Luters,
I'd have to say I agree with Manolo. The theorbo
presents such a mass of strings that its really a
handfull compared to guitar or ren. lute. In the
olden days, it seems to have been customary for
would-be theorbists to study the _lute_ with a master
first and then progress to the bigger instrument.
As for Manolo's experience, I also must agree,
although I started with lute (after playing guitar for
years) and then took up theorbo. When I first started
playing chitarrone, I also developed a pain in my left
hand and had to re-evaluate my whole approach which
had worked fine on classical guitar and, with modest
concessions, with the lute. (Yep, Kapsperger, de
Visee, and even Piccinini present some difficult
moments!)
In short: the theorbo's a beast!
Chris
--- Manolo Laguillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >Better yet, if New Boy is interested in playing in
> ensembles either professionally or
> >not, he should consider getting a theorbo.
> >
> > It shares many of the easy
> >technical features of the baroque lute, and has the
> added advantage of
> >being single strung and tuned almost exactly like a
> guitar. Anybody who
> >has played guitar (any style) for any amount of
> time will immediately
> >recognize many of the chord shapes and names on the
> theorbo and can
> >generally learn to play continuo in a few months'
> time, provided he can
> >read music. This opens up such a vast repertoire
> of chamber and orchestral
> >music and opera that you could hardly explore it
> all in a lifetime, not to
> >mention the wonderful and basically neglected
> (comparatively) solo
> >repertoire.
> >
> >It is quite common for guitarists also to be
> theorbo players. This was
> >true in de Visee's time and in ours. It is nearly
> impossible to make a
> >living as a classical guitarist unless you are one
> of a handful of
> >incredibly talented people. On the other hand,
> there really aren't enough
> >theorboes to go around these days.
> >
> >Charlie Weaver
> >
> Sorry, buy I disagree with you, Charlie: going into
> the lute world
> through the theorbo is not really the best entrance
> door for New Boy. He
> is_beginning_with the guitar, and the theorbo has a
> steep learning curve
> for an absolute beginner. Why? Because the theorbo
> repertoire is not
> easy (Kapsberger, de Visee...).
> Besides, it would be quite strange if he would come
> to the idea of
> playing chamber music as a theorbist right now...
> First he must learn to read tablature
> (french_and_italian), to get a
> nice rich sound out of his instrument, to know a
> minimum of the
> Renaissance repertoire.
> Here in Spain many professional guitar players of a
> certain age (around
> 40-50) came to the early music "via the theorbo",
> exactly because the
> reasons in your last paragraph: more possiblities of
> working and earning
> money. But they did it after years of work, which
> included learning not
> only the guitar, but music in general; so they could
> manage to make the
> jump in a very short time.
> 3 years ago I came to the lute using the "theorbo
> door", and although I
> don't regret it, it could have been better. I sold
> my theorbo (it was
> quite small, only 74 cm string length) 8 months
> after buying it; in the
> meanwhile I had bought a ren lute, with which I
> progressed much quicker
> than with the theorbo. With the theorbo I got
> actually a pain in the
> left thumb (it is not so easy to hold), which lasted
> for a long time.
> It is quite usual that ex-guitar players,
> professionals in any case,
> express the advice you gave. They forget that their
> background and goals
> are not the same as the one's from an amateur; in my
> opinion, and with
> the due respect, it is not a good advice.
> Last curious and funny point: who bought my theorbo?
> It was bought by a
> young boy (14 years old) who plays violin since he
> was 5...
> Saludos from Barcelona
> Manolo Laguillo
>
> --
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at
>
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
