I know that some top lute makers (and by 'top' I really do mean names
   that cause avaricious salivation when they are uttered in the company
   of lutenists) use a number of different glues for different joints in
   an instrument - notably aliphatic resin (Titebond), but also hide glue
   for parts that may need to be separated for future repairs.

   By the way, something I didn't find out until quite recently; hide glue
   dissolves very readily in alcohol - which could have its uses,
   especially for cleaning off residues.  Piano technicians use that
   method of separating joints routinely, though of course it is likely to
   damage a polished surface it the alcohol gets onto it.

   Bill
   From: Garry Warber <garrywar...@hughes.net>
   To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   Sent: Wednesday, 31 August 2011, 12:31
   Subject: [LUTE] Re: long strings?
   ------=_NextPart_001_000C_01CC67B0.04145C50
   Content-Type: text/plain;
       charset="utf-8"
   Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
   But Sterling...  I'm (or was) a luthier...    I used hide glue for
   years, becoming an alchemist with the stuff adding nitrogen fertilizer
   and such to alter gel-times, diluting for strength, etc...  I found
   epoxy (through boatbuilding) to be just as "reversible" with heat, and
   a lot nicer than hide glue to work with, providing you remembered it
   was a toxic nightmare and work clean...  It works well.  So do the
   other aliphatic resin glues, where appropriate.  You should try gluing
   lute ribs with hide...  Or even better, coating the join on the top/rib
   with hide glue then ironing it on.  Epoxy will appeal after you do just
   one, I think...
   Garry
   From: sterling price
   Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 2:30 AM
   To: Garry Warber ; [1]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: long strings?
   As any good luthier will tell you today, hide glue is still superior to
   modern glue for several reasons.
   --Sterling
   Subject: [LUTE] Re: long strings?
   Or, As I enjoy assuming, the "old ones" used the best they had, and if
   they'd had epoxy glue and nylon strings that's what they'd have
   used...  :-)
   Things can get endlessly circular in these beliefs.  I just like how
   well
   the early music is written!  The stuff plays itself without a lot of
   "interpretive gimmicks."  I'm all for re-creating their sound as close
   as we
   can, for others.  For myself, a totally modern lute is just ducky...
   :-)
   Garry
   -----Original Message-----
   From: Roman Turovsky
   Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 7:27 AM
   To: Martyn Hodgson ; [2]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu ; andy butler
   Subject: [LUTE] Re: long strings?
   There is a great likelihood that "our" gut is rather acoustically
   different
   from "their".
   Lets not forget to use the honest modifier "approximation of".
   RT
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: "Martyn Hodgson" <[3]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk>
   To: <[4]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>; "andy butler"
   <[5]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk>
   Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 7:01 AM
   Subject: [LUTE] Re: long strings?
   >
   >  The superiority of gut is chiefly that it was the material used by
   the
   >  Old Ones. If we have any pretensions to attempting to reproduce the
   >  sounds these early lutenist composers expected and their auditors
   >  heard, it is necessary to employ the same string materials.
   >
   >  MH
   >  --- On Tue, 30/8/11, andy butler <[6]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
   >
   >    From: andy butler <[7]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk>
   >    Subject: [LUTE] Re: long strings?
   >    To: [8]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   >    Date: Tuesday, 30 August, 2011, 9:27
   >
   >  David van Ooijen wrote:
   >  > The basses are shortish, so a higher tuning would be better,
   >  actually.
   >  > If the instrument is tuned to g', gut diapassons are possible (if
   >  cost
   >  > is an issue use fret gut, it really is so much better than any of
   the
   >  > modern materials), otherwise carbon or metal-wounds seem to be the
   >  > best option.
   >  Beginner's questions.
   >  Is the superiority of gut down to the shorter sustain time
   >  that someone mentioned earlier?
   >  Is string damping really unpopular? (unnecessary?)
   >  andy
   >  To get on or off this list see list information at
   >  [1][9]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >
   >  --
   >
   > References
   >
   >  1. [10]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >
   >
   ------=_NextPart_001_000C_01CC67B0.04145C50
   Content-Type: text/html;
       charset="utf-8"
   Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
   <HTML><HEAD></HEAD>
   <BODY dir=ltr>
   <DIV dir=ltr>
   <DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
   <DIV>But Sterling...&nbsp; I'm (or was) a luthier...&nbsp; <IMG
   style="BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none;
   BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none"
   class="wlEmoticon wlEmoticon-smile" alt=Smile
   src="cid:C406196480C44732A36F7147D25ECD70@GarryPC">&nbsp; I used hide
   glue for
   years, becoming an alchemist with the stuff adding nitrogen fertilizer
   and such
   to alter gel-times, diluting for strength, etc...&nbsp; I found epoxy
   (through
   boatbuilding) to be just as "reversible" with heat, and a lot nicer
   than hide
   glue to work with, providing you remembered it was a toxic nightmare
   and work
   clean... <IMG
   style="BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none;
   BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none"
   class="wlEmoticon wlEmoticon-smile" alt=Smile
   src="cid:C406196480C44732A36F7147D25ECD70@GarryPC">&nbsp; It works
   well.&nbsp;
   So do the other aliphatic resin glues, where appropriate.&nbsp; You
   should try
   gluing lute ribs with hide...&nbsp; Or even better, coating the join on
   the
   top/rib with hide glue then ironing it on.&nbsp; Epoxy will appeal
   after you do
   just one, I think...</DIV>
   <DIV>Garry&nbsp; </DIV>
   <DIV
   style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri';
   COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION:
   none">
   <DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
   <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
   <DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
   <DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A
   title=[11]spiffys84...@yahoo.com
   href="mailto:[12]spiffys84...@yahoo.com";>sterling price</A> </DIV>
   <DIV><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, August 31, 2011 2:30 AM</DIV>
   <DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=[13]garrywar...@hughes.net
   href="mailto:[14]garrywar...@hughes.net";>Garry Warber</A> ; <A
   title=[15]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   href="mailto:[16]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu";>[17]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu</A>
   </DIV>
   <DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [LUTE] Re: long strings?</DIV></DIV></DIV>
   <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></DIV>
   <DIV
   style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri';
   COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION:
   none">
   <DIV
   style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fff; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york,
   times, serif; COLOR: #000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
   <DIV style="RIGHT: auto"><FONT size=2 face=Arial><B><SPAN
   style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">As any good luthier will tell you today, hide
   glue is
   still superior to modern glue for several
   reasons.</SPAN></B></FONT></DIV>
   <DIV style="RIGHT: auto"><FONT size=2 face=Arial><B><SPAN
   style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold"></SPAN></B></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
   <DIV style="RIGHT: auto"><FONT size=2 face=Arial><B><SPAN
   style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">--Sterling<VAR
   id=yui-ie-cursor></VAR></SPAN></B></FONT></DIV>
   <DIV style="RIGHT: auto"><FONT size=2 face=Arial><B><SPAN
   style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold"></SPAN></B></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
   <DIV style="RIGHT: auto"><FONT size=2 face=Arial><B><SPAN
   style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold"></SPAN></B></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
   <DIV style="RIGHT: auto"><FONT size=2 face=Arial><B><SPAN
   style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> [LUTE] Re: long
   strings?<BR></FONT><BR>Or, As I enjoy assuming, the "old ones" used the
   best
   they had, and if <BR>they'd had epoxy glue and nylon strings that's
   what they'd
   have used...&nbsp; :-) <BR>Things can get endlessly circular in these
   beliefs.&nbsp; I just like how well <BR>the early music is
   written!&nbsp; The
   stuff plays itself without a lot of <BR>"interpretive gimmicks."&nbsp;
   I'm all
   for re-creating their sound as close as we <BR>can, for others.&nbsp;
   For
   myself, a totally modern lute is just ducky...&nbsp;
   :-)<BR>Garry<BR><BR>-----Original Message----- <BR>From: Roman
   Turovsky<BR>Sent:
   Tuesday, August 30, 2011 7:27 AM<BR>To: Martyn Hodgson ; <A
   href="mailto:[18]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu";
   ymailto="mailto:[19]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu";>[20]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu</A
   > ; andy
   butler<BR>Subject: [LUTE] Re: long strings?<BR><BR>There is a great
   likelihood
   that "our" gut is rather acoustically different<BR>from
   "their".<BR>Lets not
   forget to use the honest modifier "approximation
   of".<BR>RT<BR><BR><BR><BR>-----
   Original Message ----- <BR>From: "Martyn Hodgson" &lt;<A
   href="mailto:[21]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk";
   ymailto="mailto:[22]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk";>[23]hodgsonmartyn@yahoo.
   co.uk</A>&gt;<BR>To:
   &lt;<A href="mailto:[24]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu";
   ymailto="mailto:[25]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu";>[26]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu</A
   >&gt;; "andy
   butler" &lt;<A href="mailto:[27]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk";
   ymailto="mailto:[28]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk";>[29]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk<
   /A>&gt;<BR>Sent:
   Tuesday, August 30, 2011 7:01 AM<BR>Subject: [LUTE] Re: long
   strings?<BR><BR><BR>&gt;<BR>&gt;&nbsp; The superiority of gut is
   chiefly that it
   was the material used by the<BR>&gt;&nbsp; Old Ones. If we have any
   pretensions
   to attempting to reproduce the<BR>&gt;&nbsp; sounds these early
   lutenist
   composers expected and their auditors<BR>&gt;&nbsp; heard, it is
   necessary to
   employ the same string materials.<BR>&gt;<BR>&gt;&nbsp;
   MH<BR>&gt;&nbsp; --- On
   Tue, 30/8/11, andy butler &lt;<A
   href="mailto:[30]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk";
   ymailto="mailto:[31]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk";>[32]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk<
   /A>&gt;
   wrote:<BR>&gt;<BR>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; From: andy butler &lt;<A
   href="mailto:[33]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk";
   ymailto="mailto:[34]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk";>[35]akbut...@tiscali.co.uk<
   /A>&gt;<BR>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
   Subject: [LUTE] Re: long strings?<BR>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; To: <A
   href="mailto:[36]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu";
   ymailto="mailto:[37]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu";>[38]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu</A
   ><BR>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
   Date: Tuesday, 30 August, 2011, 9:27<BR>&gt;<BR>&gt;&nbsp; David van
   Ooijen
   wrote:<BR>&gt;&nbsp; &gt; The basses are shortish, so a higher tuning
   would be
   better,<BR>&gt;&nbsp; actually.<BR>&gt;&nbsp; &gt; If the instrument is
   tuned to
   g', gut diapassons are possible (if<BR>&gt;&nbsp; cost<BR>&gt;&nbsp;
   &gt; is an
   issue use fret gut, it really is so much better than any of
   the<BR>&gt;&nbsp;
   &gt; modern materials), otherwise carbon or metal-wounds seem to be
   the<BR>&gt;&nbsp; &gt; best option.<BR>&gt;&nbsp; Beginner's
   questions.<BR>&gt;&nbsp; Is the superiority of gut down to the shorter
   sustain
   time<BR>&gt;&nbsp; that someone mentioned earlier?<BR>&gt;&nbsp; Is
   string
   damping really unpopular? (unnecessary?)<BR>&gt;&nbsp;
   andy<BR>&gt;&nbsp; To get
   on or off this list see list information at<BR>&gt;&nbsp; [1]<A
   href="[39]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html";
   target=_blank>[40]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.htm
   l</A><BR>&gt;<BR>&gt;&nbsp;
   --<BR>&gt;<BR>&gt; References<BR>&gt;<BR>&gt;&nbsp; 1. <A
   href="[41]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html";
   target=_blank>[42]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.htm
   l</A><BR>&gt;<BR>&gt;<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
   </BODY></HTML>
   ------=_NextPart_001_000C_01CC67B0.04145C50--
   --

   --

References

   1. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   2. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   3. mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
   4. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   5. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
   6. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
   7. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
   8. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   9. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
  10. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
  11. mailto:spiffys84...@yahoo.com
  12. mailto:spiffys84...@yahoo.com
  13. mailto:garrywar...@hughes.net
  14. mailto:garrywar...@hughes.net
  15. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
  16. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
  17. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
  18. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
  19. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
  20. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
  21. mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
  22. mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
  23. mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
  24. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
  25. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
  26. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
  27. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
  28. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
  29. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
  30. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
  31. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
  32. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
  33. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
  34. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
  35. mailto:akbut...@tiscali.co.uk
  36. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
  37. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
  38. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
  39. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
  40. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
  41. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
  42. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

Reply via email to