>Ed, When I built my present lute I took the plans for a 7-course and spaced 6 courses out over the same bridge and nut width. I find it more comfortable than the normal spacing. As a beginner, with the normal spacing I found it very difficult to feel the courses as courses and not as 11 evenly-spaced strings. But I'm middle-aged with big hands and have used my fingers a lot for building things, so the tips might be pretty battered by now. I'm in the middle of building another lute which I want to be 7 courses, and I'll have to decide whether I want the same spacing or should close things up a bit.
If there's not that much music written specifically for the 8-course lute, how did it end up as the modern "default" lute anyway? For any guitar player making the transition to lute, I would think that a 6-course instrument would feel more natural. Tim > > >---- Original Message ---- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: 5c vs many more >Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 00:17:04 +0900 > >>Stewart McCoy wrote: >> >>>Dear Ed, >>> >>>If you have seven courses spread over an 8-course lute, the strings >>>would be slightly further apart than they would be with eight >>>courses. Does this help explain why you have difficulty with that E >>>flat chord? In other words, does the difficulty arise from wide >>>string spacing rather than how wide the end of your fingers are? >>>Just a thought. >> >>I think that explains part of it. However, my A lute is small and it > >>still isn't easy for me. The finger has to be placed very precisely >>to cover all four strings over two courses. I am not keen on duff >>notes. If I can't play it cleanly, getting both strings in both >>courses to sound cleanly, I'd rather look for a different solution. >>Of course my attitude might change if it were for a more rustic >style >>of music. It is also something I've never practiced, so it is within > >>the realm of possibility that I could develop the precision >>necessary. I don't know. >> >>About my lute, I arrived at the bridge spacing after consultations >>with Pat Obrien and Grant Tomlinson. I was just getting too many >>rattles with the old spacing. I don't have enough self restraint to >>not overplay, I guess. The bridge spacing is fine now, but I spaced >>the 7 courses at the nut end evenly over the span that was for 8. >>Paul Odette played my lute recently and I asked him what he thought >>about the spacing. He thought the bridge was nice but the nut was a >>bit wide. It's the same dilemma on lute as on guitar: narrow spacing > >>is great for single line work but chords benefit from wider spacing >>so that the fingers don't touch adjacent strings. >> >>To answer Bill's query in a little more detail: I ordered an 8 >>course, as so many of us do, for my main Renaissance lute because it > >>is kind of a standard. I think that is a kind of modern convention. >>When you look at the literature, the percentage of music written >>specifically for 8 course is much smaller than that for 7 course. In > >>my repertoire, it turns out that most instrumentals are for a 7th F >>and most songs are for a 7th D. I just have to plan my sets so that >I >>group them by 7th course pitch. It doesn't take long to retune, but >>it is best to retune, play a piece that only requires 6 courses and >>then go for the 7 course piece in the new tuning. That gives it a >few >>minutes to settle and a quick readjustment is all that is needed. >>However, I can't tell you how many times I've started performing a >>piece and then realize that I've forgotten to retune just as I hit >>that first 7th course note! That's the downside. It IS easier to >just >>worry about one 'extra' course outside of the 6 main courses though. > >>That's the upside. >> >>cheers, >>-- >>Ed Durbrow >>Saitama, Japan >>http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/ >> >> >> >>To get on or off this list see list information at >>http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >>
