Dear Sean and Craig, I think a,c,e,a was a slip of the computer keyboard. (Assuming a 1st course tuned to a') Mudarra gives two tunings for the guitar: a',e',c',g and a',e',c',f. (I prefer to list the strings starting with the 1st course, i.e. the one highest in pitch.)
It all depends what you mean be re-entrant, doesn't it. For me, a re-entrant tuning is one where the open strings give progressively higher notes as they move towards the 1st course. This means that the modern guitar and violin do not have re-entrant tunings, but the five-string banjo tuning is re-entrant. Things get more confusing where instruments have pairs of strings tuned an octave apart, like the lowest courses of the lute. Strictly speaking the individual strings do not get progressively higher, because of the high octave strings of an octave pair. However, as far as I am concerned, one ignores these high octaves for the purpose of establishing whether or not a tuning is re-entrant. This means that the tuning of an archlute (first six courses = g',d'd',aa,ff,cc,Gg) is not re-entrant in spite of the octave pair Gg, whereas the tuning of a theorbo (first six courses = a,e,b,g,d,A) would be re-entrant. In other words, you ignore the presence of a high octave string. The exception would be where both strings of a course are tuned to the high octave. This means that the baroque guitar tuning e',bb,gg,d'd,aA would not be re-entrant, whereas the tuning e',bb,gg,d'd,aa would be re-entrant. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy. ----- Original Message ----- From: "lutesmith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "lute society" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 5:36 PM Subject: Re: reentrant tuning > At 07:56 AM 6/7/04, you wrote: > > Actually I meant what I said. Without belaboring the point, whether you > > think of the tuning of 16c 4 cs guitar tunings (g,c,e,a or a,c,e,a) as > > reentrant or not depends on if you think of the bourdon as the primary or > > secondary string. > > Craig, > > Can you cite any examples of 16th cent guitar music that uses the bourdon > as a secondary string? In light of later guitar practice it is interesting > to imagine that 4th course as an octave higher but LeRoy and Morlaye > consistently treat it as the lowest note available*. Sometimes they even > tuned it down a step for a little more reach. I haven't gone through all > the vihuelist books yet so you may know something I don't...and should. > > And tell me more of this a,c,e,a tuning. Where does this turn up? > > Sean > > *admittedly the hurdygurdy-like Branles de Poitou in LeRoy's 3rd book could > go either way but would hardly justify restringing the guitar. > > > >Assuming that you are using a one at all. (The practice of using a bourdon > >for the low g or a does seem pretty much universal.) > > > >Craig
