[LUTE] Re: arciliuto romana (was: New literature)

2007-12-07 Thread Andreas Schlegel 

Hello David and Taco

I'm not an expert on lute building, but if I made correct  
observations, the arciliuto romano has NOT a theorbo body. They are  
rounder and much deeper:
Martinus Harz 1665 (Edinburgh): 43 ribs, belly 53.1x36x17 cm, string  
legths 67.3*/143.8 *= the neck was shortened; originally at least 71;  
6x2 / 8x1
Martinus Harz 1665 (Geneva): 47 ribs, 53.5x36.4x19 cm, 72.9/156; 1x1  
+ 5x2 / 8x1

Antonio Giauna 1694: 27 ribs, 55x36.5x19.5 cm, 71/159.5; 6x2 / 8x1
Cinzio Rotondi 1699: 25 ribs, 53.4x36.2x17 cm, 73/162; 6x2 / 8x1
Josef de Carnitis / Cinzio Rotondi 1705: 25 ribs, 52.6x36.8x16.6,  
72.8/154.1; 6x2 / 8x1

David Techler 1725: 15 ribs, 52.8x36.6x18.7, 71.1/155.5; 6x2 / 8x1

The pitch (chorista si San Pietro) was ca. 380 Hz.

Interesting are the traces of the little fingr on the Harz of Geneva!  
They go from the normal point just at the end of the bridge and  
then BEHIND the bridge until the third / fourth course!!!


Andreas


Am 07.12.2007 um 12:48 schrieb LGS-Europe:


Hoi Taco

Or was the calculation the other way round? 71cm with a minimum  
string

diameter of 0.40 gives an a of 380Hz?


That was my underlying question, obviously. But I don't know about  
the prevailing pitch(es?) in Rome around 1660.


My other rather glaringly un-hidden remark was that a theorbo tuned  
in g', without re-entrant strings is an archlute in my book (or  
rather, according to the Late Bob Spencer's definitive  
definitions). A 72cm archlute might be a fairly big one in that  
same book, but not impossible, depending on pitch/tuning/string  
material. A friend of mine has his 70something theorbo single- 
strung in g' without re-entrant strings, using synthetics. Nothing  
wrong with that, but what is it called, archlute or theorbo? Moot  
question for me, much more interesting is how to get the best out  
of a given instrument. An arcileuto romana of 72cm might be a very  
practical continuo lute, granted you can play in e' (and which lute  
player with a background in guitar couldn't?) if the people around  
you decided on 440 in stead of 380. In the 1920s these lutes were  
made as theorboed Wandervogellauten. History repeats itself. ;-)



as needed, but next week 466! (don't tell him yet)
466, ough. Why do they make such decisions... Violinplayers almost  
never

choose different string diameters, so they will like it too.


The violins apparently will restring for this one. I will try with  
existing strings, as these are fairly low-tension. But Stewart's  
(?) tip of lowering one diapasson to unusable state is an appealing  
one. On my baroque guitar I think I will use a capo, although that  
is tricky in meantone temperament, as the capo provides a not so  
stable nut as the real nut.
I actually like playing Maria Vespers at 466, it's bright and  
shiny. The cornetti and trombones are even greater than usual. And  
sopranos streched to the upper limits have an appeal I don't need  
to describe to you.


David



To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[LUTE] Re: arciliuto romana (was: New literature)

2007-12-07 Thread Taco Walstra 
On Friday 07 December 2007 12:01, LGS-Europe rattled on the keyboard:
 Ivo and Lynda write that a regional instrument was invented from the
 1660 instead of the theorbo: the arciliuto romana in g (without re-
 entrant tuning) with a string length on the petit jeu of 71-73 cm
 (a'= around 380-386 Hz).
 

 That is interesting!

 A quick calculation for the first string comes to something close to 0.40
 gut (if I'm correct). That makes sense with today's knowledge/experience of
 string making/using that 0.40 or a little thinner is about as thin as you
 can get, within safety limits.

Or was the calculation the other way round? 71cm with a minimum string 
diameter of 0.40 gives an a of 380Hz? Question remains how somebody would 
play with other instruments tuned at 440 or 415, if not a horrible 466 
Perhaps by making a mental switch and think that your instrument is tuned in 
something else?


 Was this a newly invented instrument, or just a smallish theorbo, like many
 of us have today, tuned in g instead of a, like many of us do today, and
 with as few re-entrant strings as possible, like many of us have today?
 What I mean to ask is, is it a different species of theorbo, or just a
 smallish 'normal' one, strung to its possibilities? Philosophical question,
 perhaps; what defines a new species of theorbo? Anyway, interesting to see
 today's practises copied in the past. ;-)

 David - theorbo of 76cm tuned in a, with two re-entrant strings, 415 or 440
 as needed, but next week 466! (don't tell him yet)
466, ough. Why do they make such decisions... Violinplayers almost never 
choose different string diameters, so they will like it too. 
taco



To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html