded it to youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlVuHSm4FmI To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] I International Week of Music in Ávila, Spain
Dear all, I am writing to let you know about the I Semana Internacional de Musica de Avila) that Mingui Estudio organises together with the Universidad Catolica de Avila (UCAV) from September 2^nd to 9^th 2012 ([1]www.simavila.es, the website is in spanish but there is a widget at the bottom of the webpage that will translate to various languages. For this first edition we have organised an Early Music course, a Contemporary Music course and a Festival with 7 concerts. We are very happy and proud of presenting such a fantastic group of teachers for the first edition of the SIMA. These are the different specialties for the Early Music programme: O/ Baroque violin & baroque viola. Leo Rossi O/ Baroque cello & Viol. Itziar Atutxa O/ Voice. David Mason O/ Choir. Martin Schmidt. O/ Early Plucked Instruments and Continuo. Manuel Minguillon For this 1^st edition of the SIMA the Trio Arbos will lead the Contemporary Music programme teaching modern violin, cello and piano. They will also perform a recital with 3 of the awarded pieces from the "composition for trio" course. These are the different specialties for the Early Music programme: O/ Violin. Miguel Borrego O/ Cello. Jose Miguel Gomez O/ Piano. Juan Carlos Garvayo O/ Composition for trio. Jesus Torres & Jose Minguillon O/ Piano & Composition for piano. Manuel Tevar The I Semana Internacional de Musica de Avila will offer to the city of Avila 7 public concerts during the last days of the course. The concerts will take place in San Francisco, a 13^th century church converted to an auditorium for 400 people. There will be three Early Music concerts, 2 Chamber Music and one with choir, orchestra and soloist where teachers and students will perform Membra Jesu Nostri by Dietrich Buxtehude & Magnificat & Credo by Antonio Vivaldi. There will be three other concerts of Contemporary Music, one of them by the Trio Arbos that will play works by Jesus Torres & Jose Minguillon together with three of the awarded pieces of the "composition for trio" course. Manuel Tevar will premier the awarded piece of the composition for piano course in another concert. Finally, the SIMA's choir will sing on the Sunday Mass in the Cathedral of Avila on September 9^th. You can see the SIMA's poster at [2]http://www.semanainternacionaldemusicadeavila.es/presentacion/comuni cacion/. I'll be very grateful if you can forward this information to any friends or colleagues that might be interested. For more information or to register to the courses, please visit [3]www.simavila.es You can also follow us in facebook: [4]https://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Semana-Internacional-De-M%C3%BAsic a-de-%C3%81vila/327301627330239 Or in Twitter: [5]https://twitter.com/#!/SiMusicAvila Very best wishes, Manuel Minguillon Nieto [6]www.simavila.es email: [7]i...@semanainternacionaldemusicadeavila.es tlf: +34-616324892 (Spain) mobile: +44-(0)7790705279 Mingui Estudio web: [8]www.minguiestudio.com -- References 1. http://www.simavila.es/ 2. http://www.semanainternacionaldemusicadeavila.es/presentacion/comunicacion/ 3. http://www.simavila.es/ 4. https://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Semana-Internacional-De-M%C3%BAsica-de-%C3%81vila/327301627330239 5. https://twitter.com/#!/SiMusicAvila 6. http://www.simavila.es/ 7. mailto:i...@semanainternacionaldemusicadeavila.es 8. http://www.minguiestudio.com/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Testing NNG's and back to the old love, the renaissance 10-courser...
Messed up? That's just Arto playing his funk/Renaissance arrangements after drinking five cups of espresso. -Ned On Apr 22, 2012, at 11:03 AM, Adam Olsen wrote: > Haha, it even plays the video I uploaded doubly messed up. Every > other video I watch seems to be fine. Very weird! > > On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Adam Olsen wrote: >> Ok, so this morning, my computer just will not play this video >> correctly. It played all the other ones I've been looking at just >> fine, but it really messes this one up. >> >> However, the way it messes it up is pretty interesting and fun, so I >> recorded it with my phone and uploaded it to youtube: >> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlVuHSm4FmI >> >> > > To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Testing NNG's and back to the old love, the renaissance 10-courser...
Haha, it even plays the video I uploaded doubly messed up. Every other video I watch seems to be fine. Very weird! On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Adam Olsen wrote: > Ok, so this morning, my computer just will not play this video > correctly. It played all the other ones I've been looking at just > fine, but it really messes this one up. > > However, the way it messes it up is pretty interesting and fun, so I > recorded it with my phone and uploaded it to youtube: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlVuHSm4FmI > > On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Arto Wikla wrote: >> Dear lutenists, >> >> after years of neglecting the renaissance tuning, favoring the theorbo in >> continuo and trying to get into the d-minor solo lute, I happened to get a >> tiny gig of accompanying a couple of ladies singing the late renaissance. So >> back to the 10-courser after years... And that means I have to practice! >> >> The old strings of my "Berr" by Barber 1986, were worn out Pyramid basses >> from the 80's and some old white NG's above. I ordered new NNG's and D's >> from Mimmo of the Aquila Strings. Yesterday evening I had to work hours to >> change all the 19 strings... >> >> Well, the NNG's feel good. I motivated myself to practice the neglected >> instrument and test the strings by playing to the "tubes" (again and >> again..., sorry... ;) >> >> An example of "art" music and "country" music published by one of the >> Ballards can fe found in >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4vgNR9GipA&feature=youtu.be >> and also >> http://vimeo.com/40781834 >> >> All the best, >> >> Arto >> >> >> >> To get on or off this list see list information at >> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > >
[LUTE] Re: Testing NNG's and back to the old love, the renaissance 10-courser...
Ok, so this morning, my computer just will not play this video correctly. It played all the other ones I've been looking at just fine, but it really messes this one up. However, the way it messes it up is pretty interesting and fun, so I recorded it with my phone and uploaded it to youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlVuHSm4FmI On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Arto Wikla wrote: > Dear lutenists, > > after years of neglecting the renaissance tuning, favoring the theorbo in > continuo and trying to get into the d-minor solo lute, I happened to get a > tiny gig of accompanying a couple of ladies singing the late renaissance. So > back to the 10-courser after years... And that means I have to practice! > > The old strings of my "Berr" by Barber 1986, were worn out Pyramid basses > from the 80's and some old white NG's above. I ordered new NNG's and D's > from Mimmo of the Aquila Strings. Yesterday evening I had to work hours to > change all the 19 strings... > > Well, the NNG's feel good. I motivated myself to practice the neglected > instrument and test the strings by playing to the "tubes" (again and > again..., sorry... ;) > > An example of "art" music and "country" music published by one of the > Ballards can fe found in > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4vgNR9GipA&feature=youtu.be > and also > http://vimeo.com/40781834 > > All the best, > > Arto > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
Hi Bill,
There are many difficulties with bringing early ('historical') lutes
back into use: some of the very real aspects of fragility have been
touched on. But it also depends on what we mean by an 'historical'
instrument since leaving aside one class of lute (more later), almost
all the earliest lutes have been converted to later forms (with a few
exceptions such as the Gerle) with many more courses and it's pretty
clear that even at the time these had limited shelf life if kept at
tension and regularly played (eg Mace's advice to take off and repair
the belly as being something that one might expect to have to do - or
have done). Indeed, it may be that, counter -intuitively, the more
ornamental instruments may be better candidates for modern playing (eg
the more ornate Tielke lutes) since they may have endured only light
use and been kept safe as decorative objects - but one doubts if any
collection would allow them to be strung up and played since a premium
is placed on such objects by museum curators as ornate artistic
artefacts (look at how the V&A treated their instrument collection all
for the sake of few frocks) and these are protected like the crown
jewels.
So what we are left with is a sort of self-selected group of
instruments, often in a very poor state and very much changed, to
attempt to bring back to some sort of playing condition. Personally,
because so much of such a re-incarnation is highly speculative, I
would far prefer to see these instruments conserved in their present
state for research and future generations.
However, on the bright side, I'm not so sure that there are no active
'historical' (ie old) lutes. Leaving aside the old instruments which
have been rebirthed (such as Bailes's probable original gallichon
converted to an 11 course lute or even Lindberg's re-invention of a
Rauwolf lute) there are in fact some lutes which are in playable
condition: some 18th century mandoras! I've had the privilege of
playing a couple (a Stautinger and Anon) but, for safety, strung at
lower tension than I use on a modern reconstruction. Both instruments
were playable and, indeed, I think would have been able to take
significantly higher tensions. In both cases the only significant
'restoration' which would be necessary to put them back into everyday
practical use would be to reset the neck which had lifted a little.
However even this modest move I would nowadays resist - far preferring
to see old lutes conserved (there are so very few compared with
fiddles) and allowed to be copied.
Some of the reasons for violin survival have also been mentioned but
one is, I believe, that the domed construction is enormously strong
and, like the the arched bridge, is able to withstand much larger
forces before major distortion. Nevertheless, some flat belied
instruments can be succesfully restored to playing condition:
witness the harpsichord. But even with these, although the soundboards
are often horribly distorted, the heavy framing on all but the lightest
of Italian instruments allows such restringing. Indeed, when I first
played in ensemble with Peter Holman I remember with amazement how he
used to cart his original Kirkman (unrestored - with treble cheek
lifted to boot) around in a van. But in truth the renasissance of the
modern harpsichord probably owes more to makers who eschewed the
Pleyels, Gobles, etc and sought to copy historic models than to
restringing a few old instruments.
So all power to modern makers like Martin who seek out original
specimens from which to base their instruments - and shame on those
collections and collectors who do not allow open access to their
historic instruments for this purpose.
regards
Martyn
--- On Sun, 22/4/12, William Samson wrote:
From: William Samson
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
To: "Christopher Stetson"
Cc: "Lute List"
Date: Sunday, 22 April, 2012, 8:09
I agree with most of the comments you make, Chris.
I have a couple of lutes that are between 30 and 40 years old - one
of
them (with a Sitka spruce soundboard) sounded better when new and
now
sounds quite harsh in comparison to its earlier state. The other
one
(Swiss pine soundboard) has improved with age and although the
bridge
had to be glued back on a few years ago, I find it is easier now to
produce a nice tone from it than when it was new. The caveat is, of
course, that all this is quite subjective and my technique has
changed
radically over the past 40 years - from guitar technique with nails,
guitar technique without nails, pinky-down-thumb-inside technique,
and
nowadays the thumb creeping outside and also playing closer to the
bridge to emulate how I thi
[LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
Dear All, Martin pointed out a lot of very important informations. I have had the pleasure to hear from a very close position the Rauwolf lute owned by Jakob Lindberg (and had the responsibility to trasport it on my car...) and can confirm it has a lovely sweet tone. The soundboard is supposed to be the original one, that's why Jakob got so interested into that instrument when he could find it. As far as I can remember Anthony Bailes also plays an historical lute and Toyohico Satoh has one as well. I remember Stephen Barber explaining that soundboards get thinner with the age as the wood naturally looses more and more humidity. This has two consequences: we shouldn't imitate their present thickness, as this has lowered considerably, and they get incredibly fragile. I think that the restauration work on Jakob Lindberg Rauwolf lute took about 10 years and has required advice from many different lutemakers. At the same time Jakob radically refuses to expose his historical lute to any humidity level below 40%. All in all from what I've heard directly, playing an historical lute requires an awful lot of care: it's surely a life-lasting experience, but we shouldn't forget that "the ancient ones" were mostly playing on new instruments... So, check your bank account, start that usually complex conversation with your significant other (where you painfully try to explain why you need yet another lute), then get in touch with your beloved lutemaker and order a new instrument. We should avoid what happens a bit too often in movies: as the story happens in XVI century, they pick up a 500 years old mansion and do their filming, usually forgetting that that same mansion in XVI century was and looked NEW, not the way it looks now ;-) Have a great sunday, Luca Martin Shepherd on 22/04/12 14.30 wrote: Dear All, As far as violins are concerned, I'm sure the reason we're still playing instruments built in the 17th C (albeit now radically rebuilt) is that since it first appeared in the 16th C, the violin has not only changed little (it still has four strings, for instance) it has also been in constant use. Lutes passed out of use altogether, so the only instruments which survived were those which were valuable for non-musical reasons such as being made of valuable materials (ivory, ebony, etc) and/or were pretty enough that people wanted to hang them on the wall as decoration. It's such a shame we don't have any surviving lutes from before the middle of the 16th C. Lutes are delicate, so even those which have been "restored" to playable condition have had major surgery to achieve this state - the Rauwolf lute owned by Jacob Lindberg being a good example. The oldest lute I still own is my no.2 (7c, 67.3cm, with a yew back), whose labels says "November 1982", so it's coming up to its 30th birthday. I don't think it has changed much over the years, and (almost uniquely) has never had a loose bar, so the soundboard has never been lifted. If anything it seems to have got better through the years, as seems to be usual with lutes. It has been well used (not thrashed) for all of that time. I also have nos 3 (6c, 53.5cm, 1983) and 4 (6c, 60cm, 1985) and they are also in continuous use and seem to have if anything improved with age. All three feature on my website soundfiles. I'm optimistic that lutes being made now will have a long future ahead of them, as long as people want to play them. Best wishes, Martin On 22/04/2012 08:09, William Samson wrote: I agree with most of the comments you make, Chris. I have a couple of lutes that are between 30 and 40 years old - one of them (with a Sitka spruce soundboard) sounded better when new and now sounds quite harsh in comparison to its earlier state. The other one (Swiss pine soundboard) has improved with age and although the bridge had to be glued back on a few years ago, I find it is easier now to produce a nice tone from it than when it was new. The caveat is, of course, that all this is quite subjective and my technique has changed radically over the past 40 years - from guitar technique with nails, guitar technique without nails, pinky-down-thumb-inside technique, and nowadays the thumb creeping outside and also playing closer to the bridge to emulate how I think the old ones played their lutes in the 17th century. Where I take issue, though, is that as far as I can tell Mace doesn't advocate regular replacement of the soundboard. He does, however, give instructions on how to carefully remove the soundboard, repair loose
[LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
--bcaec5016687cba6b704be4413dd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hey, William and all, Very good points about subjectivity and individual differences in wood, and my question about Mace was actually that, William. It was just my memory of a reading maybe 35 years ago, so thanks for clarifying. I hope I'm accurately remembering his advice to keep my lute in my bed [?]. In re: older soundboards made of better materials: I'm reminded of Benvenuto Cellini complaining, ca. 1560, that you just couldn't get good stuff any more. Be well, Chris. On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 3:09 AM, William Samson wrote: > I agree with most of the comments you make, Chris. > > I have a couple of lutes that are between 30 and 40 years old - one of > them (with a Sitka spruce soundboard) sounded better when new and now > sounds quite harsh in comparison to its earlier state. The other one > (Swiss pine soundboard) has improved with age and although the bridge had > to be glued back on a few years ago, I find it is easier now to produce a > nice tone from it than when it was new. The caveat is, of course, that all > this is quite subjective and my technique has changed radically over the > past 40 years - from guitar technique with nails, guitar technique without > nails, pinky-down-thumb-inside technique, and nowadays the thumb creeping > outside and also playing closer to the bridge to emulate how I think the > old ones played their lutes in the 17th century. > > Where I take issue, though, is that as far as I can tell Mace doesn't > advocate regular replacement of the soundboard. He does, however, give > instructions on how to carefully remove the soundboard, repair loose bars, > cracks etc, and glue it back down satisfactorily once repairs are done. > > I keep hearing stories of lutes, just a decade or two old, having their > soundboards replaced with brand new ones. I can't understand the > motivation behind this unless the old soundboard was made of very poor wood > or very badly made. Generally speaking, though, I find that the older > soundboards are made from better wood, with a tighter grain, than is > generally available nowadays. My gut feeling is that the tone and response > of the instrument is dominated by the soundboard, so replacing a soundboard > with a new one could radically alter the way the instrument sounds. I > wonder what seemingly irreparable soundboard faults cause players to throw > away the whole soundboard in exchange for a new one? > > Anyway, if you are thinking of replacing your soundboard, I'll happily pay > postage and packing expenses if you'll send your old one to me :) > > Bill > >*From:* Christopher Stetson > *To:* lute@cs.dartmouth.edu > *Sent:* Sunday, 22 April 2012, 2:59 > *Subject:* [LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes? > > Hi, everyone, > > I've been waiting for one of the luthiers on the list to reply, but > since they haven't, I'll toss in that it's my understanding that the > physical forces of strings pulling on the glued-down bridges of lutes, > which then torque the bridge against the very thin soundboard, are > quite different from those of strings pushing down on violin bridges, > which transmit the force downward onto the more robust, carved > soundboards, all of which results in lutes tending to come apart more > quickly than violins do. Also, I believe that in the opinion of some, > at least, because of these different structures and forces, while > violins tend to sound better as they age, the sound quality of lutes > (and guitars with glued-down bridges) tends to deteriorate over time. > Perhaps some luthier list-members could confirm, deny, or nuance? > Doesn't Mace talk of having his soundboards replaced on a regular > basis? > > Best to all, and keep playing. > > Chris. > > On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Edward Mast <[1]nedma...@aol.com> > wrote: > > I think one or two may have survived un-modified (perhaps the > "Messiah"?). Also, Yo Yo Ma 'de-modified' one of his strad cellos > (I believe I've read this), reconfiguring it as a Baroque > instrument. (How much of a shame the modifications are depends upon > who you're talking with, of course). > -Ned > > On Apr 21, 2012, at 5:00 PM, Sam Chapman wrote: > > Just for the record, I don't think any of those Stradivarius violins > > are in anything like their original condition. Which is a real shame. > > > > All the best, > > > > Sam > > > > On 20 April 2012 20:23, Herbert Ward <[2]wa...@physics.utexas.edu> > wrote: > >> > >> According to Wikipedia, there are many Strativarius violins > >> in active use today: > >> [3]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stradivarius_instruments > >> > >> But I never hear of anyone playing a historical lute routinely. > >> In fact, it seems rare for anyone to even handle one. > >> > >> Is this because the thin soundboard becomes fragile with age? > >> > >> -
[LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
Dear All, As far as violins are concerned, I'm sure the reason we're still playing instruments built in the 17th C (albeit now radically rebuilt) is that since it first appeared in the 16th C, the violin has not only changed little (it still has four strings, for instance) it has also been in constant use. Lutes passed out of use altogether, so the only instruments which survived were those which were valuable for non-musical reasons such as being made of valuable materials (ivory, ebony, etc) and/or were pretty enough that people wanted to hang them on the wall as decoration. It's such a shame we don't have any surviving lutes from before the middle of the 16th C. Lutes are delicate, so even those which have been "restored" to playable condition have had major surgery to achieve this state - the Rauwolf lute owned by Jacob Lindberg being a good example. The oldest lute I still own is my no.2 (7c, 67.3cm, with a yew back), whose labels says "November 1982", so it's coming up to its 30th birthday. I don't think it has changed much over the years, and (almost uniquely) has never had a loose bar, so the soundboard has never been lifted. If anything it seems to have got better through the years, as seems to be usual with lutes. It has been well used (not thrashed) for all of that time. I also have nos 3 (6c, 53.5cm, 1983) and 4 (6c, 60cm, 1985) and they are also in continuous use and seem to have if anything improved with age. All three feature on my website soundfiles. I'm optimistic that lutes being made now will have a long future ahead of them, as long as people want to play them. Best wishes, Martin On 22/04/2012 08:09, William Samson wrote: I agree with most of the comments you make, Chris. I have a couple of lutes that are between 30 and 40 years old - one of them (with a Sitka spruce soundboard) sounded better when new and now sounds quite harsh in comparison to its earlier state. The other one (Swiss pine soundboard) has improved with age and although the bridge had to be glued back on a few years ago, I find it is easier now to produce a nice tone from it than when it was new. The caveat is, of course, that all this is quite subjective and my technique has changed radically over the past 40 years - from guitar technique with nails, guitar technique without nails, pinky-down-thumb-inside technique, and nowadays the thumb creeping outside and also playing closer to the bridge to emulate how I think the old ones played their lutes in the 17th century. Where I take issue, though, is that as far as I can tell Mace doesn't advocate regular replacement of the soundboard. He does, however, give instructions on how to carefully remove the soundboard, repair loose bars, cracks etc, and glue it back down satisfactorily once repairs are done. I keep hearing stories of lutes, just a decade or two old, having their soundboards replaced with brand new ones. I can't understand the motivation behind this unless the old soundboard was made of very poor wood or very badly made. Generally speaking, though, I find that the older soundboards are made from better wood, with a tighter grain, than is generally available nowadays. My gut feeling is that the tone and response of the instrument is dominated by the soundboard, so replacing a soundboard with a new one could radically alter the way the instrument sounds. I wonder what seemingly irreparable soundboard faults cause players to throw away the whole soundboard in exchange for a new one? Anyway, if you are thinking of replacing your soundboard, I'll happily pay postage and packing expenses if you'll send your old one to me :) Bill From: Christopher Stetson To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Sunday, 22 April 2012, 2:59 Subject: [LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes? Hi, everyone, I've been waiting for one of the luthiers on the list to reply, but since they haven't, I'll toss in that it's my understanding that the physical forces of strings pulling on the glued-down bridges of lutes, which then torque the bridge against the very thin soundboard, are quite different from those of strings pushing down on violin bridges, which transmit the force downward onto the more robust, carved soundboards, all of which results in lutes tending to come apart more quickly than violins do. Also, I believe that in the opinion of some, at least, because of these different structures and forces, while violins tend to sound better as they age, the sound quality of lutes (and guitars with glued-down bridges) tends to deteriorate over time. Perhaps some luthier list-members could confirm, deny, or nuance? Doesn't Mace talk of having his soundboards replaced on a regular basis? Best to all, and kee
[LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
I agree with most of the comments you make, Chris. I have a couple of lutes that are between 30 and 40 years old - one of them (with a Sitka spruce soundboard) sounded better when new and now sounds quite harsh in comparison to its earlier state. The other one (Swiss pine soundboard) has improved with age and although the bridge had to be glued back on a few years ago, I find it is easier now to produce a nice tone from it than when it was new. The caveat is, of course, that all this is quite subjective and my technique has changed radically over the past 40 years - from guitar technique with nails, guitar technique without nails, pinky-down-thumb-inside technique, and nowadays the thumb creeping outside and also playing closer to the bridge to emulate how I think the old ones played their lutes in the 17th century. Where I take issue, though, is that as far as I can tell Mace doesn't advocate regular replacement of the soundboard. He does, however, give instructions on how to carefully remove the soundboard, repair loose bars, cracks etc, and glue it back down satisfactorily once repairs are done. I keep hearing stories of lutes, just a decade or two old, having their soundboards replaced with brand new ones. I can't understand the motivation behind this unless the old soundboard was made of very poor wood or very badly made. Generally speaking, though, I find that the older soundboards are made from better wood, with a tighter grain, than is generally available nowadays. My gut feeling is that the tone and response of the instrument is dominated by the soundboard, so replacing a soundboard with a new one could radically alter the way the instrument sounds. I wonder what seemingly irreparable soundboard faults cause players to throw away the whole soundboard in exchange for a new one? Anyway, if you are thinking of replacing your soundboard, I'll happily pay postage and packing expenses if you'll send your old one to me :) Bill From: Christopher Stetson To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Sunday, 22 April 2012, 2:59 Subject: [LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes? Hi, everyone, I've been waiting for one of the luthiers on the list to reply, but since they haven't, I'll toss in that it's my understanding that the physical forces of strings pulling on the glued-down bridges of lutes, which then torque the bridge against the very thin soundboard, are quite different from those of strings pushing down on violin bridges, which transmit the force downward onto the more robust, carved soundboards, all of which results in lutes tending to come apart more quickly than violins do. Also, I believe that in the opinion of some, at least, because of these different structures and forces, while violins tend to sound better as they age, the sound quality of lutes (and guitars with glued-down bridges) tends to deteriorate over time. Perhaps some luthier list-members could confirm, deny, or nuance? Doesn't Mace talk of having his soundboards replaced on a regular basis? Best to all, and keep playing. Chris. On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Edward Mast <[1][1]nedma...@aol.com> wrote: I think one or two may have survived un-modified (perhaps the "Messiah"?). Also, Yo Yo Ma 'de-modified' one of his strad cellos (I believe I've read this), reconfiguring it as a Baroque instrument. (How much of a shame the modifications are depends upon who you're talking with, of course). -Ned On Apr 21, 2012, at 5:00 PM, Sam Chapman wrote: > Just for the record, I don't think any of those Stradivarius violins > are in anything like their original condition. Which is a real shame. > > All the best, > > Sam > > On 20 April 2012 20:23, Herbert Ward <[2][2]wa...@physics.utexas.edu> wrote: >> >> According to Wikipedia, there are many Strativarius violins >> in active use today: >> [3][3]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stradivarius_instruments >> >> But I never hear of anyone playing a historical lute routinely. >> In fact, it seems rare for anyone to even handle one. >> >> Is this because the thin soundboard becomes fragile with age? >> >> -- >> >> >> >> To get on or off this list see list information at >> [4][4]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > > -- > Sam Chapman > Oetlingerstrasse 65 > 4057 Basel > (0041) 79 530 39 91 > > -- References 1. mailto:[5]nedma...@aol.com 2. mailto:[6]wa...@physics.utexas.edu 3. [7]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stradivarius_instruments 4. [8]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
