When still had a renaissance lute or two (now only a theorbo) I appreciated 
gut on the second course because it gave more volume - making it easier to 
carry descending melodies.

At 02:06 PM 2/6/05, Miles Dempster wrote:
>Tim,
>
>Yes, I suppose, but only to a degree. since:
>1. The quantity of Krazy glue is minimal
>2. The glue gets chiefly absorbed into the fibres i.e. it doesn't lie
>on the surface
>3. You don't get the reported "squeaky" effect
>
>Miles
>
>
>On Sunday, February 6, 2005, at 12:48  PM, Timothy Motz wrote:
>
> > 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
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >


www3.sympatico.ca/echapin 



Reply via email to