Dear All, Thanks to RS for the information. Once wound strings started to be used, it may well have been a matter of personal taste whether this or that musician chose to use them (and still is today). But I would just like to remind everyone that nearly all the lute music we play was written before wound strings were invented, and for the remainder we have very little evidence about whether or not they were used, though such evidence as there is suggests that they were not used. The use of extended necks to accommodate longer bass strings always suggests to me the use of uncovered gut - why grapple with a lute six feet long if you don't have to? As a practical matter, I was once asked to string the lowest two or three strings of an archlute (67/152cm) with wound strings, and I found the strings needed to be much higher tension than gut in order not to feel too floppy - not recommended!
Best wishes, Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Just a note.... > >There is substantial evidence of wound strings used on late 18th & early 19th >century guitars..on the title page of many works published in Vienna shows >this very clearly. > >Also, if my memory serves me well, there is a reference to the use of wound >strings (of some sort) in the preface to Lecoq's book (1729). > >Finally, I recall having seen a 17th c. or 18th c. painting that shows >silver strings on the neck of a small archlute. As I am not at home (in >rehearsals in Denver for Handel's Giulio Cesare with Opera Colorado....) I >can't lay >my hands on this now.....but it might be in a private collection. > >This is not to say that any of the above supports the thesis that this was >the norm.....but I some times wonder how much is dependent on personal taste. > >RS > >-- > >To get on or off this list see list information at >http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > >
