Taco, I think you confuse the matter of the choice of the a' frequency and the size of the instrument. The choice of the basic frequency for a' has more to do with whom you are playing than the specific instrument. Pitch is relative and doesn't matter, except when you are playing with other instruments. (OK, I'm sure I'll be corrected here - gross pitch is relevant, you don't want to play a soprano sound on a bass instrument - but I'm speaking of the narrower range of the level of the a' - yet sometimes it is fun to play a piece designed for the treble in the bass, you get a bit more resonance and "stay", but it can be effective).
It happens that my "flat back" lute from MusicMakers kits is 63.5 in vibrating length, as you lute is. I have done the work empirically (none of the string calculators posit breaking pitch). Forget the Newtons, they only apply to the tension for the design (we don't want the bridge to pull away) and the "action". Every length has a maximum pitch given the characteristics of the string material (how many times have I said this). And gut, Nylgut and nylon balance out with similar effective limits. Tonight I just finally got a .44 and a .42 nylon string from Aquila (my laziness as when he was out of stock I used fishing line, and it worked). Nylgut is a bit higher pitched in breaking point than gut (which I didn't try). But Nylgut won't hold a g' at 63.5 without breaking in a couple of days. I'll not give you the numbers tonight, as I'm ready for bed, but the combination of tensile strength, density (therefore tension) and diameter (therefore actual strength versus material strength) makes for a lower pitch limit for Nylgut than nylon (the guage will be different). I first used the .42 on the chanterelle tonight, an acceptable tension to the fingers. Then I tried the .44, again acceptable in the action. Each seems to work, with the thicker string a bit brighter. The test of the pudding will be in couple of days when I see if they break. Nylgut held for a couple of days at f', but broke at f'#, It is a fine difference, but a 63.5 lute is a bit jinky if tuning to g'. (And for those with comments I'll get around to giving you the actual numbers on the density and tensile strength - when I get around to it - until then just trust me. It is counter intuitive that they all seem to work out the same in breaking point, despite their differing details, but they do). Best, Jon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Taco Walstra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "lutelist lutelist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 10:14 AM Subject: Re: updated string calculator > On Monday 29 November 2004 15:34, Wayne Cripps wrote: > Hello wayne, > First of all I don't understand, the 415 for baroque and 440 for renaissance. > A renaissance lute is often smaller, so a high A frequency results in very > thin strings, which becomes a problem if you start using gut . My renaissance > lute is 63.5 cm. I had it first with fluor carbon and needed 0.38 mm for the > chanterelle at a=440. In a calculation with your script I get 0.40 mm for > the carbon and 0.45 for gut at a tension of 8.50 kg (???) at a=440. A tension > should be approx. below 40 N, in my opinion to get some useful string > diameter. I garantee that the 0.45 mm gut will break at such a huge force. > > In my own calculations I use a=415 and get g' ~ 0.40 mm for a plain gut > string, and I know this works. > So, the script gives strange values. > Compare it with arto's strings calculator, which is correct. I can also send > you a python script which I have used for some of my calculations. > > I agree with a increasing tension for higher strings but take only the 3 > highest strings. Normally I start with 37N (yes, newton, not kg because it's > a force, not mass and it's also not kg/m) and decrease it to 33N for the > second and 27N for other strings. This is a little bit low tension, but a > good start. I use it on theorbo and archlute too which creates the ability to > play at 440Hz too at higher tension. > Taco > > > Hi - > > > > I just updated my on line string calculator at > > > > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/string/string.html > > > > I would be interested in comments from people who > > have worked with getting a good set of string tensions > > for the range of strings. I am using some of George > > Blanford's ideas about increasing the tension on the > > higher strings. > > > > This is a calculator for baroque lutes at 415 and renaissance > > lutes at 440, it is not a general purpose string tension calculator. > > > > Wayne > > > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > > >
