Thanks JarosÃ
aw
Whereas professional loaded basses users were forced to look for
reliable replacements (experimenting Gimped, pure gut, ropes or
otherwise), I was just keeping my old loaded basses going and lost
contact with the various As an ex-phonetician factors in sound
production, the various bass string hypotheses do interest me, but as a
complete lutenist amateur amateur thought I could just keep my old
Venice loaded going, swapping worn ones for new old stock early HT gut
loaded. While Professionals, I knew, needing good repeatable stringing
experimented with Gimped, pure gut (ropes or HT), or KF basses, I kept
putting off the inevitable. A friend successfully swapped his loaded to
Dan Larson's silver Gimped, and then I "gave in" and was just about to
try a set myself, when Mimmo brought out his new synthetic loaded, and
of course I had to try them (my Gimped still in my lute case). So for a
time just a bystander while others experimented.
Had the Gimped not worked for me I would have tried Venice basses (as
Ed Martin reported successfully using pure Pistoys), but thought the
silver Gimped would work better with my set up (I listened with
interest to Dan L.'s recordings of lutes using either pure Pistoys or
Gimped basses). I was thinking about all this, but just didn't get
round to doing anything about it. I did follow recent debates on the
French list concerning the KF whittled down and used at low tensions,
and also a recent article by Charles Besnainou on his air core basses
(proving the wealth of different experiments on lute basses of which I
have been partly aware, so not completely out of things).
In respect to Venices, perhaps your differenceh of appreciation,
compared to Martin, could result from your using them at different
tensions: I imagine they would not work well at the low tensions Martin
may perhaps have tried them. Indeed I use my Venice octaves at a higher
tension than my , basses, and love them in that use.
On the question of more or less sustain on basses, I suppose we all
adapt by tweaking our styles and tensions to our string choices; but
just the fact that French lutenists sought out vintage lutes, could
according to Jakob Lindberg's experience with the Rauwolf, imply
articulate sustain was very important to them, and so possibly also for
their basses? perhaps ...
Best wishes
Anthony
Le samedi, février 4, 2017, 11:49 AM, JarosÃ
aw Lipski
<jaroslawlip...@wp.pl> a écrit :
Hello Anthony,
I am fine, thank you. I haven't heard from you for a while, but it's
nice to see you on our lute list again :)
Actually I meant KF strings. String ends have to be split (whittled if
you like), otherwise they are so stiff that tying them would be very
difficult. Also they wouldn't form a proper knot and initial point of
vibration would be further away from the bridge. In general this kind
of problem is characteristic for very stiff strings. Fortunately
Venices due to their rope construction are much more pliable, so there
is no problem with attaching them at the bridge.
Best wishes
Jaroslaw
> On 04 Feb 2017, at 00:20, Anthony Hind <agno3ph...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Jaroslaw
> I hope things are going well with you.
> When you say of your Venice, "Yes, mine have split ends at the
bridge." Do you mean you have managed to separate the ends of the twine
and pass them separately through the bridge hole?
> This is what Charles Besnainou does with his spring twines. This
results probably in a lower impedance in the same way as Martin's
whittled down KFs, I would suppose?
> Best wishes
> Anthony
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone <[1]https://yho.com/footer0>
>
> Le vendredi, février 3, 2017, 4:45 PM, JarosÃ
aw Lipski
<jaroslawlip...@wp.pl <mailto:jaroslawlip...@wp.pl>> a écrit :
>
> Martin,
>
> > When I said roped strings were dull compared to plain gut I was
talking only about relatively thin strings, say .80-.90mm.
>
> I tried both thicker and thinner Aquilla Venice ropes and even on 4th
course they sound brighter than plain gut IMHO. But, this discussion
only shows how relative our sound perception is.
> >
> > For the KF strings, the high tensions which many people want to use
will not work because the thicker KF strings are really too thick and
stiff to work. On the 11th course of an 11c lute I would use nothing
larger than 1.50mm (actual diameter). I'm using .95 for the 6th
course.
> >
>
> I am using 1.60 on 11th course and it works fine for me. But again
it's a matter of taste.
>
> > Another factor with KF strings is the importance of thinning them
where they go through the bridge and wrap over themselves in front of
the bridge. If you don't do this, the sound will be dull and you will
probably get problems with the strings buzzing against the top of the
bridge.
> >
>
> Yes, mine have split ends at the bridge.
>
> Best
>
> Jaroslaw
>
>
> > Martin
> >
> > On 03/02/2017 11:39, JarosÃ
aw Lipski wrote:
> >> Mimmo,
> >>
> >>> You experience is that a roped string is duller than a plain gut?
I have the contrary. Maybe it is necessary to know how the roped
string was done. Mine is a roped string made with two fresh 'brins'
twisted like as rope and then polished. In practice our Venices.
> >> Yes, I use your Venice roped strings and can confirm this. They
are brighter than plain gut
> >>
> >>> I would like to buy some KF strings just to do a comparation:
> >> I have both KFs and your CDs and compared them side to side. KFs
have shorter sustain, are more percussive and â¦slightly duller sound
IMO. KFs work well till 11th course on BQL. I don't like them on
diapasons. CDs have stronger fundamental, longer sustain (much longer
than guts) and work very well on diapasons, however their elasticity
make them work only on instruments with higher than normal action and
wide string spacing. Also tuning is not ideal.
> >>
> >>> Heck, guys, what to do? first or second option?
> >>> At present the second option is the winner!
> >> Now, the question is what is your goal in making CD strings. If
you aim at finding a substitute for gut strings than stiffer strings
would be better. I am used to gut basses so I like short sustain and a
little bit stiffer string. If someone played only overwounds he/she
would probably prefer longer sustain. So the answer to your question
will depend on whom you'll ask.
> >> All in all there is no one answer to this question, and probably
you would have to take into consideration your business strategy.
> >> Best
> >> Ciao
> >>
> >> Jaroslaw
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> ciao to all
> >>> Mimmo
> >>>
> >>> -----Messaggio originale----- From: Martin Shepherd
> >>> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 10:22 AM
> >>> To: Mimmo Peruffo ; Matthew Daillie
> >>> Cc: Arto Wikla ; <>baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
<mailto:baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
> >>> Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
> >>>
> >>> Thanks, Mimmo.
> >>>
> >>> I agree absolutely that there is no need to make versions of
these
> >>> strings thinner than .80mm.
> >>>
> >>> The issue of damping is perhaps the one which worries me most.
In the
> >>> case of roped strings, they sound duller than a plain gut string
of the
> >>> same size, presumably because of internal friction between the
strands
> >>> of the rope. In the case of rubber strings (sorry!) what worries
me is
> >>> that some damping/absorption of energy is happening as the string
> >>> stretches and contracts with each vibration. The KF fluorocarbon
> >>> strings, being solid and stiff, have neither of these damping
effects.
> >>> I can imagine that a string which was "floppy" but not especially
> >>> elastic would work well.
> >>>
> >>> I hope that a lower rubber content would allow the strings to
slide
> >>> better over the nut, which would also be a welcome
characteristic.
> >>>
> >>> Best to all,
> >>>
> >>> Martin
> >>>
> >>> On 03/02/2017 10:09, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:
> >>>> Thank you very much about all these helpfull suggestions, guys.
> >>>>
> >>>> actually the gauges from 80 CD till 105CD are made half loaded
using also a stiffer elastomer. This combination is perfect fo the
tonl trasiction betweenj pure gut/nylon/Nylgut to a wound strings, KF
or CDs etc etc.
> >>>> I call this range of gauges simply as Meanes. they are still CD
types however.
> >>>> In practice they are around the 5th course of renaissance & d
minor Lutes.
> >>>> I have intentionally exluded the 4th courses because make not
sense at all to use a denser strings on it. The 80 CD is just done for
those that are curious.
> >>>>
> >>>> well, I done the very first prototypes (than cannot be perfect)
and sent out to some friends to hear their opinions: of course, some of
them were uneven. Despite that I had very good reports.
> >>>> Some installed them also like octaves (!): I never realized that
additional option. However, I do not raccomend. Octaves normally can
works at higher working index than a 5 th course; so they can breack.
> >>>>
> >>>> said that, I agree with you Matthew. thanks
> >>>>
> >>>> Martin, a stiffer string has an higher elasticity modulus so the
performances are less good than those of an equivalent string with
more elasticity. You probably reffers to the KF strings. However there
are others parameters at work here, for example the inner damping
effect is one of them, and it is not related to the elasticity
modulus. This explain for example why a special kind of nylon, whose
density is far less than fluorocarbon sound like this one. It was a
huge surprise to me!
> >>>>
> >>>> I am thinking that you guys prefer the second option. To me is
even better, it help to solve some problem becausew they sometime stick
on the nut slots/ grooves.
> >>>>
> >>>> False strings? yes, with prototypes can happen. when one start
with the ufficial production an extruder plant work exatly in the same
even way. The first strings are the waste and then the rest are done
exactly in the same way.
> >>>> well, I am leaving italy to London so I have not time to re
start; I will do some samples both for meanes and basses just to see if
they actually works in the proper way
> >>>> Be patient again; i cannot be too fast here.
> >>>> Mimmo
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Messaggio originale----- From: Martin Shepherd
> >>>> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 9:35 AM
> >>>> To: Matthew Daillie ; Mimmo Peruffo
> >>>> Cc: Arto Wikla ; <>baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
<mailto:baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
> >>>> Subject: Re: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
> >>>>
> >>>> Tout à fait d'accord, Matthew.
> >>>>
> >>>> I would add that "trueness" is not just a question of intonation
when
> >>>> notes are fretted. A false string never sounds in tune even as
an open
> >>>> string, and the pattern of vibration makes it buzz against the
frets.
> >>>> If your string heights are high enough that this isn't a
problem,
> >>>> they're too high.
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't know whether the samples I had from Mimmo some time ago
are the
> >>>> same as the current production, but I thought they were too
elastic. He
> >>>> did say he was going to make a less elastic version for the
thinner
> >>>> strings, but I don't know whether he's implemented this idea or
not (can
> >>>> you tell us, Mimmo?). I'm slightly puzzled by the suggestion
that the
> >>>> less elastic version would have a duller or darker sound, I
would almost
> >>>> expect the opposite - as a comparison, the KF strings are very
stiff but
> >>>> sound bright.
> >>>>
> >>>> It would be such a shame if after all his efforts we end up with
a
> >>>> string which is not as good as the old loaded gut. Actually the
new
> >>>> string needs to be better than that in terms of trueness.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best wishes to all,
> >>>>
> >>>> Martin
> >>>>
> >>>> On 03/02/2017 09:06, Matthew Daillie wrote:
> >>>>> Dear Mimmo,
> >>>>> In my opinion there are two factors which need to be given
priority even before judging the sound of a string. Firstly it has to
be true (with no problems of intonation going up the fingerboard for
stopped strings) and secondly it has to be playable: on a well-made and
well set up lute, it must not catch on the nut, buzz, hit a
neighbouring string, hit against the fingerboard, or cause any other
extraneous noises. If a string has the potential to sound wonderful but
does not meet these two criteria, then it is of no use whatsoever.
> >>>>> Once that is established, obviously players want a string with
a full-bodied and stable tone, enough sustain to make voice-leading a
pleasure and the instrument to sing to the best of its ability and
sufficient power to provide convincing projection and resonance.
> >>>>> Personally I am looking for a warm and sweet tone with precise
fundamentals and enough overtones to make the timbre rich and variable.
> >>>>> Oh dear, that does sound like a holy grail doesn't it?
> >>>>> Fingers crossed!
> >>>>> Best
> >>>>> Matthew
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Feb 3, 2017, at 8:29, Mimmo Peruffo <
<>mperu...@aquilacorde.com <mailto:mperu...@aquilacorde.com>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thank you for the suggestion Arto.
> >>>>>> Unfortunately i cannot do it
> >>>>>> I already image how confuse the thing will be with the
customers.
> >>>>>> This mean the eford to mannage twice products and honestly I
do not
> >>>>>> like to add cofusion in the factory and with customers
already stressed
> >>>>>> by me!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I should do a choice and in fast time: is it better a more
elastic
> >>>>>> string like these are (whith problems related to the fact
that maybe
> >>>>>> stretch tooo much and that the sound is too bright) or it is
better to
> >>>>>> switch to a less elastic plastic support with the advantage
that it
> >>>>>> stretch less, the sound is darker and with less sustain?
> >>>>>> Hard to do the choice: both solutions are ok; i already tried
the
> >>>>>> second option that is similar to the loaded gut strings
> >>>>>> Even Anthony Bailes suggested me the second option.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Strings or not to strings? this is the question
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ah ah
> >>>>>> (my poor english at work)
> >>>>>> Ciao
> >>>>>> Mimmo
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ps
> >>>>>> which are your suggestion guys?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -----Messaggio originale-----
> >>>>>> From: Arto Wikla
> >>>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 9:46 PM
> >>>>>> To: Mimmo Peruffo ; <>baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
<mailto:baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
> >>>>>> Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Dear Mimmo,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> if you decide to make the loaded nylgut strings (CD) less
elastic, I
> >>>>>> hope (and wish and urge ;-) ) that you keep also the original
elastic
> >>>>>> version in your repertoire! They work exceptionally well on
my Harz
> >>>>>> arclute, great stuff.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And big thanks for your invaluable work!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Arto
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 02/02/17 14:03, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:
> >>>>>>> Well, seeing this post I have the idea to switch to these
stiffer
> >>>>>> ones.
> >>>>>>> at the end of the day they are closer to those loaded strings
made of
> >>>>>> gut.
> >>>>>>> I will do some samples in advance.
> >>>>>>> Mimmo
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> To get on or off this list see list information at
> >>>>>> [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
<[3]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
software.
> >>>> [4]https://www.avast.com/antivirus
<[5]https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
software.
> >>> [6]https://www.avast.com/antivirus
<[7]https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > ---
> > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
software.
> > [8]https://www.avast.com/antivirus
<[9]https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
> >
--
--
References
Visible links
1. https://yho.com/footer0
2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
3. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
4. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
5. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
6. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
7. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
8. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
9. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Hidden links:
11. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
12. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
13. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
14. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
