[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
Or my favorite Tibetan "mind" verse:
"Homage to the mind, which, like a wish-fulfilling gem, grants us all
that we desire."
C.
>>> Daniel Winheld 7/31/2009 12:35 PM >>>
...and capoing at the 1st fret gives us A=392, and removing the capo
gives us A=370, Viola! Your "E" guitar is now a "G" lute after all!
It's all in the mind- As John Milton said (or was it Blake?), "The
mind
is all! Can make a heaven out of hell and a hell out of heaven."
Basically, then one needs to re-educate the mind.
One of our learned colleagues (was that you, dt?) once said that the
smaller, higher pitched lutes more satisfactory for playing vocal
intabulations and that the larger ones were better for solos,
generally
speaking of course.
Dan
Placing the capo at the 2nd fret on a guitar tuned to A=440 would
be
equivalent to G=415 lute pitch. More method to the madness than
first appears.
Gary
- Original Message - From: "Franz Mechsner"
To: "Eugene C. Braig IV" ; "Daniel Winheld"
; "lute"
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 10:18 AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
When I played the guitar, I often put a capo on 2nd (rarely 3rd)
fret
for renaissance pieces transcribed from lute because I felt they
sounded better like that. I had no idea about the lute and
thought
I
put the pieces too high... So was that silly? And if yes, why?
Somehow
I missed the whole threat of discussion here, thus I am not so
enlightened as I should probably be...
Franz
--
--
To get on or off this list see list information at
[1]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
On Jul 31, 2009, at 9:35 AM, Daniel Winheld wrote: > "The mind >is all! Can make a heaven out of hell and a hell out of heaven." The mind is its own place, and in it self Can make a Heav'n of Hell, a Hell of Heav'n. --Satan in Paradise Lost, Book I -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
...and capoing at the 1st fret gives us A=392, and removing the capo
gives us A=370, Viola! Your "E" guitar is now a "G" lute after all!
It's all in the mind- As John Milton said (or was it Blake?), "The mind
is all! Can make a heaven out of hell and a hell out of heaven."
Basically, then one needs to re-educate the mind.
One of our learned colleagues (was that you, dt?) once said that the
smaller, higher pitched lutes more satisfactory for playing vocal
intabulations and that the larger ones were better for solos, generally
speaking of course.
Dan
Placing the capo at the 2nd fret on a guitar tuned to A=440 would be
equivalent to G=415 lute pitch. More method to the madness than
first appears.
Gary
- Original Message - From: "Franz Mechsner"
To: "Eugene C. Braig IV" ; "Daniel Winheld"
; "lute"
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 10:18 AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
When I played the guitar, I often put a capo on 2nd (rarely 3rd)
fret
for renaissance pieces transcribed from lute because I felt they
sounded better like that. I had no idea about the lute and thought
I
put the pieces too high... So was that silly? And if yes, why?
Somehow
I missed the whole threat of discussion here, thus I am not so
enlightened as I should probably be...
Franz
--
--
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
Placing the capo at the 2nd fret on a guitar tuned to A=440 would be equivalent to G=415 lute pitch. More method to the madness than first appears. Gary - Original Message - From: "Franz Mechsner" To: "Eugene C. Braig IV" ; "Daniel Winheld" ; "lute" Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 10:18 AM Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help When I played the guitar, I often put a capo on 2nd (rarely 3rd) fret for renaissance pieces transcribed from lute because I felt they sounded better like that. I had no idea about the lute and thought I put the pieces too high... So was that silly? And if yes, why? Somehow I missed the whole threat of discussion here, thus I am not so enlightened as I should probably be... Franz __ Von: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu im Auftrag von Eugene C. Braig IV Gesendet: Mo 20.07.2009 18:12 An: 'Daniel Winheld'; lute Betreff: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > -Original Message- > From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [[1]mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On > Behalf Of Daniel Winheld > Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2009 6:06 PM > To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > > It's been enjoyable for me to sit back and watch this discussion > develop along its predictable yet excellent path- and I especially > love Martin's description of the "grim determination of guitarists to > use a capo at the 3rd fret" -come Hell or high water, no matter what, > because a Renaissance solo lute is a G instrument, God Damn it! (It's > OK, I was one of those guitarists myself very many years ago) [Eugene C. Braig IV] I never was. That's a rather silly and arbitrary "determination" and, I think, much rarer than it was a few decades ago. Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu 2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html Internal Virus Database is out of date. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.374 / Virus Database: 270.13.20/2248 - Release Date: 07/19/09 05:57:00
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help- transposing
I suspect that the vocal part acceded to the lute in cases where the there was but one lute available and the lutenist was not a thoroughly trained professional. Of course whatever system the singer used (and I do remember moveable do training from a thousand years ago, although specific hexachord theory was not part of the Temple Music School curricula way back when...) would obviate "transposing". I'm impressed that you can transpose from tablature; every time I've needed to transpose, it was always from notation- from guitar training I could always play as if on an "E" instrument, pushing a "G" lute up a 3rd. Jumping 4ths is always a natural move, so an "A" lute is available from E, and from bass viol and 7 course experience a "D" lute becomes available. The only tab transposing that I've done is occasionally from d-minor Baroque when the archlute was in my lap and the Weiss was at hand, and too lazy to change instruments. Sometimes the other way around, but doesn't work as well. When we performed more, soprano I've been married to for untold decades and I would sometimes simply fight over whose "do" got moved. Other arts than musical then came into play. > By the way, there is no evidence that the Signore Adriano >responsible for intabulating Verdelot's madrigals was Willaert. Ron- you may be right. My SPES edition lists "A. Willaert" on the cover, but inside the first facsimile page refers only to "Messer Adriano" - so, Adriano who? Dan >Respectfully, I disagree that the that the singing part was was >always intended to be transposed to match the lute. >Also, the singing part would have been read in "moveable Do" space, >so transposition would neither have been necessary nor called for. >The vocal parts are simply hexachord positions. >You are of course correct that the vocal parts are notated in "Flat >minimal" style, this is so the hexachords could be read more easily. >Because of this, the singer could accompany the lute not only on >whatever lute was being used, but in whatever key the lute player >preferred to play. > >I can fluently play the tablature parts of lute pieces in any of >several keys at sight, and will even do this between a rehearsal and >a performance, should the singer decide a different reference pitch >is more suitable at that moment. And there is no reason to believe >that this practice was not widespread, just as an organist could >rekey organ tablature. > >best wishes >dt > > >At 03:50 PM 7/21/2009, you wrote: >> Dan: >> Your missive outlines one of my pet peeves concerning a rational >> approach to editing early music. Yes, several old prints contain clear >> guides indicating logical starting pitches of of a piece for voice and >> lute. The singing part was _always_ intended to be transposed to match >> the tuning of the lute. The 'key signature' of a given vocal line was >> always printed for ease of reading with zero, one, or rarely two flats, >> just enough to clearly indicate the mode. Previously, 20th century >> editors took the 'key signature' of the vocal at face value to >> determine the pitch and tuning of the lute. No, no, no. This is a >> clear sign of an editor who doesn't play the lute and generally doesn't >> understand 16th century performing conventions. > >By the way, there is no evidence that the Signore Adriano responsible > >for intabulating Verdelot's madrigals was Willaert. >> Thanks for thoughtfully addressing this issue, if tinged with a bit of >> irony. >> Best wishes, > >Ron Andrico -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help- transposing
it should of course read 'inspiring stuff' rather than 'insiring stuff' - hope i did not produce an insulting or misunderstandable word - am not english f __ From: Franz Mechsner Sent: Wed 22.07.2009 04:51 To: David Tayler; lute-cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: RE: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help- transposing This is exciting, david, and certainly an important extra bit information which makes much sense in addition to the movable do-space. there were and are of course different lutes and humans to adapt towards each other, and the consort art hand. If you have to re-key, are there intervals that work best and which you like most as options, say, a fourth upwards etc.? Can you concentrate on a limited set of options for practicing? or have you to be able to do any re-keying? thanks for the insiring stuff (and for being respectfully rather than arrogant about how educated you are and how silly the rest of us...) franz sorry for the minuscules - a drop of water on the keyboard did destroy some options... __ From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu on behalf of David Tayler Sent: Wed 22.07.2009 04:33 To: lute-cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help- transposing Respectfully, I disagree that the that the singing part was was always intended to be transposed to match the lute. Also, the singing part would have been read in "moveable Do" space, so transposition would neither have been necessary nor called for. The vocal parts are simply hexachord positions. You are of course correct that the vocal parts are notated in "Flat minimal" style, this is so the hexachords could be read more easily. Because of this, the singer could accompany the lute not only on whatever lute was being used, but in whatever key the lute player preferred to play. I can fluently play the tablature parts of lute pieces in any of several keys at sight, and will even do this between a rehearsal and a performance, should the singer decide a different reference pitch is more suitable at that moment. And there is no reason to believe that this practice was not widespread, just as an organist could rekey organ tablature. best wishes dt At 03:50 PM 7/21/2009, you wrote: >Dan: >Your missive outlines one of my pet peeves concerning a rational >approach to editing early music. Yes, several old prints contain clear >guides indicating logical starting pitches of of a piece for voice and >lute. The singing part was _always_ intended to be transposed to match >the tuning of the lute. The 'key signature' of a given vocal line was >always printed for ease of reading with zero, one, or rarely two flats, >just enough to clearly indicate the mode. Previously, 20th century >editors took the 'key signature' of the vocal at face value to >determine the pitch and tuning of the lute. No, no, no. This is a >clear sign of an editor who doesn't play the lute and generally doesn't >understand 16th century performing conventions. >By the way, there is no evidence that the Signore Adriano responsible >for intabulating Verdelot's madrigals was Willaert. >Thanks for thoughtfully addressing this issue, if tinged with a bit of >irony. >Best wishes, >Ron Andrico >www.mignarda.com >> Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 12:06:11 -0700 >> To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu >> From: dwinh...@comcast.net >> Subject: [LUTE] Alto lute help- transposing >> >> Back to the slippery "do"- While Renaissance theory and concepts of >> "moveable do" may seem counterintuitive, arcane & complicated to us, >> for the 16th - 17th century music consumer they were rendered >> incredibly simple and user friendly by the publications. In >> Willaert's 1536 edition of Verdelotto's madrigals intabulated for >> voice and lute, the singer's first note is indicated by which >> tabulature figure in the lute part gives him/her that note- e.g., "El >> Canto a tre Tasti della Sottana" that is, 3rd fret of the second >> course. Second madrigal "Al quinto del Canto" (5th fret, 1st course). >> So right off the bat if someone assumes a "fixed do" system we >> already need an "A" lute and an "E" lute. This system was used all >> over Europe at least u
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help- transposing
This is exciting, david, and certainly an important extra bit information which makes much sense in addition to the movable do-space. there were and are of course different lutes and humans to adapt towards each other, and the consort art hand. If you have to re-key, are there intervals that work best and which you like most as options, say, a fourth upwards etc.? Can you concentrate on a limited set of options for practicing? or have you to be able to do any re-keying? thanks for the insiring stuff (and for being respectfully rather than arrogant about how educated you are and how silly the rest of us...) franz sorry for the minuscules - a drop of water on the keyboard did destroy some options... __ From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu on behalf of David Tayler Sent: Wed 22.07.2009 04:33 To: lute-cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help- transposing Respectfully, I disagree that the that the singing part was was always intended to be transposed to match the lute. Also, the singing part would have been read in "moveable Do" space, so transposition would neither have been necessary nor called for. The vocal parts are simply hexachord positions. You are of course correct that the vocal parts are notated in "Flat minimal" style, this is so the hexachords could be read more easily. Because of this, the singer could accompany the lute not only on whatever lute was being used, but in whatever key the lute player preferred to play. I can fluently play the tablature parts of lute pieces in any of several keys at sight, and will even do this between a rehearsal and a performance, should the singer decide a different reference pitch is more suitable at that moment. And there is no reason to believe that this practice was not widespread, just as an organist could rekey organ tablature. best wishes dt At 03:50 PM 7/21/2009, you wrote: >Dan: >Your missive outlines one of my pet peeves concerning a rational >approach to editing early music. Yes, several old prints contain clear >guides indicating logical starting pitches of of a piece for voice and >lute. The singing part was _always_ intended to be transposed to match >the tuning of the lute. The 'key signature' of a given vocal line was >always printed for ease of reading with zero, one, or rarely two flats, >just enough to clearly indicate the mode. Previously, 20th century >editors took the 'key signature' of the vocal at face value to >determine the pitch and tuning of the lute. No, no, no. This is a >clear sign of an editor who doesn't play the lute and generally doesn't >understand 16th century performing conventions. >By the way, there is no evidence that the Signore Adriano responsible >for intabulating Verdelot's madrigals was Willaert. >Thanks for thoughtfully addressing this issue, if tinged with a bit of >irony. >Best wishes, >Ron Andrico >www.mignarda.com >> Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 12:06:11 -0700 >> To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu >> From: dwinh...@comcast.net >> Subject: [LUTE] Alto lute help- transposing >> >> Back to the slippery "do"- While Renaissance theory and concepts of >> "moveable do" may seem counterintuitive, arcane & complicated to us, >> for the 16th - 17th century music consumer they were rendered >> incredibly simple and user friendly by the publications. In >> Willaert's 1536 edition of Verdelotto's madrigals intabulated for >> voice and lute, the singer's first note is indicated by which >> tabulature figure in the lute part gives him/her that note- e.g., "El >> Canto a tre Tasti della Sottana" that is, 3rd fret of the second >> course. Second madrigal "Al quinto del Canto" (5th fret, 1st course). >> So right off the bat if someone assumes a "fixed do" system we >> already need an "A" lute and an "E" lute. This system was used all >> over Europe at least up into the 17th Century French "Airs de Cour". >> >> For Mudarra's "Tres Libros de Musica..." we "need" vihuelas in A, B, >> D, E, F, F#, and G to comply with a fixed do tyranny. (no "C" >> vihuela- how about that?) That was what drove poor old Emilio Pujol >> crazy- in hi
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help- transposing
Respectfully, I disagree that the that the singing part was was always intended to be transposed to match the lute. Also, the singing part would have been read in "moveable Do" space, so transposition would neither have been necessary nor called for. The vocal parts are simply hexachord positions. You are of course correct that the vocal parts are notated in "Flat minimal" style, this is so the hexachords could be read more easily. Because of this, the singer could accompany the lute not only on whatever lute was being used, but in whatever key the lute player preferred to play. I can fluently play the tablature parts of lute pieces in any of several keys at sight, and will even do this between a rehearsal and a performance, should the singer decide a different reference pitch is more suitable at that moment. And there is no reason to believe that this practice was not widespread, just as an organist could rekey organ tablature. best wishes dt At 03:50 PM 7/21/2009, you wrote: >Dan: >Your missive outlines one of my pet peeves concerning a rational >approach to editing early music. Yes, several old prints contain clear >guides indicating logical starting pitches of of a piece for voice and >lute. The singing part was _always_ intended to be transposed to match >the tuning of the lute. The 'key signature' of a given vocal line was >always printed for ease of reading with zero, one, or rarely two flats, >just enough to clearly indicate the mode. Previously, 20th century >editors took the 'key signature' of the vocal at face value to >determine the pitch and tuning of the lute. No, no, no. This is a >clear sign of an editor who doesn't play the lute and generally doesn't >understand 16th century performing conventions. >By the way, there is no evidence that the Signore Adriano responsible >for intabulating Verdelot's madrigals was Willaert. >Thanks for thoughtfully addressing this issue, if tinged with a bit of >irony. >Best wishes, >Ron Andrico >www.mignarda.com >> Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 12:06:11 -0700 >> To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu >> From: dwinh...@comcast.net >> Subject: [LUTE] Alto lute help- transposing >> >> Back to the slippery "do"- While Renaissance theory and concepts of >> "moveable do" may seem counterintuitive, arcane & complicated to us, >> for the 16th - 17th century music consumer they were rendered >> incredibly simple and user friendly by the publications. In >> Willaert's 1536 edition of Verdelotto's madrigals intabulated for >> voice and lute, the singer's first note is indicated by which >> tabulature figure in the lute part gives him/her that note- e.g., "El >> Canto a tre Tasti della Sottana" that is, 3rd fret of the second >> course. Second madrigal "Al quinto del Canto" (5th fret, 1st course). >> So right off the bat if someone assumes a "fixed do" system we >> already need an "A" lute and an "E" lute. This system was used all >> over Europe at least up into the 17th Century French "Airs de Cour". >> >> For Mudarra's "Tres Libros de Musica..." we "need" vihuelas in A, B, >> D, E, F, F#, and G to comply with a fixed do tyranny. (no "C" >> vihuela- how about that?) That was what drove poor old Emilio Pujol >> crazy- in his 1949 transcription he dutifully transcribed each and >> every vihuela intabulation into the literal "key" so indicated by the >> singer's first note and fret conjunction, no matter what pitch level >> the vihuela would then be at, thereby bestowing seven sizes of >> vihuela on a grateful posterity. "D'oh!" indeed! >> >> Dan >> >> >Certainly good points. >> >However, a renaissance musician used a transposing system, therefore >> >they did not transpose in the modern sense because they were already >> >transposing. >> >Although there is not a handy modern analogy, unless you play the >> >bass clarinet, it would be like saying a person who was >sight-singing >> >using "moveable Do" instead of "fixed Do" >> >should use "moveable Do". They would say, I always use "moveable >Do," >> >what do you mean? >> > >> >(Substitute "moveable Ut" if you are a purist, although Ut is by >> >definition moveable) >> > >> >The most difficult part about renaissance theory--aside from the >> >Formschneider codex--is that the lute is currently in a "fixed Do" >> >space, but historically was in the "moveable Do" space: >> > >> >"G Lute" = fixed Do space >> >"Lute in Sol" = moveable Do space >> > >> >Does it matter? Sure thing! Endless confusion otherwise about keys, >> >pitch, performance, etc. >> >dt >> > >> >> -- >> >> >> >> To get on or off this list see list information at >> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > ___
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help- transposing
Dan: Your missive outlines one of my pet peeves concerning a rational approach to editing early music. Yes, several old prints contain clear guides indicating logical starting pitches of of a piece for voice and lute. The singing part was _always_ intended to be transposed to match the tuning of the lute. The 'key signature' of a given vocal line was always printed for ease of reading with zero, one, or rarely two flats, just enough to clearly indicate the mode. Previously, 20th century editors took the 'key signature' of the vocal at face value to determine the pitch and tuning of the lute. No, no, no. This is a clear sign of an editor who doesn't play the lute and generally doesn't understand 16th century performing conventions. By the way, there is no evidence that the Signore Adriano responsible for intabulating Verdelot's madrigals was Willaert. Thanks for thoughtfully addressing this issue, if tinged with a bit of irony. Best wishes, Ron Andrico www.mignarda.com > Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 12:06:11 -0700 > To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu > From: dwinh...@comcast.net > Subject: [LUTE] Alto lute help- transposing > > Back to the slippery "do"- While Renaissance theory and concepts of > "moveable do" may seem counterintuitive, arcane & complicated to us, > for the 16th - 17th century music consumer they were rendered > incredibly simple and user friendly by the publications. In > Willaert's 1536 edition of Verdelotto's madrigals intabulated for > voice and lute, the singer's first note is indicated by which > tabulature figure in the lute part gives him/her that note- e.g., "El > Canto a tre Tasti della Sottana" that is, 3rd fret of the second > course. Second madrigal "Al quinto del Canto" (5th fret, 1st course). > So right off the bat if someone assumes a "fixed do" system we > already need an "A" lute and an "E" lute. This system was used all > over Europe at least up into the 17th Century French "Airs de Cour". > > For Mudarra's "Tres Libros de Musica..." we "need" vihuelas in A, B, > D, E, F, F#, and G to comply with a fixed do tyranny. (no "C" > vihuela- how about that?) That was what drove poor old Emilio Pujol > crazy- in his 1949 transcription he dutifully transcribed each and > every vihuela intabulation into the literal "key" so indicated by the > singer's first note and fret conjunction, no matter what pitch level > the vihuela would then be at, thereby bestowing seven sizes of > vihuela on a grateful posterity. "D'oh!" indeed! > > Dan > > >Certainly good points. > >However, a renaissance musician used a transposing system, therefore > >they did not transpose in the modern sense because they were already > >transposing. > >Although there is not a handy modern analogy, unless you play the > >bass clarinet, it would be like saying a person who was sight-singing > >using "moveable Do" instead of "fixed Do" > >should use "moveable Do". They would say, I always use "moveable Do," > >what do you mean? > > > >(Substitute "moveable Ut" if you are a purist, although Ut is by > >definition moveable) > > > >The most difficult part about renaissance theory--aside from the > >Formschneider codex--is that the lute is currently in a "fixed Do" > >space, but historically was in the "moveable Do" space: > > > >"G Lute" = fixed Do space > >"Lute in Sol" = moveable Do space > > > >Does it matter? Sure thing! Endless confusion otherwise about keys, > >pitch, performance, etc. > >dt > > > > -- > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html __ Windows Live Hotmail(R): Search, add, and share the webs latest sports videos. [1]Check it out. -- References 1. http://www.windowslive.com/Online/Hotmail/Campaign/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_QA_HM_sports_videos_072009&cat=sports
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
To quote an icon of American television culture "D'oh!" > -Original Message- > From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On > Behalf Of Lex van Sante > Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 4:42 AM > To: lute mailing list list > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > > It was the Dodo that was to slow to adapt to changing circumstances > wasn't it? > > LvS > > Op 21 jul 2009, om 09:47 heeft David van Ooijen het volgende geschreven: > > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 7:42 AM, Daniel > > Winheld wrote: > >> Unfortunately this leads us to the "Do Si Do" moveable do space > >> theory. > > > > Aka the final frontier in musicology, > > > > David > > > > -- > > *** > > David van Ooijen > > davidvanooi...@gmail.com > > www.davidvanooijen.nl > > *** > > > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
It was the Dodo that was to slow to adapt to changing circumstances wasn't it? LvS Op 21 jul 2009, om 09:47 heeft David van Ooijen het volgende geschreven: On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 7:42 AM, Daniel Winheld wrote: Unfortunately this leads us to the "Do Si Do" moveable do space theory. Aka the final frontier in musicology, David -- *** David van Ooijen davidvanooi...@gmail.com www.davidvanooijen.nl *** To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 7:42 AM, Daniel Winheld wrote: > Unfortunately this leads us to the "Do Si Do" moveable do space theory. Aka the final frontier in musicology, David -- *** David van Ooijen davidvanooi...@gmail.com www.davidvanooijen.nl *** To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
No do was as moveable as the vihuela do. Some early 20th century musicologists were so confused about the vihuelist's theoretical explanations that they thought that vihuelas were actually built in at least seven different sizes. In fact, does anyone remember the musician, (I think his name was Roderigo de Zayas), who built his reputation on playing "All Seven Sizes of the Vihuela" back in the 1970's? Unfortunately this leads us to the "Do Si Do" moveable do space theory. Dan >The most difficult part about renaissance theory--aside from the >Formschneider codex--is that the lute is currently in a "fixed Do" >space, but historically was in the "moveable Do" space: > >"G Lute" = fixed Do space >"Lute in Sol" = moveable Do space > >Does it matter? Sure thing! Endless confusion otherwise about keys, >pitch, performance, etc. >dt > -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
An excellent summary of contemporary practice. DD Certainly good points. However, a renaissance musician used a transposing system, therefore they did not transpose in the modern sense because they were already transposing. Although there is not a handy modern analogy, unless you play the bass clarinet, it would be like saying a person who was sight-singing using "moveable Do" instead of "fixed Do" should use "moveable Do". They would say, I always use "moveable Do," what do you mean? (Substitute "moveable Ut" if you are a purist, although Ut is by definition moveable) The most difficult part about renaissance theory--aside from the Formschneider codex--is that the lute is currently in a "fixed Do" space, but historically was in the "moveable Do" space: "G Lute" = fixed Do space "Lute in Sol" = moveable Do space Does it matter? Sure thing! Endless confusion otherwise about keys, pitch, performance, etc. dt At 11:53 AM 7/20/2009, you wrote: A practical musician wiil use a practical tuning. In the sense that a certain lute will sound right for certain repertoire when tuned to a certain pitch with the appropriate strings. When playing in an ensemble with other tuneable instruments one has to come to an an agreement on which pitch to use. When playing with fixed pitch instruments one will have to either cancel the gigg, or transpose or play another size of lute. All this is very much in accordance with "ye oulde practice" LvS Op 20 jul 2009, om 20:14 heeft David Tayler het volgende geschreven: Terms like "alto lute" or "alto viol" are periodically floated and usually do not gain traction, however, this is simply a modern terminology phenomenon. Alto recorder did very well; on the other hand, male alto--now replaced by the more resplendent sounding "countertenor"--has pretty much disappeared. Several professional archlute players changed the name of their instruments from "archlute" to "theorbo" when the theorbo became more in demand from the hiring point of view--they didn't change instruments, just names. At one point, when it looked like "arciliuto" might gain traction, several changed to "arciliuto", then back again to "archlute" and "theorbo". You can see the trail reflected in CD liner notes. I sort of liked "arciliuto" myself--more historical and with that international flair. Does not rhyme with "hirsute" as well. And of course Shakespeare's famous line "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet" was originally "a rose by any other word", which avoids the careless repetition of the "word name": What's in a name? That which we call a Rose By any other Word would smell as sweet. dt To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
Andrew-- Aren't you glad you asked?? We've all learned a lot from your very basic query. Regards, Leonard Williams /[ ] / \ | * | \_=_/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
Certainly good points. However, a renaissance musician used a transposing system, therefore they did not transpose in the modern sense because they were already transposing. Although there is not a handy modern analogy, unless you play the bass clarinet, it would be like saying a person who was sight-singing using "moveable Do" instead of "fixed Do" should use "moveable Do". They would say, I always use "moveable Do," what do you mean? (Substitute "moveable Ut" if you are a purist, although Ut is by definition moveable) The most difficult part about renaissance theory--aside from the Formschneider codex--is that the lute is currently in a "fixed Do" space, but historically was in the "moveable Do" space: "G Lute" = fixed Do space "Lute in Sol" = moveable Do space Does it matter? Sure thing! Endless confusion otherwise about keys, pitch, performance, etc. dt At 11:53 AM 7/20/2009, you wrote: >A practical musician wiil use a practical tuning. >In the sense that a certain lute will sound right for certain >repertoire when tuned to a certain pitch with the appropriate strings. >When playing in an ensemble with other tuneable instruments one has >to come to an an agreement on which pitch to use. >When playing with fixed pitch instruments one will have to either >cancel the gigg, or transpose or play another size of lute. >All this is very much in accordance with "ye oulde practice" > >LvS > >Op 20 jul 2009, om 20:14 heeft David Tayler het volgende geschreven: > >>Terms like "alto lute" or "alto viol" are periodically floated and >>usually do not gain traction, however, this is simply a modern >>terminology phenomenon. >>Alto recorder did very well; on the other hand, male alto--now >>replaced by the more resplendent sounding "countertenor"--has pretty >>much disappeared. >> >>Several professional archlute players changed the name of their >>instruments from "archlute" to "theorbo" when the theorbo became more >>in demand from the hiring point of view--they didn't change >>instruments, just names. >>At one point, when it looked like "arciliuto" might gain traction, >>several changed to "arciliuto", then back again to "archlute" and >>"theorbo". You can see the trail reflected in CD liner notes. >>I sort of liked "arciliuto" myself--more historical and with that >>international flair. Does not rhyme with "hirsute" as well. >> >>And of course Shakespeare's famous line "a rose by any other name >>would smell as sweet" was originally "a rose by any other word", >>which avoids the careless repetition of the "word name": >> >>What's in a name? That which we call a Rose >>By any other Word would smell as sweet. >> >> >>dt >> >> >> >> >>To get on or off this list see list information at >>http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
A practical musician wiil use a practical tuning. In the sense that a certain lute will sound right for certain repertoire when tuned to a certain pitch with the appropriate strings. When playing in an ensemble with other tuneable instruments one has to come to an an agreement on which pitch to use. When playing with fixed pitch instruments one will have to either cancel the gigg, or transpose or play another size of lute. All this is very much in accordance with "ye oulde practice" LvS Op 20 jul 2009, om 20:14 heeft David Tayler het volgende geschreven: Terms like "alto lute" or "alto viol" are periodically floated and usually do not gain traction, however, this is simply a modern terminology phenomenon. Alto recorder did very well; on the other hand, male alto--now replaced by the more resplendent sounding "countertenor"--has pretty much disappeared. Several professional archlute players changed the name of their instruments from "archlute" to "theorbo" when the theorbo became more in demand from the hiring point of view--they didn't change instruments, just names. At one point, when it looked like "arciliuto" might gain traction, several changed to "arciliuto", then back again to "archlute" and "theorbo". You can see the trail reflected in CD liner notes. I sort of liked "arciliuto" myself--more historical and with that international flair. Does not rhyme with "hirsute" as well. And of course Shakespeare's famous line "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet" was originally "a rose by any other word", which avoids the careless repetition of the "word name": What's in a name? That which we call a Rose By any other Word would smell as sweet. dt To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
Hey- non taken! Just an outbreak of discussion taking place, as threatened- comes from sneezing and not washing hands on an international forum. I have a really, really good capo for my 7-string, steel-string guitar. That does open up whole different sonorities. I can have a high pitched fake Orpharion or remove the capo, retune, and have still too-high pitched fake Bandora. Lots of fun, this instrument. dt- What's in a name indeed. I have no idea what to call my archthing. (Maybe Lucille, unless BB King has that copyrighted.) String lengths of 65 and 97 cm, but no 8ves on the bass diapasons. In any case, nothing you call me will improve the smell. And where did you get Buxtehude's pitch from? >My apologies, Daniel, Franz, et al. > >I sincerely intended no offense (or even threat) with the "silly" comment. >That was more meant for ribbing than as a serious attack on all those silly >guitarists (which I myself am much more than any incarnation of lutenist). >Because I don't capo solo music doesn't mean better qualified musicians >shouldn't. Enjoy. > >Eugene > -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
You've convinced me! Eugene > -Original Message- > From: Roman Turovsky [mailto:lu...@polyhymnion.org] > Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 2:27 PM > To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu; Eugene C. Braig IV > Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > > You shouldn't get preoccupied: I certainly wouldn't advocate a capo for > any > of my music. > RT > > From: "Eugene C. Braig IV" > > My apologies, Daniel, Franz, et al. > > I sincerely intended no offense (or even threat) with the "silly" > comment. > > That was more meant for ribbing than as a serious attack on all those > > silly > > guitarists (which I myself am much more than any incarnation of > lutenist). > > Because I don't capo solo music doesn't mean better qualified musicians > > shouldn't. Enjoy. > > Eugene > > > > > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On > >> Behalf Of Daniel Winheld > >> Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 1:28 PM > >> To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu > >> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > >> > >> Well, it didn't seem silly when I had no clue about historic pitch > >> variation, and no knowledge of lute sizes- and all transcriptions > >> were for a "G" instrument, with no disclaimer that such a pitch was > >> strictly nominal convenience from another age. I was 17, it was 1964, > >> and I desperately wanted a "lute" in the worst possible way. While > >> the "determination" has grown rarer, we have actually had to educate > >> a few guitarists right on this list over the past couple of years. > >> One irony- at a workshop with my old "E" bass lute, I had to get it > >> up to F# and G (A-440) for some singers. Instant capo at 2nd and 3rd > >> fret with a pencil and some thick rubber bands! Talk about karmic > >> retribution. Or the Gods of Early Music have a sense of humor. > >> > >> >[Eugene C. Braig IV] I never was. That's a rather silly and arbitrary > >> >"determination" and, I think, much rarer than it was a few decades > ago. > >> >Eugene > > > > > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > >
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
You shouldn't get preoccupied: I certainly wouldn't advocate a capo for any of my music. RT From: "Eugene C. Braig IV" My apologies, Daniel, Franz, et al. I sincerely intended no offense (or even threat) with the "silly" comment. That was more meant for ribbing than as a serious attack on all those silly guitarists (which I myself am much more than any incarnation of lutenist). Because I don't capo solo music doesn't mean better qualified musicians shouldn't. Enjoy. Eugene -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Daniel Winheld Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 1:28 PM To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help Well, it didn't seem silly when I had no clue about historic pitch variation, and no knowledge of lute sizes- and all transcriptions were for a "G" instrument, with no disclaimer that such a pitch was strictly nominal convenience from another age. I was 17, it was 1964, and I desperately wanted a "lute" in the worst possible way. While the "determination" has grown rarer, we have actually had to educate a few guitarists right on this list over the past couple of years. One irony- at a workshop with my old "E" bass lute, I had to get it up to F# and G (A-440) for some singers. Instant capo at 2nd and 3rd fret with a pencil and some thick rubber bands! Talk about karmic retribution. Or the Gods of Early Music have a sense of humor. >[Eugene C. Braig IV] I never was. That's a rather silly and arbitrary >"determination" and, I think, much rarer than it was a few decades ago. >Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
Terms like "alto lute" or "alto viol" are periodically floated and usually do not gain traction, however, this is simply a modern terminology phenomenon. Alto recorder did very well; on the other hand, male alto--now replaced by the more resplendent sounding "countertenor"--has pretty much disappeared. Several professional archlute players changed the name of their instruments from "archlute" to "theorbo" when the theorbo became more in demand from the hiring point of view--they didn't change instruments, just names. At one point, when it looked like "arciliuto" might gain traction, several changed to "arciliuto", then back again to "archlute" and "theorbo". You can see the trail reflected in CD liner notes. I sort of liked "arciliuto" myself--more historical and with that international flair. Does not rhyme with "hirsute" as well. And of course Shakespeare's famous line "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet" was originally "a rose by any other word", which avoids the careless repetition of the "word name": What's in a name? That which we call a Rose By any other Word would smell as sweet. dt To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
My apologies, Daniel, Franz, et al. I sincerely intended no offense (or even threat) with the "silly" comment. That was more meant for ribbing than as a serious attack on all those silly guitarists (which I myself am much more than any incarnation of lutenist). Because I don't capo solo music doesn't mean better qualified musicians shouldn't. Enjoy. Eugene > -Original Message- > From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On > Behalf Of Daniel Winheld > Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 1:28 PM > To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > > Well, it didn't seem silly when I had no clue about historic pitch > variation, and no knowledge of lute sizes- and all transcriptions > were for a "G" instrument, with no disclaimer that such a pitch was > strictly nominal convenience from another age. I was 17, it was 1964, > and I desperately wanted a "lute" in the worst possible way. While > the "determination" has grown rarer, we have actually had to educate > a few guitarists right on this list over the past couple of years. > One irony- at a workshop with my old "E" bass lute, I had to get it > up to F# and G (A-440) for some singers. Instant capo at 2nd and 3rd > fret with a pencil and some thick rubber bands! Talk about karmic > retribution. Or the Gods of Early Music have a sense of humor. > > >[Eugene C. Braig IV] I never was. That's a rather silly and arbitrary > >"determination" and, I think, much rarer than it was a few decades ago. > >Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
From: >I missed the whole threat of discussion >here, thus I am not so >enlightened as I should probably be... Don't worry, there's always the lingering threat that actual discussion will break out on this list, but that rarely happens. Chris Sorry, I've been busy lately, and couldn't be more threatening. RT To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
Franz, --- On Mon, 7/20/09, Franz Mechsner wrote: > When I played the > guitar, I often put a capo on 2nd (rarely 3rd) fret > for renaissance pieces transcribed from > lute because I felt they > sounded better like that. I've seen a number of professional guitarists use the capo at the 2nd fret lately when playing lute music. They do this because they are "informed" that during the Olden Days only the G lute was used and it was uniformly agreed upon the All Musikale Pitches would be precisely one half step lower than in Today's Days. (The exceptions being Buxtehude, who used an idiosyncratic A= 25,113,972.74589 and Lully, who preferred the lower A= -6.073. Today, performances of these composers' music are rarely heard at their original pitches, possible because these pitches are incapable of being heard by modern ears.) > I missed the whole threat of discussion > here, thus I am not so > enlightened as I should probably be... > Don't worry, there's always the lingering threat that actual discussion will break out on this list, but that rarely happens. Chris > Franz > > __ > > Von: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu > im Auftrag von Eugene C. Braig IV > Gesendet: Mo 20.07.2009 18:12 > An: 'Daniel Winheld'; lute > Betreff: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > > > -Original Message- > > From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu > [[1]mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] > On > > Behalf Of Daniel Winheld > > Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2009 6:06 PM > > To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu > > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > > > > It's been enjoyable for me to sit > back and watch this discussion > > develop along its predictable yet > excellent path- and I especially > > love Martin's description of the > "grim determination of guitarists to > > use a capo at the 3rd fret" -come > Hell or high water, no matter what, > > because a Renaissance solo lute is a > G instrument, God Damn it! (It's > > OK, I was one of those guitarists > myself very many years ago) > [Eugene C. Braig IV] I never was. > That's a rather silly and arbitrary > "determination" and, I think, much rarer > than it was a few decades ago. > Eugene > To get on or off this list see list > information at > [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > -- > > References > > 1. mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu > 2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
Well, it didn't seem silly when I had no clue about historic pitch variation, and no knowledge of lute sizes- and all transcriptions were for a "G" instrument, with no disclaimer that such a pitch was strictly nominal convenience from another age. I was 17, it was 1964, and I desperately wanted a "lute" in the worst possible way. While the "determination" has grown rarer, we have actually had to educate a few guitarists right on this list over the past couple of years. One irony- at a workshop with my old "E" bass lute, I had to get it up to F# and G (A-440) for some singers. Instant capo at 2nd and 3rd fret with a pencil and some thick rubber bands! Talk about karmic retribution. Or the Gods of Early Music have a sense of humor. >[Eugene C. Braig IV] I never was. That's a rather silly and arbitrary >"determination" and, I think, much rarer than it was a few decades ago. >Eugene -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
When I played the guitar, I often put a capo on 2nd (rarely 3rd) fret for renaissance pieces transcribed from lute because I felt they sounded better like that. I had no idea about the lute and thought I put the pieces too high... So was that silly? And if yes, why? Somehow I missed the whole threat of discussion here, thus I am not so enlightened as I should probably be... Franz __ Von: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu im Auftrag von Eugene C. Braig IV Gesendet: Mo 20.07.2009 18:12 An: 'Daniel Winheld'; lute Betreff: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > -Original Message- > From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [[1]mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On > Behalf Of Daniel Winheld > Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2009 6:06 PM > To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > > It's been enjoyable for me to sit back and watch this discussion > develop along its predictable yet excellent path- and I especially > love Martin's description of the "grim determination of guitarists to > use a capo at the 3rd fret" -come Hell or high water, no matter what, > because a Renaissance solo lute is a G instrument, God Damn it! (It's > OK, I was one of those guitarists myself very many years ago) [Eugene C. Braig IV] I never was. That's a rather silly and arbitrary "determination" and, I think, much rarer than it was a few decades ago. Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu 2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
> -Original Message- > From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On > Behalf Of Daniel Winheld > Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2009 6:06 PM > To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > > It's been enjoyable for me to sit back and watch this discussion > develop along its predictable yet excellent path- and I especially > love Martin's description of the "grim determination of guitarists to > use a capo at the 3rd fret" -come Hell or high water, no matter what, > because a Renaissance solo lute is a G instrument, God Damn it! (It's > OK, I was one of those guitarists myself very many years ago) [Eugene C. Braig IV] I never was. That's a rather silly and arbitrary "determination" and, I think, much rarer than it was a few decades ago. Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
On Jul 19, 2009, at 1:57 PM, Ron Andrico wrote: >To clarify, Bob Lundberg did indeed think of the circa 60 cm > lute as an >'alto' lute. You are right in pointing out that his book was > not quite >left fully edited as far as consistent terminology, etc. But I > think >he would stand by his classification of lute sizes. When he passed >away, Bob was in the middle of building a 62 cm Maler lute for me, >which he deliberately (and provacatively) called an alto lute. His book is more deliberate and provocative than that. A caption on page 8 says "Alto lute by Wendelio Venere, 1582...The string length is 66.7 cm.." There might be good reasons for calling an instrument that size an alto (it allowed him to avoid the term "baritone," but I'm not sure that would have been important), just as a "tenor" recorder in C might more accurately be called a "soprano." But someone who uses a word in a different sense from everyone else is going to have talk with footnotes if he wants to avoid confusion. Lundberg's other examples on those pages: his "small octave" is 44cm, "descant" is 58.4cm, the "tenor" is 78cm, the "bass" is 89.5cm. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
Would that me in winter or in summer? Buxtehude's pitch was 483 dt To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
Buxtehude's pitch was 483 dt To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
On Jul 19, 2009, at 2:56 PM, Thomas Schall wrote: > Which would lead to a standard pitch of a92-415 for the germany > of the baroque. That's far too limited a range, a mere half tone. In Leipzig alone in Bach's day, there was a standard chorton (probably about 440) and a standard kammerton a whole tone lower. This is why some of the instrumental parts for Bach's cantatas are transposed. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
It's been enjoyable for me to sit back and watch this discussion develop along its predictable yet excellent path- and I especially love Martin's description of the "grim determination of guitarists to use a capo at the 3rd fret" -come Hell or high water, no matter what, because a Renaissance solo lute is a G instrument, God Damn it! (It's OK, I was one of those guitarists myself very many years ago) I've always suspected from the rough proportions of the instruments to the players holding them in the historic iconographical record that a majority of solo R lutes looked, in fact, to be in the 65cm to 68 cm range. For a number of years, my favorite solo lute was a small bass, which I referred to as a "division bass" lute (from the gambist's terminology differentiating the large consort bass from the smaller, but same pitched, division bass viol for solos) which I pitched at either E or Eb - ended up being "E" with A=420. This critter had a SL of 72 cm. and I could play virtually everything on it- the acid test being the full Ab chord (on a G lute, ha ha) that requires a full barre on the first fret with a c at the 5th fret with the little finger. Eventually I gave up the instrument; one gets weaker & stiffer with age, and not everything sounded well at that pitch- to my ears. I very much enjoy 64 to 64 cm. range now for pitch level and fingering comfort. Robert Lundberg was not necessarily mistaken; terminology is a minefield, and in fact the Germans referred to the bass viol as a "tenor" the tenor as an "alto", etc. Don't know if they still do, however. Dan -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
As far as I know one can tell the approximate pitch by observing the pitch of old organs (surviving flutes etc.). Which would lead to a standard pitch of a=392-415 for the germany of the baroque. I don't know how the situation may have been in other countries. Thomas To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
On Jul 19, 2009, at 2:30 PM, Martin Shepherd wrote: > Whether a lute is called an "alto", a "tenor", or whatever, is > entirely a matter of taste, Terminology is entirely a matter of taste only when you're talking to yourself, or you're the first to use a term. Otherwise, it's a matter of convention. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
Howard: To clarify, Bob Lundberg did indeed think of the circa 60 cm lute as an 'alto' lute. You are right in pointing out that his book was not quite left fully edited as far as consistent terminology, etc. But I think he would stand by his classification of lute sizes. When he passed away, Bob was in the middle of building a 62 cm Maler lute for me, which he deliberately (and provacatively) called an alto lute. His further contextual comments on the subject indicated that he felt lutenists today played small lutes because they are easier to play, and that larger lutes, circa 66 cm, were likely more common in the 16th century. Best wishes, Ron Andrico www.mignarda.com > Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 10:00:36 -0700 > To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu > From: howardpos...@ca.rr.com > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > > On Jul 19, 2009, at 9:29 AM, nedma...@aol.com wrote: > > > In Robert Lundberg's book "Historical Lute Construction" there is a > > photograph of 5 lutes (pp.8&9); small-octave, descant, alto, > > tenor and > > bass. He lists the tunings for them as being d", a', g', e' & d' > > respectively. > > > > While I always thought of the g' tuning as being a tenor lute, > > apparently it's an alto lute, and (I think?) the most commonly > > played. > > There's nothing authoritative about that book's terminology, and it's > occasionally at odds with what's commonly accepted. For example, it > calls the 64cm archlute on page 14 a "theorbo" and apparently > reserves the term "archlute" for smaller liuto attiorbato types that > have double-strung extension basses. It needs to be taken with a > grain of salt because the material for his book was generated over a > quarter of a century, during which time knowledge and terminology > changed, and Lundberg died leaving a draft instead of a finished > book. The editors chose to treat it as a sort of historical > document, and not "correct" it. > > Sometimes the book's terminology is internally inconsistent. Page 2 > defines the Transition period (between renaissance and baroque) as > 1620-1660, but the term is used on page 10 to mean beginning about > 1600 and lasting until nearly 1680, and on page 12 we read that the > one lute-family instrument being built during this period is the > theorbo, which Lundberg couldnt possibly have meant, no matter how > he was using the word "theorbo." > > Anyway, don't go around calling an A lute a tenor; it will just > create misunderstanding. > -- > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html __ Bing brings you maps, menus, and reviews organized in one place. [1]Try it now. -- References 1. http://www.bing.com/search?q=restaurants&form=MLOGEN&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TXT_MLOGEN_Local_Local_Restaurants_1x1
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
Thanks for that information about Lundberg's book, Howard (that it should not be taken as absolutely authoritative and is sometimes at odds with accepted views) . I knew that he had died before the book had been thoroughly edited and revised where necessary, but did not know the extent to which some of the terminology was still undergoing re-examination. I'll make it a point not to think of my instruments as 'alto' or 'tenor', but simply as lutes in g' tuning. Ned __ Can love help you live longer? [1]Find out now. -- References 1. http://personals.aol.com/articles/2009/02/18/longer-lives-through-relationships/?ncid=emlweuslove0001 To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
Dear Andrew > instrument was made for: A, E, C, G, D, A; but am curious if there are You have a 6-course renaissance lute, tuned (top to bottom) g' d' a f c G or one tone up a' e' b g d A. Considering the string length, you're probably better off tuning it in a'. Most notated music will presume a lute tuned in g', but as long as you're playing by yourself nobody will be bothered. If you feel the strings are a bit tense at 440Hz, tune it down half a tone to 415Hz, live with it a couple of days and then decide if you're happier with it at the lower pitch/lower string tension. These are personal matters, so no one can give you really good advice but yourself. If you have no clue and are an absolute nove, just go with what the maker or former owner adviced and live with that for a while till you have developped some taste and sensetivity to these matters yourself. Feel free to call you're lute an alto lute, but most lute players would refer to it as an a'-lute, I think, or just mention the string length. I have a 6-course at 54cm, usually tuned in a' = 440 or 415hz, whatever is in demand. I tend to change the strings when changing pitch, as the instrument seems happier when I do. Lately I've been playing music on it at 466Hz, so I called it a g'-lute at 466, though you might just as well call it an a'-lute at 415Hz. What's in a name. For a project in September I need something small enough to take as hand luggage on a plane, and in 440hz, so I just tuned it down half a tone and am learning to live with it as a g'-lute at 440Hz. Some rattling still, but it must be my heavy thumb. ;-) As long as you're playing from tablature, and most if not all literature for your instrument will be 16th century music written in various types of tablature, you can tune or call it to whatever pitch you like, as long as you keep the intervals between the strings constant. This might upset your guitar friends, but if they're clever they'll just tune up the third course half a step, play Stairway to Heaven and Dust in the Wind, after which you can tune the third course down again and return to Dalza, Francesco and Dowland. Happy playing David -- *** David van Ooijen davidvanooi...@gmail.com www.davidvanooijen.nl *** To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009, Andrew Arconti said: >I have been using the following tuning which I was told is what the >instrument was made for: A, E, C, G, D, A; but am curious if there are >other tunings appropriate for a lute of this type? depends on what music you are playing from. You have to tune the instrument to suit the tabulature when you play from tabulature. > I have been tuning to 440hz There is some flexibility here, depends on the choice of strings (tension), design of the instrument, and who you choose to play with; choices of ensemble work may be greater if you stick to 440, unless you have opportunity to work with one of the few ensembles working at a lower pitch. >Finally, are there any good resources for information pertaining to 6 >course renaissance alto lutes out there? Seems like this is not the >most common lute type and info is really hard to find. lute duets for instruments a tone apart exist, and can be performed on instruments in a and g (Heckel, Matelart). The entire solo 6c lute repertoire can be played on your instrument; it will be transposed up a tone, but who cares? -- Dana Emery To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
On Jul 19, 2009, at 9:29 AM, nedma...@aol.com wrote: >In Robert Lundberg's book "Historical Lute Construction" there is a >photograph of 5 lutes (pp.8&9); small-octave, descant, alto, > tenor and >bass. He lists the tunings for them as being d", a', g', e' & d' >respectively. > >While I always thought of the g' tuning as being a tenor lute, >apparently it's an alto lute, and (I think?) the most commonly >played. There's nothing authoritative about that book's terminology, and it's occasionally at odds with what's commonly accepted. For example, it calls the 64cm archlute on page 14 a "theorbo" and apparently reserves the term "archlute" for smaller liuto attiorbato types that have double-strung extension basses. It needs to be taken with a grain of salt because the material for his book was generated over a quarter of a century, during which time knowledge and terminology changed, and Lundberg died leaving a draft instead of a finished book. The editors chose to treat it as a sort of historical document, and not "correct" it. Sometimes the book's terminology is internally inconsistent. Page 2 defines the Transition period (between renaissance and baroque) as 1620-1660, but the term is used on page 10 to mean beginning about 1600 and lasting until nearly 1680, and on page 12 we read that the one lute-family instrument being built during this period is the theorbo, which Lundberg couldnt possibly have meant, no matter how he was using the word "theorbo." Anyway, don't go around calling an A lute a tenor; it will just create misunderstanding. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
In Robert Lundberg's book "Historical Lute Construction" there is a photograph of 5 lutes (pp.8&9); small-octave, descant, alto, tenor and bass. He lists the tunings for them as being d", a', g', e' & d' respectively. While I always thought of the g' tuning as being a tenor lute, apparently it's an alto lute, and (I think?) the most commonly played. But - somewhat confusingly to me - the string length of the 7 course descant lute is shown as 58.4 cm. This seems close to the string length used by many makers for lutes in g'. The alto lute (by Wendelio Venere) has a string length of 66.7 cm. This seems rather long, (though my Hauser model lute has a string length of 64 cm). My Meadow 8 course (g' tuning) seems comfortable with a string length of about 58 cm. I would think a string length up in the 60's would make much of the solo literature quite difficult to play for anyone without quite large hands. I guess guitarists manage it, but with much narrower necks. Ned __ Can love help you live longer? [1]Find out now. -- References 1. http://personals.aol.com/articles/2009/02/18/longer-lives-through-relationships/?ncid=emlweuslove0001 To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
I have to apologize for my mistake earlier in saying the length from nut to bridge is 21.5 cm. What I meant to say is that it is 54.61 cm. The 21.5 is the length in inches. Sorry for the confusion. And thank you everyone for catching that. So what I'm starting to find is that altos aren't as uncommon as I thought. I guess I came to that conclusion from having found a good deal of info and discussion on lutes in g' rather than a', and also no examples of tunings for lutes in a'. I am excited to finally have a correct tuning for this lute. ADGBEA. Thank you everyone for your help and suggestions. I'm slowly learning. :) > Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 11:08:41 -0400 > To: itno...@hotmail.com > CC: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu > From: br...@estavel.org > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > > 21.5 cm sounds a bit short for an A lute and a bit too long for a > Soprano lute in D.A Not sure what you have there Andrew. As Ken said, > if its 21.5 inches, then its a good length for an A lute. You might be > able to get away with tuning it in G at that string length, but it > won't sound as good in my opinion. > > A > > so if in G:A GCFADG > > if in A: ADGBEA > > A > > if indeed it is 21.5 cm, your best bet is probably to tune it inA C: > CFBflatDGC > > A > > Bruno > > Montreal, Quebec > > A > > On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Ken Brodkey <[1]kbrod...@pacbell.net> > wrote: > > Hello Andrew, > The tuning you described is the same relative tuning as a guitar. > I'm not > sure why your guitar friends would say, "it's close to guitar tuning > save > for a note or two", unless they were meaning it's not tuned to 'E' > but > relatively higher. Guitars are generally tuned in E and your lute is > in A. > For lute tuning you need to lower the 3rd course a half step; from > 'C' to > 'B'. > 21.5 cm is way too small. Isn't that 21.5 inches? In inches it > converts to > 54.6 cm, which is a good length for a lute in 'A'. > For starters check out Wayne Cripps lute pages: > [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute/lute.html > Good luck. > Ken Brodkey > > -Original Message- > From: [3]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu > [mailto:[4]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu]on > Behalf Of Andrew Arconti > Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 4:30 PM > To: [5]l...@cs.dartmouth.edu > > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > A A > __ > A From: [6]itno...@hotmail.com > A To: [7]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu > A Subject: RE: [LUTE] Alto lute help > A Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 16:26:44 -0700 > A > You mean B? Or do you have it in guitar tuning? > A It's not in guitar tuning as far as I know. I was told by the seller > A that this is the correct tuning for this lute. Wouldn't think it'd > be a > A guitar tuning , but... > A I have taken it to some friends who play guitar however, and they > have > A said it's close to guitar tuning save for a note or two. > A Wish I could say more, but I'm new to all of this. > A > Anyone answering these questions would need to know the mensur > A > (length from bridge to nut) and what strings you have on it now. > A The length is approx. 21.5 cm from nut to bridge. It's got nylgut > A throughout except with the addition of silver wound strings on the > 5th > A and 6th courses, and nylon for the top string. Unfortunately, other > A than that I'm not sure about the strings. Not sure what the gauges > are > A currently. > A > Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 15:39:29 -0700 > A > To: [8]l...@cs.dartmouth.edu > A > From: [9]howardpos...@ca.rr.com > A > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > A > > A > > A > On Jul 18, 2009, at 3:26 PM, Andrew Arconti wrote: > A > > A > > I have been using the following tuning which I was told is what > the > A > > instrument was made for: A, E, C > A > > A > You mean B? Or do you have it in guitar tuning? > A > > A > > , G, D, A; but am curious if there are > A > > other tunings appropriate for a lute of this type? I have been > A > > tuning > A > > to 440hz and am wondering if anyone feels there is a better > A > > frequency > A > > to be tuning an alto to, and if I was
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
21.5 cm sounds a bit short for an A lute and a bit too long for a Soprano lute in D.A Not sure what you have there Andrew. As Ken said, if its 21.5 inches, then its a good length for an A lute. You might be able to get away with tuning it in G at that string length, but it won't sound as good in my opinion. A so if in G:A GCFADG if in A: ADGBEA A if indeed it is 21.5 cm, your best bet is probably to tune it inA C: CFBflatDGC A Bruno Montreal, Quebec A On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Ken Brodkey <[1]kbrod...@pacbell.net> wrote: Hello Andrew, The tuning you described is the same relative tuning as a guitar. I'm not sure why your guitar friends would say, "it's close to guitar tuning save for a note or two", unless they were meaning it's not tuned to 'E' but relatively higher. Guitars are generally tuned in E and your lute is in A. For lute tuning you need to lower the 3rd course a half step; from 'C' to 'B'. 21.5 cm is way too small. Isn't that 21.5 inches? In inches it converts to 54.6 cm, which is a good length for a lute in 'A'. For starters check out Wayne Cripps lute pages: [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute/lute.html Good luck. Ken Brodkey -Original Message- From: [3]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:[4]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu]on Behalf Of Andrew Arconti Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 4:30 PM To: [5]l...@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help A A __ A From: [6]itno...@hotmail.com A To: [7]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu A Subject: RE: [LUTE] Alto lute help A Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 16:26:44 -0700 A > You mean B? Or do you have it in guitar tuning? A It's not in guitar tuning as far as I know. I was told by the seller A that this is the correct tuning for this lute. Wouldn't think it'd be a A guitar tuning , but... A I have taken it to some friends who play guitar however, and they have A said it's close to guitar tuning save for a note or two. A Wish I could say more, but I'm new to all of this. A > Anyone answering these questions would need to know the mensur A > (length from bridge to nut) and what strings you have on it now. A The length is approx. 21.5 cm from nut to bridge. It's got nylgut A throughout except with the addition of silver wound strings on the 5th A and 6th courses, and nylon for the top string. Unfortunately, other A than that I'm not sure about the strings. Not sure what the gauges are A currently. A > Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 15:39:29 -0700 A > To: [8]l...@cs.dartmouth.edu A > From: [9]howardpos...@ca.rr.com A > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help A > A > A > On Jul 18, 2009, at 3:26 PM, Andrew Arconti wrote: A > A > > I have been using the following tuning which I was told is what the A > > instrument was made for: A, E, C A > A > You mean B? Or do you have it in guitar tuning? A > A > > , G, D, A; but am curious if there are A > > other tunings appropriate for a lute of this type? I have been A > > tuning A > > to 440hz and am wondering if anyone feels there is a better A > > frequency A > > to be tuning an alto to, and if I was to lower my tuning frequency, A > > would I need to change out my strings to a new size? A > A > A > Anyone answering these questions would need to know the mensur A > (length from bridge to nut) and what strings you have on it now. A > A > A > -- A > A > To get on or off this list see list information at A > [10]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html A A __ A Windows Live Hotmail(R): Search, add, and share the webs latest sports A videos. [1]Check it out. A A __ A Windows Live Hotmail(R): Celebrate the moment with your favorite sports A pics. [2]Check it out. -- References A 1. [11]http://www.windowslive.com/Online/Hotmail/Campaign/QuickAdd?ocid=TX T_TAGLM_W L_QA_HM_sports_videos_072009&cat=sports A 2. [12]http://www.windowslive.com/Online/Hotmail/Campaign/QuickAdd?ocid=TX T_TAGLM_W L_QA_HM_sports_photos_072009&cat=sports -- Bruno Cognyl-Fournier Luthiste, etc Estavel Ensemble de musique ancienne [13]www.estavel.org -- References 1. mailto:kbrod...@pacbell.net 2. http://www.cs.dartmout
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
Hello Andrew, The tuning you described is the same relative tuning as a guitar. I'm not sure why your guitar friends would say, "it's close to guitar tuning save for a note or two", unless they were meaning it's not tuned to 'E' but relatively higher. Guitars are generally tuned in E and your lute is in A. For lute tuning you need to lower the 3rd course a half step; from 'C' to 'B'. 21.5 cm is way too small. Isn't that 21.5 inches? In inches it converts to 54.6 cm, which is a good length for a lute in 'A'. For starters check out Wayne Cripps lute pages: http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute/lute.html Good luck. Ken Brodkey -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu]on Behalf Of Andrew Arconti Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 4:30 PM To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help __ From: itno...@hotmail.com To: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: RE: [LUTE] Alto lute help Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 16:26:44 -0700 > You mean B? Or do you have it in guitar tuning? It's not in guitar tuning as far as I know. I was told by the seller that this is the correct tuning for this lute. Wouldn't think it'd be a guitar tuning , but... I have taken it to some friends who play guitar however, and they have said it's close to guitar tuning save for a note or two. Wish I could say more, but I'm new to all of this. > Anyone answering these questions would need to know the mensur > (length from bridge to nut) and what strings you have on it now. The length is approx. 21.5 cm from nut to bridge. It's got nylgut throughout except with the addition of silver wound strings on the 5th and 6th courses, and nylon for the top string. Unfortunately, other than that I'm not sure about the strings. Not sure what the gauges are currently. > Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 15:39:29 -0700 > To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu > From: howardpos...@ca.rr.com > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > > > On Jul 18, 2009, at 3:26 PM, Andrew Arconti wrote: > > > I have been using the following tuning which I was told is what the > > instrument was made for: A, E, C > > You mean B? Or do you have it in guitar tuning? > > > , G, D, A; but am curious if there are > > other tunings appropriate for a lute of this type? I have been > > tuning > > to 440hz and am wondering if anyone feels there is a better > > frequency > > to be tuning an alto to, and if I was to lower my tuning frequency, > > would I need to change out my strings to a new size? > > > Anyone answering these questions would need to know the mensur > (length from bridge to nut) and what strings you have on it now. > > > -- > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html __ Windows Live Hotmail(R): Search, add, and share the webs latest sports videos. [1]Check it out. __ Windows Live Hotmail(R): Celebrate the moment with your favorite sports pics. [2]Check it out. -- References 1. http://www.windowslive.com/Online/Hotmail/Campaign/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_W L_QA_HM_sports_videos_072009&cat=sports 2. http://www.windowslive.com/Online/Hotmail/Campaign/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_W L_QA_HM_sports_photos_072009&cat=sports
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
__ From: itno...@hotmail.com To: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: RE: [LUTE] Alto lute help Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 16:26:44 -0700 > You mean B? Or do you have it in guitar tuning? It's not in guitar tuning as far as I know. I was told by the seller that this is the correct tuning for this lute. Wouldn't think it'd be a guitar tuning , but... I have taken it to some friends who play guitar however, and they have said it's close to guitar tuning save for a note or two. Wish I could say more, but I'm new to all of this. > Anyone answering these questions would need to know the mensur > (length from bridge to nut) and what strings you have on it now. The length is approx. 21.5 cm from nut to bridge. It's got nylgut throughout except with the addition of silver wound strings on the 5th and 6th courses, and nylon for the top string. Unfortunately, other than that I'm not sure about the strings. Not sure what the gauges are currently. > Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 15:39:29 -0700 > To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu > From: howardpos...@ca.rr.com > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Alto lute help > > > On Jul 18, 2009, at 3:26 PM, Andrew Arconti wrote: > > > I have been using the following tuning which I was told is what the > > instrument was made for: A, E, C > > You mean B? Or do you have it in guitar tuning? > > > , G, D, A; but am curious if there are > > other tunings appropriate for a lute of this type? I have been > > tuning > > to 440hz and am wondering if anyone feels there is a better > > frequency > > to be tuning an alto to, and if I was to lower my tuning frequency, > > would I need to change out my strings to a new size? > > > Anyone answering these questions would need to know the mensur > (length from bridge to nut) and what strings you have on it now. > > > -- > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html __ Windows Live Hotmail(R): Search, add, and share the webs latest sports videos. [1]Check it out. __ Windows Live Hotmail(R): Celebrate the moment with your favorite sports pics. [2]Check it out. -- References 1. http://www.windowslive.com/Online/Hotmail/Campaign/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_QA_HM_sports_videos_072009&cat=sports 2. http://www.windowslive.com/Online/Hotmail/Campaign/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_QA_HM_sports_photos_072009&cat=sports
[LUTE] Re: Alto lute help
On Jul 18, 2009, at 3:26 PM, Andrew Arconti wrote: > I have been using the following tuning which I was told is what the >instrument was made for: A, E, C You mean B? Or do you have it in guitar tuning? > , G, D, A; but am curious if there are >other tunings appropriate for a lute of this type? I have been > tuning >to 440hz and am wondering if anyone feels there is a better > frequency >to be tuning an alto to, and if I was to lower my tuning frequency, >would I need to change out my strings to a new size? Anyone answering these questions would need to know the mensur (length from bridge to nut) and what strings you have on it now. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
