Ren lute is absolutely fine. When I played in the Collegium at Eastman, Paul (O'Dette) occasionally sat in with us continuo players. He always used his 8 course because he said it was easier to conduct without the long neck. In addition to this, the instrument handles modulations easily and can tackle a wider range of figures with greater potential for "proper" voice leading. (Although period players weren't overly concerned with the latter.) True, on the whole overall volume will be minimized, but what it lacks in body can be made up for in punch. As always, playing this lute thumb out, close to the bridge, is a good idea that is supported in period iconography. There is plenty of historical precedent for using the Renaissance lute in this manner. Agazzari called the lute the King of the Instruments because in an ensemble it could play both lead lines and chordal accompaniment. In fact, he goes so far as to say that all other instruments should model their continuo playing after what lutenists did. Iconography shows a huge variety of lutes being played in all manner of ensembles. The concept that the "Renaissance" lute should be confined to pre-1600 and that the large Roman theorbo is the most correct instrument to use in baroque plucked continuo is a thoroughly modern one that didn't exist during the actual period. Chris [1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad
At Nov 2, 2014, 21:35:42, Herbert Ward<'[2]wa...@physics.utexas.edu'> wrote: I saw a production of Monteverdi's "Return of Ulysses" last night. In the orchestra was a theorbo. At least I think it was a theorbo. It has a prominent place in the production, serving as the sole accompaniment for approximately six of the songs. Would it be feasible to replace the theorbo with a Renaissance lute in this opera? To get on or off this list see list information at [3]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/?.src=iOS 2. mailto:wa...@physics.utexas.edu 3. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html