Dear Rob, Mimmo Peruffo did a thorough study of the bridge holes in surviving lutes and came to the conclusion that many of them were too small for a solid gut string at the kind of tension we are used to. It follows that the original strings were either at very low tension (Mimmo rejects this, others have gone part of the way down this path) or they were more dense than modern gut strings. Hence the development of "loaded" gut strings. Mimmo has suspended the production of his loaded strings due to problems of trueness (the difficulty being to distribute the loading substance evenly through the string).
Luthiers used to drill absurdly small holes in their bridges - but I think things may have improved. I always drill bridge holes big enough for gut strings. I don't drill big holes in the pegs, because it can be infuriating trying to attach a thin wound string to a peg with a large hole, and peg holes (unlike bridge holes) can easily be enlarged at a later date. I should explain that I don't tie strings to pegs - I just bend the last 5mm of the string into a right angle and poke this into the hole - that way there are no loose ends of string in the pegbox and less chance of buzzes. The debate about what old gut bass strings were really like and whether or not they were loaded is ongoing. I just hope that one day someone rummaging in the attic of an Italian palazzo discovers a lute-shaped wooden case which has not been opened for 400 years.... Best wishes, Martin Rob MacKillop wrote: >A luthier once told me that many of the original bridge string holes are too >small for the diameters we choose for 'modern' gut. Is this true, and if so >what are the implications? > >Also, many luthiers drill bridge holes on their instruments for wound >synthetic strings, and when you decide to experiment with gut, you too will >find that the holes are too narrow. On two occasions I have had to have the >holes widened. > >There is some connection between these two paragraphs... > >Rob > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Edward Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: 29 January 2005 20:20 >To: Michael Thames; LGS-Europe; Lute net; Edward Martin >Subject: Re: Gutsy stories > >No argument here. The extended bass length is precisely for that >purpose.......with the longer basses, the required strings will necessarily >require a smaller string diameter. I am uncertain if it gives more volume >and sustain, but for sure, a better clarity of pitch and sound. These >instruments were designed for gut strings. > >ed > > > > > > >To get on or off this list see list information at >http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > > >
