Re: # 1 lute question
Jim, Good point as to the joint. Someone else asked why one would need a joint if the neck were straight. There is a good answer to that if one has tried to find a good section of wood at a certain size. I turn wood for goblets and bowls, it is difficult to fine a long straight grain of a decent width. The forests of Spain were denuded for the fine trees for the Armada, as were those of England. Masts and yards were a premium commodity. Perhaps the early luthiers even used a natural bend, but that is pure speculation. But to have strength the neck must be a "quarter sawn" piece, probably not including the heartwood. Sapwood and heartwood dry at different rates, and the only thing I can think of off hand that uses the combination is the old English longbow that was cut of Yew to include both, the heartwood for compression and the sapwood for tension. It might have been easier to join two good pieces at an angle where the pull was a compression rather than to find one good piece that could be both neck and pegboard. But this is pure speculation. Best, Jon > Dear All: > There seems to be a very simple explanation for the bent-back pegbox: The > joint is more stable. The glue holds the pegbox in place but is not > subjected to upward pull -- as it would if the pegbox were in line with the > neck. > Yours, > Jim
re: #1 lute question
In a message dated 12/10/2003 11:30:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Dear All: > There seems to be a very simple explanation for the bent-back pegbox: The > joint is more stable. The glue holds the pegbox in place but is not > subjected to upward pull -- as it would if the pegbox were > in line with the > neck. > Yours, > Jim I can attest to this!! About two months ago I arrived from the airport in Baltimore at Ed Greenhood's house with my Ed Greenhood alto lute, all ready to sit down and play duets ...only to find that during air travel my pegbox broke loose at the join. Under full string tension it was still in place, even when I lifted it out of the case. Immediately, Ed glued it back as I held it down on his worktable in his shop. Within an hour we were playing our duets, actually trios with Betsy Small, and the lute was more or less in tune the entire time, needing relatively little tuning adjustment after this repair. So, for sure the angled pegbox is a very stable structural configuration! - Kenneth Be
Re: # 1 lute question
Dear Wayne and All: Thanks for your elegantly simple explanation. Yours, Jim Wayne Cripps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] .edu>cc: Subject: Re: # 1 lute question 12/10/2003 03:23 PM Please respond to wbc The glue holding my pegbox on has let go, but the pegbox is still pretty much in place, because of the shape of the joint. There is a little V which locks the pegbox in place, even without glue! Wayne
Re: # 1 lute question
>Yes, it acts like one half of a dovetail joint. Just don't loosen your strings! Tim > > > Original Message >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: # 1 lute question >Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 15:23:08 -0500 (EST) > >> >> >>The glue holding my pegbox on has let go, but the pegbox >>is still pretty much in place, because of the shape of >>the joint. There is a little V which locks the pegbox >>in place, even without glue! >> >> Wayne >> >> >>
Re: # 1 lute question
The glue holding my pegbox on has let go, but the pegbox is still pretty much in place, because of the shape of the joint. There is a little V which locks the pegbox in place, even without glue! Wayne
Re: # 1 lute question
While some guitar headstocks are glued on, most are one piece with the neck. Patrick Doctor Oakroot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Howard Posner wrote: > James A Stimson at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> There seems to be a very simple explanation for the bent-back pegbox: >> The >> joint is more stable. > > But isn't it the bent-back design that makes a joint necessary in the > first > place? I.e., if the pegbox were straight, couldn't it be made from the > same > piece of wood as the neck? > You can't actually make it straight. There wouldn't be enough downward pull on the strings against the nut and the strings would buzz when played open. I think the headstock on a guitar is also glued on (although I guess you could make it by steam bending the the neck stock), but it needs a heftier joint than a lute's peg box. -- Rough-edged songs from a dark place in the soul: http://DoctorOakroot.com - Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing --
Re: # 1 lute question
Howard Posner wrote: > James A Stimson at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> There seems to be a very simple explanation for the bent-back pegbox: >> The >> joint is more stable. > > But isn't it the bent-back design that makes a joint necessary in the > first > place? I.e., if the pegbox were straight, couldn't it be made from the > same > piece of wood as the neck? > You can't actually make it straight. There wouldn't be enough downward pull on the strings against the nut and the strings would buzz when played open. I think the headstock on a guitar is also glued on (although I guess you could make it by steam bending the the neck stock), but it needs a heftier joint than a lute's peg box. -- Rough-edged songs from a dark place in the soul: http://DoctorOakroot.com
Re: # 1 lute question
Dear James: There is another theory that the bent neck distributes the pull of the = strings better. Having the neck extended does tend to put more of a = bending stress on the neck, the bent back peg box tends to focus the = tension of the strings directly back and straight down to the neck = prolonging the warping of the neck. Vance Wood. - Original Message -=20 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 5:26 PM Subject: Re: # 1 lute question In a message dated 12/9/2003 4:48:59 PM Pacific Standard Time, = [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi James: I view it as an issue of balance. The peg box loaded is probably = the single most weighty portion of the Lute. Bent back as it is helps to = distribute the weight more toward the center of the instrument. Hi Vance, Thanks, yours is the only serious reply so far; but I do think "So = it will fit in the case" is kinda cute. We might think it a silly (not = stupid, as Bruno suggests) question, but if anyone expresses any = curiosity about the lute, I think it's good p.r. to try to be polite = and/or funny when replying. If you give a sarcastic answer, then you = can guarantee that's what they will retain. Perhaps some luthiers have = some ideas? Sincerely, James --
Re: # 1 lute question
James A Stimson at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > There seems to be a very simple explanation for the bent-back pegbox: The > joint is more stable. But isn't it the bent-back design that makes a joint necessary in the first place? I.e., if the pegbox were straight, couldn't it be made from the same piece of wood as the neck?
Re: # 1 lute question
James A Stimson wrote: > > > > > Dear All: > There seems to be a very simple explanation for the bent-back pegbox: The > joint is more stable. The glue holds the pegbox in place but is not > subjected to upward pull -- as it would if the pegbox were in line with > the > neck. > Yours, > Jim > I'm inclined to agree with that as the basic, original reason, perhaps in addition to pulling the strings down against the nut. Those two reasons clearly account for the peg box angle on an instrument such as the oud. But the lute's peg box angle is more extreme than an oud's. I suspect the not-poking-the-guy-to-your-left explanation may have some validity for the extreme angle used on the lute. -- Rough-edged songs from a dark place in the soul: http://DoctorOakroot.com
Re: # 1 lute question
Dear All: There seems to be a very simple explanation for the bent-back pegbox: The joint is more stable. The glue holds the pegbox in place but is not subjected to upward pull -- as it would if the pegbox were in line with the neck. Yours, Jim
Re: # 1 lute question
I always thought the angle of the pegbox had to do with extra contact and so more pressure between the low tension strings and the nut - assuming that less pressure would lead to more buzzing. Joseph Mayes > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 20:26:56 EST > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: # 1 lute question > > In a message dated 12/9/2003 4:48:59 PM Pacific Standard Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Hi James: > > I view it as an issue of balance. The peg box loaded is probably the single > most weighty portion of the Lute. Bent back as it is helps to distribute > the weight more toward the center of the instrument. > Hi Vance, > > Thanks, yours is the only serious reply so far; but I do think "So it will > fit in the case" is kinda cute. We might think it a silly (not stupid, as > Bruno suggests) question, but if anyone expresses any curiosity about the > lute, I > think it's good p.r. to try to be polite and/or funny when replying. If you > give a sarcastic answer, then you can guarantee that's what they will retain. > Perhaps some luthiers have some ideas? > > Sincerely, > > James > > -- >
Re: # 1 lute question
And may I add it is also very handy for quick and minimal tuning correction: pulling the string over the frets and/or slightly pushing it over the pegbox. (I cannot do that with flat pegboxes.) I believe the reason is the same as for Kenneth's explanation below: there is more friction at the nut in case of bent pegbox. Best regards: Gabor Domjan - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 4:19 AM Subject: Re: # 1 lute question > Actually, James, in all seriousness I've noticed that it is much easier to > tune and keep the tuning stable in lutes with bent back pegboxes than lutes with > extended pegboxes and certainly more than baroque and renaissance guitars and > vihuelas. > > Kenneth > > -- > >
Re: # 1 lute question
James, I hope this is neither silly nor cute, but there is also the question of the size of doors and people at the time. In 1947, at the age of twelve, I spent a summer at a farm in England owned by a schoolgirl friend of my mother. The house was over 400 years old and my room was on the second floor in the back. I had to duck my head to go through the doorway, and I wasn't exceptionally tall for my age. (Nor am I now, a normal 5'10" (178cm)). Perhaps it was just the reach of the arms to tune the farther pegs, or the convenience of passing through spaces. Although I could certainly agree with the balance proposal. (Vignette, my hostess had a dining room table that glowed, and she was often asked how to make a table look that way. Her answer was "start with good wood, then oil it once a week for 400 years".). Best, Jon > Hi James: > > I view it as an issue of balance. The peg box loaded is probably the single > most weighty portion of the Lute. Bent back as it is helps to distribute > the weight more toward the center of the instrument. > Hi Vance, > > Thanks, yours is the only serious reply so far; but I do think "So it will > fit in the case" is kinda cute. We might think it a silly (not stupid, as > Bruno suggests) question, but if anyone expresses any curiosity about the lute, I > think it's good p.r. to try to be polite and/or funny when replying. If you > give a sarcastic answer, then you can guarantee that's what they will retain. > Perhaps some luthiers have some ideas? > > Sincerely, > > James > > -- > >
Re: # 1 lute question
Actually, James, in all seriousness I've noticed that it is much easier to tune and keep the tuning stable in lutes with bent back pegboxes than lutes with extended pegboxes and certainly more than baroque and renaissance guitars and vihuelas. Kenneth --
Re: # 1 lute question
In a message dated 12/9/2003 4:48:59 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi James: I view it as an issue of balance. The peg box loaded is probably the single most weighty portion of the Lute. Bent back as it is helps to distribute the weight more toward the center of the instrument. Hi Vance, Thanks, yours is the only serious reply so far; but I do think "So it will fit in the case" is kinda cute. We might think it a silly (not stupid, as Bruno suggests) question, but if anyone expresses any curiosity about the lute, I think it's good p.r. to try to be polite and/or funny when replying. If you give a sarcastic answer, then you can guarantee that's what they will retain. Perhaps some luthiers have some ideas? Sincerely, James --
Re: # 1 lute question
Hi James: I view it as an issue of balance. The peg box loaded is probably the single most weighty portion of the Lute. Bent back as it is helps to distribute the weight more toward the center of the instrument. Vance Wood. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 12:58 PM Subject: Re: # 1 lute question > Hi to all, > > Whenever I perform on the lute the number one question from the audience > is, "Why is the head/pegbox bent at such a sharp angle"? I'm guessing it's an > engineering solution to the torque of all the strings on a very lightly built > instrument, but I wish I could give a definitive answer. Fred Noad's answer > was that it helps keep you from jabbing the person to your left. :) Anyway, > humorous answers are welcome, but if anybody knows for sure... > > Sincerely, > > James Edwards > > --
Re: # 1 lute question
Hi to all, Whenever I perform on the lute the number one question from the audience is, "Why is the head/pegbox bent at such a sharp angle"? I'm guessing it's an engineering solution to the torque of all the strings on a very lightly built instrument, but I wish I could give a definitive answer. Fred Noad's answer was that it helps keep you from jabbing the person to your left. :) Anyway, humorous answers are welcome, but if anybody knows for sure... Sincerely, James Edwards --
