Dear Jean-Marie, There's quite a history to this discussion, both recently and some months ago and you may care to look in the archives for the long and, I'm afraid, rather tedious and repetitive thread. Basically the historical case (evidence for your 'burden of proof') for saying that small theorbos were not generally tuned double reentrant is that the few early writers who mention such stringing details at all (principally Piccinini, Mace), say that on the theorbo the string length and pitch is such that the top course is obliged to be tuned down an octave if it is not to break (ie what we now call single reentrant) and further say that if the instrument is large one is even obliged to tune the second an octave down. In short, if you can you should just detune the first course and only detune the next if the second string is likely to break. For some reason this tuning seems unattractive to many modern players: perhaps it's because some like to think they are playing a large theorbo of the type played by early professional continuo musicians but are put off by the actual size. I have no argument with this position whatsoever and if the case is made for such stringing is on the basis on modern convenience (and using modern overwound strings) rather than historical usage then that's fine. The problem arises when it's suggested that double reentrant tuning was normally used on small theorbos earlier: I ask for any evidence but none is ever forthcoming! Perhaps this unwillingness to confront the evidence is because most amateur theorbo players are principally lutenists and don't wish to stray too far from the sort of size to which they've become accustomed. regards Martyn PS If it's of any succour, it may be that some early amateurs might possibly have played small theorbos in A or G as double reentrant (altho no evidence has been presented) but I presume we are speaking about 'best practice' here.
Jean-Marie Poirier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: (Sorry David for sending this to your private mailbox. I don't master yet all the subtleties of replying to the list when I get messages from such or such person ) Thanks David. That's a clear statement, full of good sense and and I totally concur. My "not so small" theorbo, which I use for continuo, is 80 cm on the fingerboard and I have not particularly small hands, being more than 6 ft tall, but I must confess I have already quite a "handful" of it... My smaller theorbo, which I occasionally use for continuo too :) is 73 cm, and that would almost make a "tiorbino" of it if I understand well... ;-) ! Best, Jean-Marie >>Martyn wrote: >> >>>> >>If you have anything like the Praetorius, Mace, Picinni, Talbot evidence on >>large theorbos but clearly relating to smalI instruments in this tuning, I'd >>like to see it please. >><< >> >>So far we have seen evidence of reentrant tuning for large theorbos, thank >>you for the references. And we have solo music requiring reentrant tuning >>and strongly suggesting a-tuning (Kapsberger). However, we have not seen >>evidence stating small theorbos could not be tuned reentrant. Your opinion >>on the matter is clear, but your arguments are not. I hate to be taking >>sides in an argument that could, and should, bring us all to a better >>understanding of the historical record and, especially interesting for me, >>its consequences for our own playing today, but as it stands now I think the >>burden of proof is on your side: what are the arguments to deny the >>possibility of tuning a small theorbo reentrant in a? Saying, as I >>understand you to do, that the fact that large theorbos were tuned reentrant >>is proof small theorbos were not tuned reentrant, does not make sense. I >>agree with you that bigger is better for much of theorbo continuo practice. >>I agree with you that many of us, myself included, have a 'toy' theorbos >>(76cm here!) not ideally suited for some of the continuo repertoire >>(Montevredi las weekend!) we play on it nonetheless. I agree with you that >>covering up the defects of a small theorbo by using overspun basses on 6 >>(and lower if present at the fingerboard) is a modern solution. But I see no >>evidence denying the historical possibility of tuning a small theorbo >>reentrant in a. On the contrary, some would argue that the solo music (in a) >>would require a small theorbo as it would require rather very large hands to >>be played on one of the very large continuo theorbos. >> >>respectfully >> >>David >> >> >>**************************** >>David van Ooijen >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>www.davidvanooijen.nl >>**************************** >> >> >> >> >>To get on or off this list see list information at >>http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>Orange vous informe que cet e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail. >>Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte. >> >> > >= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://poirierjm.free.fr >08-02-2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Jean-Marie Poirier [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08-02-2008 --------------------------------- Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Tryit now. --
