Stewart,
This matter was discussed at length a year or so ago: it is a chimera.
Other than wishful thinking, there is no evidence for use of a theorbo
second course strung in octaves; indeed, since the stress of a higher
octave second would exceed the maximum breaking stress, it is highly
unlikely. You could, I suppose, adopt a very low nominal tuning to allow
the physics to work but then the lower fingered courses would be at such a
low stress that the very sound the instrument was invented to produce (a
stronger, more focussed bass) would be lost........................
There are examples of this octave melodic shift in other theorbo tablatures
and, bearing in mind their willingness to transpose basses an octave,
there's really no reason to suppose the Old Ones were as intransigent as us
on these matters (also see earlier communications).
rgds
Martyn
"Martin Shepherd"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
net.co.uk> cc:
Subject: Re: Double 1st (HIP
message
04/01/2004 19:47 included)
----- Original Message -----
From: Stewart McCoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Lute Net <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 05 January 2004 16:24
Subject: Double 1st
> Dear Sterling,
>
> There seems to have been considerable variety in instruments known
> as theorboes. Single or double strings on the fingerboard is one of
> many variants. From the purely musical point of view (i.e.
> recreation of different notes, not tone quality), the only
> significant difference between a single-strung theorbo and a
> double-strung one would be if the double course consisted of two
> strings tuned an octave apart. Andrea Dammiani has suggested that
> this tuning is likely for the theorbo music of Melii, where there
> are some odd melodic shifts from one octave to another. A
> single-strung theorbo would not produce the same (desired?) effect.
>
Dear Stewart,
You're quite right that we tend to oversimplify, and someone has already
hauled me over the coals for suggesting that Italian theorboes were double,
French single, etc. - more of which another time...
I know what you mean about there being no difference in *notes* between
single and double, but tone quality (and perhaps quantity) is important,
which is why I worry about the tendency of modern lutenists to avoid double
firsts. I see it as something which has just been quietly swept under the
carpet, just as gut frets, thumb-under on renaissance lute, thumb-out on
baroque lute, double frets, double second, no wound strings, etc., etc.,
have been in the past (and some of them still into the present). If we're
serious about what lutes might have sounded like in the past, I think we
have to try some things which seem a bit odd. We have to be realistic
about the success or otherwise of our experiments, of course, and we can't
expect to get it right first time (gut stringing being an example of a
still unresolved problem). But I think you would agree that we should not
ignore the evidence just because it suits our prejudices. Of course the
most important thing is the music,!
and I feel we've made considerable progress in understanding that (though
there's still a long way to go) - but we wouldn't be doing what we're doing
if we didn't believe that the technology which makes the music possible
wasn't inportant too, otherwise we'd all be playing it on the electric
guitar...
Enough of that. Having tried a double first, I can say that it makes a
different sound, and requires a different (well, more careful) technique.
If it was what Dowland & Co. had in mind, it seems more than a historical
curiousity and more like something we should take seriously.
Best wishes to all,
Martin
________________________________________________________________________
The information in this email (and any attachment) may be for the
intended recipient only. If you know you are not the intended recipient,
please do not use or disclose the information in any way and please
delete this email (and any attachment) from your system.
Service of legal documents is not accepted by email
________________________________________________________________________
