I think there is conscious design element that uses the resonant frequency. A friend who owns a Chambure copy and tunes his open 6th to its RF which resides between F and F#. Other lutes have used the RF of the open 5th course which is equally useful.
Then there is the effect of meantone tuning. Some folks notice a better resonance and more volume when using some sort of meantone fret pattern. I don't think historic builders and players would have ignored these factors when reaching for a better sound. Based on building experience it should be possible to find measurements that are repeatable. Certainly there was similar expertise that went into building tuned sets of recorders. For solo playing however, we should experiment more w/ tuning to the best sound for the instrument. As I write this, Guy Smith's letter just popped in. It makes a lot of sense and perhaps benefits could coincide for both arguments. Perhaps the goal was to distribute the frequencies over the widest possible range but it maybe it also remains inevitable that one set of frequencies will dominate. If they have to be there why not use those to advantage and maximise the the rest w/ a well chosen top and bracing? best regards, Sean At 12:34 PM 1/18/04, you wrote: >Hi Ed, > >My understanding is that the resonant frequency of a volume (such as a >lute or guitar) is a function of both the volume, and the size of the sound >hole. So yes, in theory, a luthier could adjust the frequency somewhat >by varying the size of the rose... though all the frilly bits might make >this >a bit tough to do predictably. > > From a practical perspective, I'd be interested in knowing if any luthiers >actually do this "tuning". > >Eric > > >James, > > This is amazing. I tried this on my Baroque guitar. I merely muted > >the strings with my hand. It clearly resonates at d and f. This is > >good, I like Dm. :-) On my Ren lutes, it wasn't as pronounced and > >seemed to be a wider Q factor (width). My B lute resonates at A low > >pitch. This is truly facinating. > > > > > > > >>The difference is amazing. If you're not the sort to be convinced, > >>as I am, by the physics, the sound will decide it--as it should. > >>The resonance of the instrument will be greatly magnified, as will > >>the volume, and even the clarity of the plucked notes and their > >>overtones. I have done it with two 64cm lutes, one responded at E > >>and the other at F. They are much the richer for it--totally > >>different instruments. They stand up very well to a voice they > >>accompany, without being overwhelmed. The harmonic synergy between > >>the voice and lute (if it's you singing) is palpable. > >> > >> > > > >I'm wondering if this is something easy or difficult for a luther to > >control. Do they design instruments to resonate at certain pitches? > >If there is too much resonance doesn't that give an uneven response? > >Who wants to be trying to play something evenly and one note suddenly > >jump out? I haven't noticed that problem on my B guitar, but it is > >pretty much a tank of an instrument anyway. > > > >
