Dear Ed, and all
I'm sure your aware of the Joseph Pons guitar that was found in a bank
vault in London, in perfect unplayed condition. This guitar was a gift by
Giuliani to Mr.De Monte, and formally belonged to Empress Marie-Louise,
Napoleons wife.
What is unique about this guitar, is the fact the original strings were
still on it since sometime before 1815.
This might have been Giuliani's, preference on strings, and in my
opinion, is quite unconventional from our perspective 200 years later. One
would expect to see the first 3 strings in gut and the rest in silver wound.
What is interesting is that only the first string was gut, and the remaining
5 strings were wound ( silver or silver plated copper on silk.
1st string 0.90 gut
2nd 0.79 wound silver
3rd 0.89 wound silver
4th 1.18 wound silver
5th 1.30 wound silver
6th 1.50 wound silver
As coincidence would have it, these silver wound strings fit perfectly
in the bass courses of surviving baroque lutes.
This might be the closest thing to finding that 400 year old lute in some
attic in Italy. I think we must remain some what open minded about what we
think was the absolute norm in historical times.
Michael Thames
www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Edward Martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Michael Thames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Edward Martin"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 9:50 PM
Subject: Re: gut treble strings
> Dear Michael et all,
>
> As I said, this is a fascinating subject! Wouldn't it be great if someone
> would find some period strings in the attic?
>
> ed
>
> At 09:08 PM 2/4/2005 -0700, Michael Thames wrote:
> >Ed,
> > Here is the refference I was reffering to....
> >
> >1. Bridge holes
> >
> >
> >The hypothesis that the loading of gut could have been the common and
> >relevant characteristic of bass strings employed between 16th and 18th
> >centuries found its way in the light of some data recording, which
> >afterwards became systematic, of bridge holes sizes from historic lutes
> >built before, or very close to 1664, year to which the earliest surviving
> >historic report of overspun strings date back to (9). It should be
> >underlined, however, how scant and scattered the spreading of the new
type
> >of strings must have been, probably on the ground of the habit musical
> >taste, and the fact that traditional bass strings in the face of the
> >novelty, kept being competitive. T. Mace (10) over ten years after J.
> >Playford's announcement, make no mention of them. J. Talbot (11) by then
> >prefers to use conventional bass strings, and so does L. Mozart who well
> >into the 18th century, implicitly excludes, in his 1756 violin tutor, the
> >use of overspun strings.
> >
> > I got this all wrong. it was a violin tutor not the Burwell tutor.
> >Michael Thames
> >www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Edward Martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "Michael Thames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> >"Lute Net" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
> >Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 7:52 PM
> >Subject: Re: gut treble strings
> >
> >
> > > Dear Michael,
> > >
> > > I find this statement very interesting indeed. I am unaware of
Burwell
> > > mentioning anywhere anything about the use of metal in strings. Where
is
> > > that quote? This is what Burwell said (I cut & pasted this quote
from
> > > Martin's web site, as it would be too tedious to re-type it all):
> > > *************
> > > From the Mary Burwell Lute Tutor, c.1670, f.7 (full stops editorial):
> > > The good stringes are made at Rome or about Rome and none that are
good
> >are
> > > made in any other place except the great strings and octaves that are
made
> > > in Lyons att Fraunce and noe where else. They attribute that to the
> >clymate
> > > and to the waters. The stringes are made of sheepes and catts gutte
and
> >are
> > > twisted with a good deale of art. To be good they must be hard and
> > > transparant smooth and well twisted hard and strong and now they are
> > > preserved in a white paper dipped in oyle of almonds or in a hogges
> > > bladder. They endure noe moisture nor any opressive heate noe more
than
> >the
> > > lute but they will have a temperate ayre and place but of the twoe the
> > > moisture is the worst. When they are open there goodnes is knowne thus
> > > holding the twoe ends in both hands and strikeing the string with the
> > > middle finger if they parte in twoe onely or if being laid uppon the
lute
> > > they doe not jarre. If the twoe stringes can be made of one bunch they
> >will
> > > agree the better but it is hard to find twoe good stringes of a length
> > > therefore you must choose them as neare as you can to the same bignes,
the
> > > string must not be full of knotts or gowty or rugged nor be bigger in
one
> > > place then in another.
> > > *********************
> > >
> > > Burwell goes on to write about the 11th course (for the 11 course
lute)
> >and
> > > she writes,
> > > "Concerning the 11th string, which is the last bass, the good masters
of
> > > the lute do use only the octave (that is, the little one), because the
> >11th
> > > bass is a superfluous string that has been added to the lute of late
to
> > > give ease to the hands; for the "d" of the sixth, is the same thing
> >(i.e.,
> > > in unison) with the 11th, and if we must stop a string below the neck
with
> > > the "d" of the sixth, 'tis hard and sometimes impossible to do it;
then
> >we
> > > must use the eleventh instead of the "d" in the sixth. Therefore, it
were
> > > necessary to discharge the lute of that burden. Making the bridge and
nut
> > > smaller and taking from the head the superfluous pegs, the lute would
> >sound
> > > better and the hands would find more ease. The eleventh string being
> >alone
> > > ought to be something bigger than if it were an octave; her bigness
must
> > > be between the size of the fifth and the great sixth. The
lute-masters
> > > have taken away that great string because the sound of it is too big
and
> > > smothers the sound of others."
> > >
> > > Her reference to bigness and smothering to me does not imply metal or
> >wound
> > > strings.
> > >
> > > In chapter XVI: "Concerning the errors and abuses that are committed
> >about
> > > the lute", she goes on to talk about the English Gaultier having had
lutes
> > > made that have two heads. She states that although England accepted
this
> > > orientation, the French masters kept the old tradition of only keeping
the
> > > small eleventh. She accuses Gaultier of being "feeble", in asserting
that
> > > the longer length made a "longer & bigger sound", which she states is
> > > wrong, because all the strings "must have the same length of sound".
She
> > > states it creates discord, creates a "sound like when one sings in the
> > > nose", one "cannot stop upon them long basses", a lack of symmetry in
> > > proportion of the two heads, and the result is "not the sound of a
lute,
> > > but a bastard instrument between a lute and theorbo". In conclusion,
she
> > > states "if one does not have a light hand (as English Gaultier had)
one
> > > maketh and ugly and confused noise upon them long basses".
> > >
> > > Does anyone have reference of Burwell writing about metal?
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > >
> > > ed
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > At 05:00 PM 2/4/2005 -0700, Michael Thames wrote:
> > > > The shift to fan bracing would also suggest the use of more
dense
> >bass
> > > >strings, perhaps they played around with metal wound strings. The
> >Burwell
> > > >tutor instructing not to use metal wound strings, implies that in
fact
> >they
> > > >were used, does it not? One hundred years or so, earlier than Weiss
> > > >developments.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Edward Martin
> > > 2817 East 2nd Street
> > > Duluth, Minnesota 55812
> > > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > voice: (218) 728-1202
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
> Edward Martin
> 2817 East 2nd Street
> Duluth, Minnesota 55812
> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> voice: (218) 728-1202
>
>
>
>
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
