On Jul 29, 2006, at 5:33 AM, gary digman wrote: > I wonder if lutenists of the 15th and early 16th centuries > felt the > same about the introduction of the 7, 8 and 10 course instruments, > not to > mention the theorbos, attorbiatos etc., as some of us seem to feel > about the > liutos forte, ruby gambas, arch guitars, etc.
I imagine some did and some didn't. > ...So how do we determine what the authentic sound of a lute should > be? By playing it...? > It all > seems to come down to the fancy of the moment. Nothing wrong with that, is there? UNLESS you suspect that the fancy of the moment migh be different today than it was 300 years ago. Then, you've got a puzzle to solve... > What I get from reading about early players is that they eagerly > sought out > and made use of whatever the latest innovation was. That's why we > have such > a wide spectrum of lutes and lutelike instruments availlable to us > today. I > say the more the merrier, innovate away. I agree with you entirely. But yet another lute/guitar hybrid developed from yet another "secret process" to produce yet another instrument that sounds "like the perfect lute" is to my mind just that good old smoke-and-mirrors, and not exactly an innovation. Time could prove me wrong. Hey man, the only way they can separate me from my authentic, oh-so- historical lute, will be to pull it from my cold, dead hands! Grrrrrr!!! Snap! Snap! ;-) ;-) ;-) 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
