> I am questioning a rather dubious methodological > approach, and I have stated my reasons for considering > it as such. If that reminds you of MO's atacks, it is > your privilege to believe so. If you accept E.7XXXX as a vihuela there is no reason not to accept Diaz.
As to endangering a > livelihood, there is nothing to prevent Mr. Batov from > approching the reconstruction of vihuelas on more > solid ground. I haven't been convinced that there was any solid ground in reconstruction of the vihuela, besides the Jaquemart piece of furniture. The only valid methodology has been so far the empirical endeavors of luthiers. > If you are impliying that the survival > of Mr Batov depends on making instruments following a > mistaken approach, you must have a rather lowly > opinion of him. My lowly opinion of Mr.BAtov is actually very high, rather than low. > > By the way, which is my categoric statement? If there > are grounds to support it, I will certainly confirm > it, otherwise I will be pleased to apologiza. > > > > --- Roman Turovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribi??> >> E.0748, >>>>> being the most obvious), this particular murder >>>> left >>>>> behind a most enlightening iconographical trail. >>>> The differences between E.0748 and Diaz seem to >> be >>>> similar to the >>>> differences between Hoffmann and Edlinger, one >> being >>>> wider than the other, >>>> while no one questions luteness of Hoffmann >> because >>>> it is narrower. >>>> Besides, isn't Dugot of opinion that Diaz is a >>>> vihuela? >>>> RT >>> The case for the lute on the one hand, and for the >>> vihuela and guitar on the other are not similar. >> It is >> A matter of perception. >> >>> a rather deficient methodological approach to >> compare >>> oranges with apples. >> We are comparing pink and yellow grapefruits, I'm >> afraid. >> >> >>> And, no, Dugot has never made >>> such a categoric statement. >> But you did make a categoric one, while it is more >> customary among >> professional musicologists to use the noncommittal >> formula "this very well >> may/may not be so", especially considering that you >> are questioning the >> validity of Mr. Batov's efforts in a way that is >> reminiscent of MO's attack >> on Stephen Barber's E.0748 on the same grounds. >> If we give you a benefit of a doubt and agree that >> Diaz could be argued both >> ways, even that alone jeopardizes Batov's >> livelihood, and I don't like that. >> RT >> ______________ >> Roman M. Turovsky >> http://polyhymnion.org/swv >> >> >> >> >> To get on or off this list see list information at >> > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >> > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Informaci??e Estados Unidos y Am?ca Latina, en Yahoo! Noticias. > Vis?nos en http://noticias.espanol.yahoo.com > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
