Howdy all, I think I've read all your input, but I shan't guarantee it. I have looked at the recommended sites. Perhaps I didn't explain myself well enough. My baby is my harp, but as a dilletante in music I play a few other things. And that really is a bit of a canard, as I spend a bit of time with the older formats (the hex chord and the tetra chord). Finially I'm learning the origins, and the fun, of the formats. Like the modal dulcimer the lute is a historic instrument. I'll be off fpr a week now, got to gather with my singers of the fifties (PU Tigertones) to see if we can yet sing together.
I think I'll go with Jerry's flat back. There is a parallel. The Paraguayan harp is made with the bowl back, and is considerably lighter than the normal Celtic, or Folk, harp. But the sound isn't that different. The stringing is lighter than the standard, but that also makes the feel of the strings different, and can make the lower strings a bit "growly". I'd be pleased to hear more on the lute, but as one who is doing instrument design I do have a bit of a bench board to test the various strings. I'd rather play my harp as a primary instrument, but I can't think of a greater pleasure than picking up a lute and playing to myself. Particulary if I'd built it. I don't have the time to go from scratch, but I will look into it on the web site that several of you have suggested. Best, Jon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Fletcher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Jon Murphy'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 4:29 PM Subject: RE: Newbie to the lute > Hi Jon, > > Not wishing to offend you with the flat-backed lute. You will find that > almost everyone's expectation of a lute is that it should have a bowl-back > made up of ribs and an angled peg-box. > > Maybe you could procure a drawing and produce a lute from the pieces you > have. Only the ribs are a little difficult (not impossible) to obtain. As > already mentioned, David van Edwards' on-line course, or CD-rom is also > excellent. There is also a wealth of knowledge on this lute-list for any > query you may have. > > There is a 7-course lute kit available in the UK from the Early Music Shop, > in Bradford, West Yorkshire. Selling around 345 Pounds. They also have a > new 8-course lute for 350 Pounds > > http://www.e-m-s.com > > Most of the music is French tablature, which uses letters on the > represented strings. > > Italian tablature uses numbers, but has the added difficulty of putting the > highest string at the bottom! (Bass at the top) > > Very few use German tablature. There are no strings represented, the > letters and numbers seem randomly placed in a grid-pattern. But it works > for some. > > Most lute music is free to down-load from various web-sites. Publications > may be purchased from other web-sites. > > The lute-world is a whole new ball-game! > > Best Wishes > > Ron Fletcher > Loughborough > East Mids.UK > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jon Murphy [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 18 September 2003 07:21 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Newbie to the lute > > Hi all, (and pardon the big bold type font, my computer seems to have a > mind > of its own) > > I don't yet play the lute, but I'd like to ask for your opinions. A bit of > background. I'm retired and making instruments for my own use. So far a > couple of harps (one cross strung diatonic and one double strung), a bowed > psaltery and a plucked psaltery and a mountain dulcimer. The latter three > with kits from MusicMakers in Minn, and the harps from kits by Stoney End > (also Minn). I have to use kits as in my area the expense of getting the > woods needed is greater than getting the kit (the kit maker can buy in > volume and cut a number of instruments from one piece). Also my shop is > rather small, being a former 5'x5' closet that holds a band saw, wood > lathe, > drill press, belt/disk sander and a few other things. > > So here is my question, or set of questions: > > Ooops, before the questions a bit more background. Jerry Brown > (MusicMakers) > offers a kit for a "flat back lute". It is 7 courses (13 strings, nylon). > The idea of the "flat back" is to make construction easier and cheaper. I > have a picture of it, but although I've visited his shop in MN (I have a > grandson in MN) I'm not going to make the trip to check out the instrument. > The catalogue photo shows nine full frets to the body, then another five > partial frets going into the body. The tuning pegs are classical tapered > ebony rather than modern "machines". The bridge is glued to the soundboard > like a classical guitar (strings tied to the bridge). > > I have gotten the book on playing lute that he offers (I do some business > with him, and he is reliable and honest). The book is "The Scottish Lute" > by > Ronn McFarlane. Actually it is two books in one. A book of modern notation > with a secondary clef noted for frets, and fingering note - and a book of > "French tabulature" that was apparently used in the Scottish lute books of > the early sixteen-hundreds that he used. That "French tabulature" is purely > a notation of the frets and strings (with an indication above the clef as > to > the timing structure). I've retuned the old classical (wide neck) guitar > and > played from both notations. > > Finally the questions: > > I like making my own instruments, and I'm very tempted to spend the $350 it > would cost me for this kit (despite being quite busy learning the other > instruments I've built). The flat back would probably change the "fullness" > of the sound, but couldn't be less than the flat back of the guitar. So, do > I buy this kit? (Remember I have a certain pride in customizing even my > kits, I always have a seagull form for my main soundhole, and it is a > different "free hand bird" on each of the others I made). > > Secondly, what is the standard lute notation of the olden times? > McFarlane's > book only speaks to the Scottish lute books of 1600, is that "French > tabulature" a standard in old texts? > > Finally, knowing myself I'm probably going to build and play the damned > thing anyway, so I'll ask for any advice you all can offer. It would seem > that one's choice of fingers is more sequential than by shape (as it is on > a > chorded folk guitar). But I have been able to make some musical sounds, > with > a bit of effort, using the retuned guitar. And it would seem that the > shorter neck length of the lute might make it easier to make some of the > placements (I've played guitar for fifty years, but always at the neck end, > never had a good barre - that would seem to militate toward good lute > practice). > > Best, Jon > > Jonathan W. Murphy > Englishtown, NJ > > > >
