Understanding that this is just opinion, as are most of the previous 
responses, I don't think it is possible to truly understand what happened 
here with the Lute.

However there is a concept in the study of the evolution of species that 
states; the more specialized a species becomes the more prone to extintion 
it will be.  I kind of look at the Lute in this light.

 We have discussions on this list all the time about all of the different 
tunings, the different sizes, the different strings, the diffirent forms of 
music and the different forms of playing techniques.  We go from five to 
thirteen sets, or courses, of strings, to these monster instruments with six 
foot necks.

Personally I think if the Lute had not changed over and over and been 
re-invented every time music changed, but had stayed with no more than seven 
courses it might well have survived.  I think that those people, who over 
the years loved the Lute, loved it to death.

 It got to be too ponderous, too complicated, too expensive to string, too 
fragile, too difficult to transport, too complicated to play  and--- too 
specialized to survive. Couple all of this with the sound limitations being 
discussed here and you have a lot of good reasons the instrument could not 
and did not survive.

Of course this is just my opinion which with four dollars will get you a cup 
of coffee at your local Star Bucks. 



To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

Reply via email to