Miles, Aren't you duplicating the effect of varnished gut? Tim
On Saturday, February 5, 2005, at 08:28 AM, Miles Dempster wrote: > So: A gut chanterelle is the most desirable and yet the most fragile. > > Eliott Chapin, as he described in a previous posting to this list, has > devised a way for extending the life of gut strings, chanterelles in > particular: > > 1. Before assembling the string on the lute, raise it to the > approximate tension under which it will operate. For example, attach > one end to a nail or door handle, and hang a suitable weight on the > other end. > > 2. Make a small wad out of tissue paper, Kleenex or what-have-you. > > 3. Put a few drops of Krazy Glue on the wad > > 4. Very quickly run the wad down the length of the string. > > As far as I understand it, the glue, which has a very low surface > tension, quickly penetrates the fibres, and has the effect of binding > them together. In my experience, the string will resist much longer > before starting to degrade and fray. > > > Miles Dempster > > On Saturday, February 5, 2005, at 03:49 AM, Jon Murphy wrote: > >> James, >> >>> It seems ironic for people who think gut has the best sound, to >> sacrifice >>> that sound on the chanterelle, where it probably has the most >>> noticeable >>> effect... It almost makes more sense (unless you can afford to buy >>> all >> gut strings) >>> to have nylgut or nylon (which can literally last years) on every >>> course >> but >>> the 1st and 2nd; and to use gut on those strings, where the melody is >>> most >>> often found. Just an idea... >> >> A good idea, but I think an impractical one for some lutes. And I >> confess >> that I've not tested gut yet for breaking pitch. >> >> With all due respect for the empiricals, I believe that gut and nylgut >> - >> having a very similar density - use the same tension for the pitch. >> But that >> gut has less "tensile strength" so can't maintain the same pitch >> without >> breaking as can nylgut. And I know, from experience, that nylon will >> give >> you about a half to full tone higher on the chanterelle without >> breaking. >> >> So the problem of the lute is the chanterelle (there is a 16th C. >> manuscript >> that tells of the tuning, tune the chanterelle until it breaks, then >> tune a >> bit lower - an expensive approach as one has to replace the broken >> chanterelle). The range of the lute is defined by the vibrating >> length, and >> the material of the chanterelle. But as it has a fixed length across >> the nut >> it is also defined by the lower courses. I'll give up for the night >> here, >> leaving the question open on purpose. >> >> Best, Jon >> >> >> >> To get on or off this list see list information at >> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >> > >
