[LUTE] Re: Theorbo question
G dt At 12:20 PM 1/5/2009, you wrote: Although I'm primarily interested in Ren music, I haven't been able to resist the temptation to dabble in continuo a bit (we have a continuo group in Seattle, loosely modeled on Pat's Continuo collective). I'm afraid that I might have finally taken complete leave of my senses, as I am now in possession of one of those overly large lutes with too many strings (on loan, but...). I plan to seek professional assistance soon, but in the interim, a tuning question. The instrument is currently in A. I could retune it to G, so I could more easily transfer my experience with the G lute, or I could leave it in A and relearn a bunch of chords. Any advice on which option is likely to be preferable? FWIW, I don't have to perform on it for around 6 months, so relearning the chords should be manageable, although the next rehearsal or two might be a bit rough. Guy -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo question
A mr David Tayler vidan...@sbcglobal.net schrieb: G dt At 12:20 PM 1/5/2009, you wrote: Although I'm primarily interested in Ren music, I haven't been able to resist the temptation to dabble in continuo a bit (we have a continuo group in Seattle, loosely modeled on Pat's Continuo collective). I'm afraid that I might have finally taken complete leave of my senses, as I am now in possession of one of those overly large lutes with too many strings (on loan, but...). I plan to seek professional assistance soon, but in the interim, a tuning question. The instrument is currently in A. I could retune it to G, so I could more easily transfer my experience with the G lute, or I could leave it in A and relearn a bunch of chords. Any advice on which option is likely to be preferable? FWIW, I don't have to perform on it for around 6 months, so relearning the chords should be manageable, although the next rehearsal or two might be a bit rough. Guy To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo question
G#! A buddhist would take the middle path... Rob 2009/1/6 Mathias Roesel [1]mathias.roe...@t-online.de A mr David Tayler [2]vidan...@sbcglobal.net schrieb: G -- References 1. mailto:mathias.roe...@t-online.de 2. mailto:vidan...@sbcglobal.net To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo question
When i got my theorbo i also first tuned it to G for two month and later wished i would have started in A straight away for the following reasons: - Playing together with other people when tablature part for theorbo is written out - Theorbo feels like a completely different instrument anyway (use of the diapasons, esp. hitting the right ones :-), reentrant tuning, what to play in continuo, ...) so learning the A tuning together with this seems easier to me than later relearning the tuning. - chord shapes for lute and theorbo differ, so choosing the G-tuning because of the familarity does not work too well anyway. Simply applying lute shapes on a theorbo will cause problems. - It was quite frustrating not to be able to play any continuo at all on theorbo when i changed to A tuning. More or less fluent reading in that tuning took some time in which i was not even able to play the pieces i already did on theorbo (and therefore pretty useless for any ensemble). Probably a bit like starting to learn italian tablature after already playing for a few years. - when the base moves higher i run out of ideas to play 7-6 or even thirds without moving to high or inconvenient positions or transposing down an octave. In G the trouble simply starts a tone lower. - only tuning the first string down an octave was not an option because of the solo music. - having one insrument in G and one in A makes things easier: Played Schütz:Musikalische Exequien the first time on archlute, second time on theorbo. Second time was much more fun... Benjamin Although I'm primarily interested in Ren music, I haven't been able to resist the temptation to dabble in continuo a bit (we have a continuo group in Seattle, loosely modeled on Pat's Continuo collective). I'm afraid that I might have finally taken complete leave of my senses, as I am now in possession of one of those overly large lutes with too many strings (on loan, but...). I plan to seek professional assistance soon, but in the interim, a tuning question. The instrument is currently in A. I could retune it to G, so I could more easily transfer my experience with the G lute, or I could leave it in A and relearn a bunch of chords. Any advice on which option is likely to be preferable? FWIW, I don't have to perform on it for around 6 months, so relearning the chords should be manageable, although the next rehearsal or two might be a bit rough. Guy -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo question
Rob MacKillop luteplay...@googlemail.com schrieb: G#! A buddhist would take the middle path... But, you know, the middle path between A and G is D! So that's how it came into being! ;) -- Best, Mathias 2009/1/6 Mathias Roesel [1]mathias.roe...@t-online.de A mr David Tayler [2]vidan...@sbcglobal.net schrieb: G -- References 1. mailto:mathias.roe...@t-online.de 2. mailto:vidan...@sbcglobal.net To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo question
Huh? ecb -Original Message- From: Rob MacKillop [mailto:luteplay...@googlemail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 8:26 AM To: Mathias Rösel Cc: lute-cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [LUTE] Re: Theorbo question G#! A buddhist would take the middle path... Rob 2009/1/6 Mathias Roesel [1]mathias.roe...@t-online.de A mr David Tayler [2]vidan...@sbcglobal.net schrieb: G To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo question
Arto makes a good point about E Major Vivaldi. But in, for example, in the Four Seasons, you have E Major and then the other three are F minor, G minor, F major, all of which are far better in G. And so it goes! Looking down the road, you want to be in a position where you are playing good voice leading, and that favors the G tuning, single reentrant However, for obvious reasons, an A instrument is the right match to the G instrument. Many happy campers in A. It's not a question that will be settled anytime soon, which is a good thing. dt To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo question
Don't matter. cw --- Mathias Rösel mathias.roe...@t-online.de wrote: A mr David Tayler vidan...@sbcglobal.net schrieb: G dt At 12:20 PM 1/5/2009, you wrote: Although I'm primarily interested in Ren music, I haven't been able to resist the temptation to dabble in continuo a bit (we have a continuo group in Seattle, loosely modeled on Pat's Continuo collective). I'm afraid that I might have finally taken complete leave of my senses, as I am now in possession of one of those overly large lutes with too many strings (on loan, but...). I plan to seek professional assistance soon, but in the interim, a tuning question. The instrument is currently in A. I could retune it to G, so I could more easily transfer my experience with the G lute, or I could leave it in A and relearn a bunch of chords. Any advice on which option is likely to be preferable? FWIW, I don't have to perform on it for around 6 months, so relearning the chords should be manageable, although the next rehearsal or two might be a bit rough. Guy To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo question
Guy, If you have any guitar experience, you already know the chords. From the second string (E) down to the A string, you have the top five strings of the guitar (albeit reentrantly tuned because the top E is an octave lower.) The next four strings represent the diatonic scale from the guitar's open, bottom E up to G. It takes a while to get used to having the bottom string 'spread' like that, but I'm proof that it can be done! Then you just need to concern yourself with the simple task of bringing the top A string into the chord, and working the top two strings into arpeggio patterns which make sense (as they fit between the D string and the b string, which is now the highest in pitch.) So there would be no real reason to consider changing the tuning if, indeed, you have guitar experience and can transfer it in this fashion. Additionally, most of the Theorbo literature that is in Tab and has other instruments playing with it are for an A theorbo, at least of what I've found so far. If you change to G tuning, you will be behind the 8-ball for this literature. If you have no experience with guitar and/or cannot wrap your mind around the warp from guitar to theorbo, and will not be playing anything out of tab, then tuning the theorbo to G is certainly an option. ray On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 3:20 PM, Guy Smith guy_m_sm...@comcast.net wrote: [clip] I plan to seek professional assistance soon, but in the interim, a tuning question. The instrument is currently in A. I could retune it to G, so I could more easily transfer my experience with the G lute, or I could leave it in A and relearn a bunch of chords. Any advice on which option is likely to be preferable? [clop] To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo question
I say start relearning. And start enjoying D major and minor and A major and minor as easy chords/tonic home bases. Also, it's good to get used to playing g minor on the theorbo as there is plenty of it (even Caccini and Peri on an A instrument). I think also it's more of an adjustment to use the open strings in the reentrant tuning than to get used to the new pitches of the chords. R. If you still yearn for an instrument in G with long diapasons, you can always get an archlute. R. -Original Message- From: Guy Smith [mailto:guy_m_sm...@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 3:20 PM To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [LUTE] Theorbo question Although I'm primarily interested in Ren music, I haven't been able to resist the temptation to dabble in continuo a bit (we have a continuo group in Seattle, loosely modeled on Pat's Continuo collective). I'm afraid that I might have finally taken complete leave of my senses, as I am now in possession of one of those overly large lutes with too many strings (on loan, but...). I plan to seek professional assistance soon, but in the interim, a tuning question. The instrument is currently in A. I could retune it to G, so I could more easily transfer my experience with the G lute, or I could leave it in A and relearn a bunch of chords. Any advice on which option is likely to be preferable? FWIW, I don't have to perform on it for around 6 months, so relearning the chords should be manageable, although the next rehearsal or two might be a bit rough. Guy -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo question
On Jan 5, 2009, at 12:20 PM, Guy Smith wrote: I'm afraid that I might have finally taken complete leave of my senses, as I am now in possession of one of those overly large lutes with too many strings (on loan, but...). How long is it? If that's not too personal a question... I plan to seek professional assistance soon, but in the interim, a tuning question. The instrument is currently in A. I could retune it to G, so I could more easily transfer my experience with the G lute, or I could leave it in A and relearn a bunch of chords. Any advice on which option is likely to be preferable? FWIW, I don't have to perform on it for around 6 months, so relearning the chords should be manageable, although the next rehearsal or two might be a bit rough. See the first question. Is the instrument theorbo-sized? i.e. too big to tune the top strings at lute pitch? There's nothing wrong with theorbo in G, though the sound may be a bit tubby; depends on the instrument. Consider one reentrant course instead of two, if you're considering them at all. If you had aspirations of being a professional, the answer would be might as well tune it in A because you need to learn the tuning. For amateurs, especially those who might be slow to acquire the skill of reading in a new tuning, I'd say keep it simple and go with what you know. This also depends on what kind of music you're playing. If you're doing Vivaldi in E major, A tuning makes life easier. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo question
On 1/5/2009, howard posner howardpos...@ca.rr.com wrote: If you're doing Vivaldi in E major, A tuning makes life easier. And it will still be difficult! ;-) Arto PS I recommend theorbo in A; many more manageable keys than in G. But some that are easy in G are horrible in A! The more flats you prefer, the more you choose G tuning, the more sharps, the more you enjoy A tuning. And my more and less are just between 3 flats or sharps... Well 4 flats of F minor work still in G tuning, four sharps of E major I do not enjoy in A tuning, will not play in G tuning... ;.) To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo question
It's relatively small, 140/75 cm (FWIW, it's by Bob Lundberg, but I don't know just when it was made). I have played guitar, albeit not recently, so I do remember at least the more common chords. Maybe making the jump to A tuning is the best bet (it would also simplify some of the details of the loan that don't bear going into here). Thanks, Guy -Original Message- From: howard posner [mailto:howardpos...@ca.rr.com] Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 12:37 PM To: lute-cs.dartmouth.edu List Subject: [LUTE] Re: Theorbo question On Jan 5, 2009, at 12:20 PM, Guy Smith wrote: I'm afraid that I might have finally taken complete leave of my senses, as I am now in possession of one of those overly large lutes with too many strings (on loan, but...). How long is it? If that's not too personal a question... I plan to seek professional assistance soon, but in the interim, a tuning question. The instrument is currently in A. I could retune it to G, so I could more easily transfer my experience with the G lute, or I could leave it in A and relearn a bunch of chords. Any advice on which option is likely to be preferable? FWIW, I don't have to perform on it for around 6 months, so relearning the chords should be manageable, although the next rehearsal or two might be a bit rough. See the first question. Is the instrument theorbo-sized? i.e. too big to tune the top strings at lute pitch? There's nothing wrong with theorbo in G, though the sound may be a bit tubby; depends on the instrument. Consider one reentrant course instead of two, if you're considering them at all. If you had aspirations of being a professional, the answer would be might as well tune it in A because you need to learn the tuning. For amateurs, especially those who might be slow to acquire the skill of reading in a new tuning, I'd say keep it simple and go with what you know. This also depends on what kind of music you're playing. If you're doing Vivaldi in E major, A tuning makes life easier. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo question
On Jan 5, 2009, at 3:20 PM, Guy Smith wrote: I plan to seek professional assistance soon, but in the interim, a tuning question. The instrument is currently in A. I could retune it to G, so I could more easily transfer my experience with the G lute, or I could leave it in A and relearn a bunch of chords. Any advice on which option is likely to be preferable? FWIW, I don't have to perform on it for around 6 months, so relearning the chords should be manageable, although the next rehearsal or two might be a bit rough. I think it's a good idea to become familiar with both G and A tunings. I find that chords in flat keys, and also G major of course, fall under the hand better in G tuning, whereas D and A (major and minor) are easier in A tuning. It's initially a question of learning to read bass lines in staff notation on the bass clef, and you can practice that on a renaissance lute in G, as well as on your A instrument. Do you have Nigel North's book on bc playing? davidr dlu...@verizon.net -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo Question
Mace, Wilson MH David Rastall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the solo theorbo, being by definition an instrument of shorter playing length, is known to have been tuned with only the first course in re-entrant tuning, presumably there was some amount of solo repertoire for that tuning. Where can it be found? The only solo repertoire I know of is written for a theorbo with courses one and two in re-entrant tuning. David R [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Sent from Yahoo! #45; a smarter inbox. --
[LUTE] Re: Theorbo Question
As far as reentrant goes, a notch away in size is also a notch in pitch, so a size smaller can be tuned in double reentrant a tone higher. So that is really not an issue. I use double for most solo pieces, but some sound persuasive in single. My solo instrument at 465 in A is too high for single reentrant to sound good, at 77cm. It would work at 415 or 392, however. dt To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: theorbo question
David, The body of the lute/theorbo - particularly the t'bo - affects the sound profile immensely. By body shape we actually mean the shape and volume of the air cavity within the body and how its volume and distribution affect the propagation of the vibrations of the sound board. Likewise, the size and placement of the rosette, the barring of the board and location and mass of the bridge pose their own effects not to mention the MOL (modulus of elasticity) and directional stiffness characteristics of the soundboard material itself. For instance, comparing three bodies with which I have some experience, the Frei body, the big Dieffopruchar and the little Dieffopruchar. The big Dieff has a rounder and more mellow sound in which the basses can become muddy if the sustain is too great. The soundboard must therefore be carefully barred to preclude this. It seems to provide adequate projection if sufficient string length and tension are used and certainly provides a stunning visual effect if the traditional 86/160cm lengths are used. The Frei, in contrast, tends to have a more complex tonal profile with a strong core tone reminiscent of a good guitar but with a coppery, bright overtone floating over the core. This slightly imposing brightness gives the little Frei a presence that belies its physical size and t'bos of 74/140cm are quite loud and useful in ensemble (not to mention much easier to transport). The little Dieffopruchar fall somewhere in between. The popular Hoffmann, in my observation, is too deep so as to provide sufficient brightness for penetration without silver overspuns in the bass and all the way up to the 4th crs. Again, there is a risk of the basses becoming muddy if the instrument is not barred for a shorter sustain in these grand piano basses. All that's the long way around saying that size does matter, particularly in the body cavity. Each body seems to have a tonal profile and a Frei is a Frei regardless of whether it's an 11crs or a t'bo. Best, Rob Dorsey http://RobDorsey.com -Original Message- From: David Rastall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 1:14 AM To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [LUTE] theorbo question Dear collective wisdom. I'm finding out about some of the size variants available in theorboes. For example, I've been looking at one which is 79 cm playing length on the fingerboard, and 159 cm on the diapasons. That seems quite a long neck extension since, with 10 frets on the fingerboard, the body is not exactly huge. I've also seen theorboes with larger bodies with eight or nine frets on the fingerboard and around 120 cm.diapasons: large body, short neck extension. So my question is: which is more important to the production of a full, substantial theorbo sound...long playing length, or a large body? Or is it a combination of both? Another continuo question: is it appropriate to ornament the bass line? Either in basso continuo situations, or as part of the bass part of a Baroque lute piece? Thanks for your thoughts on this, David R [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.rastallmusic.com -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: theorbo question
Chris sent this additional information. === Dear Arthur Tempus fugit indeed! Boethius/Severinus facsimiles are now sold by Jacks, Pipes and Hammers - you can see their ad in LSAQ - e.g. on p. 10 of the February 2006 number all the best Chris Goodwin To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: theorbo question
Dear David question is: which is more important to the production of a full, substantial theorbo sound...long playing length, or a large body? Or is it a combination of both? For theorbos it's simple: bigger is better. Big body, long stopped strings, long diapassons. You want to have big, booming, low, full, sustaining sound. The only limits are practicality: size of hands, arms, room, car or airplane seat (if only, these days). If you're only going to play French solo music you might consider a French theorbo, tuned in d, that is smaller in size. A one-for-all theorbo should be as big as you feel you can handle comfortably. Fashion these days seems to be in the low to middle 80s for the stopped strings. For the diapassons I'd recommend at least 140cm, but it's possible to have a good sound with shorter strings, too. Stephen and Sandi made me a small archlute with a diapasson length of only 105cm. Single gut strings still give me a booming low G, but this is about the limit. Bigger is better. Another continuo question: is it appropriate to ornament the bass line? Either in basso continuo situations, Yes. The function of a theorbo in continuo is twofold: as melody instrument to take care of the bass line and as chord instrument to take care of the harmony. Often these two are combined. If your only job is to play the bass line you are expected to ornament it. There are treatitses on this, with examples. For a good general introduction to theorbo playing turn to Kevin Mason's The Chitarrone and its repertoire in early seventeenth-century Italy (Boethius 1989) and the introductory chapters of Nigel North's Continuo playing on the lute, archlute and theorbo (Faber Faber 1987). David David van Ooijen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: theorbo question
LGS-Europe écrit: For a good general introduction to theorbo playing turn to Kevin Mason's The Chitarrone and its repertoire in early seventeenth-century Italy (Boethius 1989) Hello David, This sounds very interesting, but it seems to be out of print. Does anyone know where one could find a copy? Thanks, Dennis To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: theorbo question
Dear David and All: I would say a larger body is more important, because it takes a critical mass of top area to reproduce that bass note, sort of like a bass drum. That is one reason why many archlutes are deficient in the bass register, in my opinion. A luthier once showed me an archlute he was making (actually just the top) and I remarked on how wide it was relative to that of a tenor lute. He replied that that was the key to making it work in the bass. So it seems to me that the top either must be longer -- as on theorbos -- or wider, as this luthier advocated for his archlute -- for the bass register to be effective. Cheers, Jim -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: theorbo question
((PS. I found it, Chris!)) When Boethius took clerical orders, he took the name Severinus. Check Severinus Press. It's still in print: http://www.severinus.co.uk/lute04.htm#chit Lots of other nice things at that site. See the home page. http://www.severinus.co.uk/index.htm ajn. - Original Message - From: dc [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 6:46 AM Subject: [LUTE] Re: theorbo question LGS-Europe écrit: For a good general introduction to theorbo playing turn to Kevin Mason's The Chitarrone and its repertoire in early seventeenth-century Italy (Boethius 1989) Hello David, This sounds very interesting, but it seems to be out of print. Does anyone know where one could find a copy? Thanks, Dennis To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: theorbo question
David, I have to disagree with the prevailing opinion somewhat: bigger is not always better. I speak from some experience, owning both a gigantic theorbo (99cm on the board(!), diapasons around 6 1/2 feet long) and a smaller one (76cm fingerboard/119 diapasons). Nowadays I use the small one for almost everything. The large one FELT great when I played it in ensembles. Big, booming bass, lots of all-around resonance. But a huge hastle to lug around and a pain to play. When, for convenience sake, I brought my small theorbo, I felt lost in the group. So, other than ease of transport/playing, why would I want to use this small one for groups? Simple: the sound that actually gets out front. I listened to recordings of myself with these groups, sometimes even rehearsals of the same piece played by turns on both instruments. I could tell that the big one had a richer sound, but this was only when I was accompanying a single singer or instrument with no other bass. Whenever there was more than one other person involved - be that two singers/players or even just a bowed bass playing along, much of that richness was covered. There was one area in which the smaller one clearly WAS superior, however: orchestral tuttis. With ol' Frankenstein, I might as well have left and gotten a bite to eat whenever there was a passage multiple instruments. My small one cut right through the mix. At some places, I've even learned to hold back when I use the small guy so that the sound doesn't get too annoying. And another benefit to the small one: what it lacks in tonal richness in sparse passages is more than made up for by the fact that I can play more intricate accompaniments there. I should mention strings: I use some gut and some synthetics on my big theorbo, all synthetic on the small one. Possibly with all modern gut, my experience would be different. This reminds me of what I was always told about evolution of guitar in undergraduate school: the modern classical guitar wit high tension is an improvement over the 19th century style because it is so much louder and better sounding. This simply isn't true. The 19th century guitar has a special character all its own. Not as deep or rich, but punchier and just as easy to hear as the modern guitar. Of course there's another area of theorbo playing in which the small one does better, too: solo music. I used it for all of my Hurel CD. Chris --- David Rastall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear collective wisdom. I'm finding out about some of the size variants available in theorboes. For example, I've been looking at one which is 79 cm playing length on the fingerboard, and 159 cm on the diapasons. That seems quite a long neck extension since, with 10 frets on the fingerboard, the body is not exactly huge. I've also seen theorboes with larger bodies with eight or nine frets on the fingerboard and around 120 cm.diapasons: large body, short neck extension. So my question is: which is more important to the production of a full, substantial theorbo sound...long playing length, or a large body? Or is it a combination of both? Another continuo question: is it appropriate to ornament the bass line? Either in basso continuo situations, or as part of the bass part of a Baroque lute piece? Thanks for your thoughts on this, David R [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.rastallmusic.com -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
[LUTE] Re: theorbo question
Arthur Ness écrit: When Boethius took clerical orders, he took the name Severinus. Check Severinus Press. It's still in print: Great! Thanks, Arthur. Dennis To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: theorbo question
At some places, I've even learned to hold back when I use the small guy so that the sound doesn't get too annoying. Once I saw a Steinway baby grand that had a nicer bass than a larger Steinway a few feet away. Not louder, but clearer and more musical. Is this phenomenon also possible in theorboes and lutes? To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: theorbo question
--- Herbert Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At some places, I've even learned to hold back when I use the small guy so that the sound doesn't get too annoying. Once I saw a Steinway baby grand that had a nicer bass than a larger Steinway a few feet away. Not louder, but clearer and more musical. Is this phenomenon also possible in theorboes and lutes? Herbert, I'm sure it is possible with lutes (my experience with theorbos supports this.) However, I perhaps should have added that, like so many other things - it depends. There are so many variables that go into instrument construction that the best advice is always to try out a lute (or anything) before you buy. ..and of course bring along someone else very knowledgable about lute things to listen to you play. ..and ask the seller if you can borrow the lute for a year to see how it handles in different acoustics. ;-) Sadly, whether we're buying a used instrument sight unseen/heard on Wayne's Lute Page or having a new one built, so many of us (myself included) don't get to even pluck a chord before we get the thing. Forget about measuring up how it will do in the real world! Anyway, I started out my last message saying that when it comes to theorbos, bigger isn't _always_ better. Undoubtedly, sometimes it is. We just don't know until we get the thing in our hands for a while. Chris __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: theorbo question
Just on your first question, I understand, based on conversations with various luthiers, that both are relevant in different ways. The longer stringlength allows you to use gut basses with a deeper sound, while the size of the body affects the timbre or tone of the sound. David Rastall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear collective wisdom. I'm finding out about some of the size variants available in theorboes. For example, I've been looking at one which is 79 cm playing length on the fingerboard, and 159 cm on the diapasons. That seems quite a long neck extension since, with 10 frets on the fingerboard, the body is not exactly huge. I've also seen theorboes with larger bodies with eight or nine frets on the fingerboard and around 120 cm.diapasons: large body, short neck extension. So my question is: which is more important to the production of a full, substantial theorbo sound...long playing length, or a large body? Or is it a combination of both? Another continuo question: is it appropriate to ornament the bass line? Either in basso continuo situations, or as part of the bass part of a Baroque lute piece? Thanks for your thoughts on this, David R [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.rastallmusic.com -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html - Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less. --
