Dear Martyn
> Why should an instrument with a longer string length work 'better' with
> gut? MH
Until, Mimmo began making loaded Venices, it seems that most lutenists using a
Charles Mouton style lute (de Troy), say 66,5cm, have tended to use wire-wound
basses, or at best gimped basses. No doubt, if a high diapason were chosen, say
440Hz or more, as you seem to suggest, pure gut basses might be acceptable.
However, would this work with the music?
I am certainly not arguing against the fairly widely held view that French
instruments were around 67cm.
however, these were frequently vintage instruments at the time, and this may
have given them better sustain than a modern 67cm lute might have. Loaded
strings certainly work with a 67cm lute at 415Hz, and do give better sustain
than pure gut basses.
I was just suggesting that as vintage lutes are not widely available, one might
attempt
to achieve more sustain, perhaps by using a larger table than at the time, or a
longer string length (say 70, but not advocating 76, as AB was using in his
recording).
Now I am not sure why a 70cm lute might give the impression of greater sustain
than a 67cm lute.
However, this is my impression when comparing two such lutes made by Martin
Haycock and two made by Stephen Gottlieb (even though, as you say, the 67cm
lutes were at a higher diapason).
Perhaps it is not due to the string length at all, but to the slightly larger
table on the 70 cm lutes.
Stephen Gottlieb actually advised me to go for the longer diapason lute, and I
have not regretted it.
Perhaps a lower diapason just gives a psychoacoustic impression of a larger
sound
and so greater sustain.
Perhaps, I have just not heard the ideal 67cm lute.
Other solutions for obtaining pseudo-historic instruments might be to load the
tables with salts, or to liberally apply oxidized linseed oil (as I believe you
once mentionned) so as to achieve very hard tables.
Whatever, the reality of my impressions, I am not at all suggesting that we
should join Bailes, in using 76cm instruments, but rather agreeing with AB that
excellent sustain (as well as clarity) might be an important factor for the
best
instrument for the repertoire. Indeed Jakob Lindberg's Rauwolf does manifest
these qualities, and that lute has around a 69cm string length, I believe (so
within the diapason you mention), but it does also have quite a large table.
Perhaps using a slight increase in string length (70cm) or a slightly larger
table than might be judged HIP (while using loaded strings) could bring us
closer to the French sound ideal.
I do realize that a much longer string length could make certain pieces much
more difficult to play (depending on hand size) as well as go against the
elegant aesthetic economy implied in the music itself.
Although, perhaps we should avoid being too rigid in what we consider as an
acceptable instrument for French music: the Rhetorique des Dieux drawings do
not
show Bologna style lutes, for example; and indeed I seem to remember that Jakob
Lindberg did play Denis Gaultier pieces at a London lute meeting on his Rauwolf
(rather than say, pieces from Mouton, that we tend to associate with a smaller
tabled lute).
However, I wonder whether we should have been shocked if he had played such
pieces and they had worked well, simply because the lute is very different from
the one depicted in the de Troy painting? Can we be sure that Mouton would have
been shocked to have been observed playing such a lute?
I am just throwing up questions that have remained in my mind ever since I
chose
the Warwick over the Rauwolf, not coming to any conclusion. I was told by some
experienced baroque performers
that a larger bowled lute (Rauwolf, B Burkholzer, etc) would have given a
greater depth of sound than the more immediate Warwick, but by others that the
Bologna shape and the resulting immediacy was simply right for French music.
I have to say that in spite of lingering doubts, the Warwick well strung with
loaded basses does not lack depth, yet it is also extremely well balanced. I do
tend to associate this type of sound with French Baroque music, but then again
..
Regards
Anthony
Any advantage gained by the strings being longer is precisely offset by
having to tune the whole instrument lower. If we follow the general
rule that the stress on the highest string is the same whatever lute
you are using (ie near the breaking stress) then the stress on the
basses of the large and the smaller lute will be exactly the same and
the lutes will exhibit the same degree of dullness/brightness in the
bass.
Of course, if one ignores the early sources and tunes a small lute at
the same nominal pitch as a large lute (you suggest A415(?)) then
naturally the small lute will sound duller.
Also see my correspondance with Bailes in recent issues of Lute News on
the sizes of French lutes c.1670: the evidence (iconography, early
measurements - especially the Talbot MS, extant instruments)
indicates that a string length around 68cm (say +/- 2cm) was what these
particular Old Ones expected. Although Bailes used a 1722 Wenger
instrument (possibly originally a gallichon - the instruments for which
Wenger was best known) recently converted to an 11 course lute with a
string length around 76cm on a CD of French lute music from around
1670, he conceded that 'As Martyn Hodgson quite rightly points out in
his letter in the last issue of Lute News (No 94), a lute the size of
the Wenger should not find acceptance as being ideal for the
performance of 17th century French lute music'.
regards
Martyn
--- On Tue, 31/5/11, Anthony Hind <agno3ph...@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Anthony Hind <agno3ph...@yahoo.com>
Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Top luthiers of 11-courser?
To: baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Date: Tuesday, 31 May, 2011, 14:04
Dear Arto
The question might be what the characteristics are that you
are looking
for
in an 11-course baroque lute, and for what part of the 11c repertoire,
and what
type of stringing you are hoping to use (particularly for the basses),
low
tension:high tension, pure gut or loaded basses, or synthetics? All
this might
determine the best makers for you to consider.
Model and bass string type:
The model (and maker) you may want to choose could be determined partly
by the
type of stringing you use. Although, for the French repertory it is
sometimes
felt that a 67cm Bologna style lute (or less) might be a typical choice
(Vienna
Frei)
if you wish to use gut, this may mean you need to use loaded or gimped
basses
(at around 415) to avoid over thick basses.
If you want to use pure gut, you may prefer to adopt a slightly longer
string
length, and possibly a larger bowl (Rauwolf, multi-ribbed
Tieffenbrucher,
Burkholzer etc); these may be felt less French by some, who base this
mainly on
Burwell,
possibly, ignoring evidence of models represented on the Rhetorique de
Dieux
manuscript.
Sustain and clarity:
Personally, I feel that Jakob Lindberg is right in considering that the
ideal
lute (for this and possibly other repertories) would be those having
the two
almost contradictory characteristics he claims for his Rauwolf: <<this
has exactly what I want. It has that clarity but also sustain, which
is amazing
>> Lute Quaterly Mai 2007 P.8.
Anthony Bailes suggests that "sustain" was so essential to the French
musicians
that this was what brought them to search out old Italian Bologna
lutes.
"The last, and most important point is that notes on such instruments
have more
sustain coupled with a more gradual and even decay to the sound. This
is
particularly important as it can give the impression that a note sounds
on
longer than it actually does." (Lute News 85, Avril 2008)
In his Gaultier recordings, AB considers this so necessary to his
interpretation
of this music that he is willing to sacrifice ideal string length,
adopting a
76cm historic Wenger lute, just for the greater sustain this vintage
lute
affords.
However, vintage lutes not being readilly available ... how can we
approach that
French ideal of sustain and clarity?
I feel a slightly longer string length than the Vienna Frei (69 to
71), such as
that of the Warwick, or perhaps certain Mahler models, along with the
use of
loaded bass strings might give us a little more depth of sound and
sustain,
while maintaining a good balance between registers.
A larger bodied lute with loaded basses might have a little too much
bass for
the French repertory, but be excellent (if not quite historically
accurate) for
later styles. they may work quite well with pure gut basses (Satoh,
etc) giving
good depth, but perhaps be somewhat lacking in sustain.
I am very happy with my 69.5 cm 11c Warwick lute from Stephen Gottlieb
with
loaded basses; it does have good sustain and singing quality, even if
it might
not be quite so transparent in the top register, as some lutes (Martin
Haycock's
for example). Thus again your preference of lute maker may be
determined by the
qualities you find essential in a Baroque lute.
It is difficult to unite all these qualities in the same lute, but
presumably a
lute by Paul Thomson might near this.
The best maker for your chosen model:
You may perhaps look for a maker according to the model, string
length and
string type, you want to adopt. Certain makers may be particularly
renowned for
certain models (and associated with certain playing styles), although
they may
be quite open to making other lute models.
Just to quote one, Richard Berg seems to be a maker frequently chosen
by those
proning low tension pure gut basses and who prefer the multi-ribbed
Burkholzer
or Greiss lutes (Satoh etc).
String tweaking:
Indeed, as I am sure you are aware, choice of stringing is almost as
important
as choice of lute, and I have spent the last two years trying to
maximise my
lute's singing quality by small shifts in the stringing.
Please do not consider that there is only one way to go, it is more a
question
of finding the right pitch, string type, and tension at which a
particular lute
really begins to sing.
My 69.5cm lute seems to work better at 392 than previously used 415 or
407; and
Aquila low impedance Venice strings on basses (loaded), most octaves,
and Meanes
does maximise sustain (through sympathetic resonances and low impedance
to the
soundboard) but while maintaining good clarity.
Nevertheless, I recently raised the tension on bass courses (while
keeping a
higher relative tension on the octaves) which further increased
sustain, thus
further improving this singing quality.
I would not claim this is the only way to string a lute, just that a
good lute
can become an excellent one with the choice of the right stringing,
both for the
lute and for the player.
This Sunday, I attended Benjamin Narvey's Baroque lute concert here
in
Paris, and can report the excellent sustain projection and clarity that
Benjamin
achieved with three different lutes all strung with gut, and with
loaded basses:
a 67cm Frei by Martin Haycock, a 71cm Tieffenbrucher by Stephen
Gottlieb, and a
13 course 70cm Frei by Martin Haycock,
Bravo, Benjamin!
Please do not consider that I am suggesting the lute makers I have
mentioned are
the best, or that others are somehow lesser.
Indeed, I think the best Baroque lute maker for one lutenist, may not
be at all
the choice of another. It does depend on your priorities and playing
choices,
but I am sure you are aware of all this.
Finally, some lute makers do fine tune the setting of a lute better
than others,
so that it may become easier to play for the same string length and
model.
Some lute makers also spend many hours on the woodwork crafting, which
may or
may not effect the sound, and may or may not be important to you, but
all this
does effect the price.
You may also want to find a lute maker with whom you can readilly
discuss your
needs, and who is open to listening to you.
Two very good lute makers who I have found particularly open to
discussion are
Martin Shepherd, here on this list (who of course is also a lutenist)
and
Malcolm Prior.
Best wishes
Anthony
________________________________
De : wikla <[1]wi...@cs.helsinki.fi>
A : [2]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Envoye le : Mer 25 mai 2011, 22h 46min 32s
Objet : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Top luthiers of 11-courser?
Dear baroque lutenists,
as some of you perhaps have noticed, I've become heavily addicted to
the 11
course French baroque lute after some decades of of playing the lutes
in
the "vieil accord", in the so called "renaissance tuning".
And I actually now have a quite nice 11-courser by Lars Joensson
(Joensson,
Jonsson), see
[3]http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/wikla/mus/11_courseLute/EkatKuvat.html
And my possible(?) progress with that instrument in one and half year
can
be checked in my page
[4]http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/wikla/mus/11_courseLute/
But my eagerness to that strange and most wonderful instrument has
become
so irresistible that I would like to order an instrument of highest
quality.
So, who do you think is today the best maker of 11-course baroque
lutes?
And a waiting list of too many years excludes even the best of bests...
Any recommendations?
All the best,
Arto
To get on or off this list see list information at
[5]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=wi...@cs.helsinki.fi
2. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
3. http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/wikla/mus/11_courseLute/EkatKuvat.html
4. http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/wikla/mus/11_courseLute/
5. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
