Dear Anthony and all other string users Gut strings over 114 cm? Is that really a question??? Did they used Pyramid strings in the early 17th century??? We don't know exactly which strings they had - but certainly not overspun strings until the last third of the 17th century (the spreading of the 1659 for the first time described overspun strings was very slow). So as material two types are in question: gut and silk. (The argument with the splitted roped strings to avoid larger bridge wholes who is readable on the page of the SFL is very strange. I think that's a polemic again the hypothesis of higher density and we have no advices for this operation, who is very dangerous for the roped string - without Loctite, invented 1423 b.c. ;-) The textile fabrication begun to use a kind of "laded silk" (Seidenbeschwerung in German) in the second half of the 16th c. So the technique was developped. But we don't know: - Used they also silk in this time for strings? (We know one later source. See Lute News 78 (Juni 2006), S.19, Patrizo Barbieri, in: Galpin Society Journal. Francesco Lana Terzi, Magisterium naturae-- (Brescia 1686, Vol. 2, S.433: ovinae maxime in usu sunt -- fides serica crassiores in testudinibus aliqui maxime approbant") - If yes: Loaded silk for the basses? - If the technique of "loaded silk" was developped, was it possible to make a technique transfer from silk to gut?
We only know three things: 1. In this time (end of the 16th century and first half of the 17th c.) new instrument types with a bigger ambitus in the bass were developped. So the problem of bass strings was certainly solved for these instruments - and not with Pyramid ;-) 2. There were different techniques in use: Very long diapasons (ratio between petit jeu and grand jeu nearly 1:2) for a bigger ambitus and smaller diapasons for smaller ambitus (f.ex. double headed 12-course lute or 10-course lute - perhaps they used the same string type for course 7 to 12?). 3. The technique of the right hand has radically changed from thumb inside to thumb outside - see all the pictures around 1600! (NB: At the end of the century the hand position is no longer in such an extreme position. Perhaps the bass strings had more tension?) My question is: Has the change of the hand position something to do with a lower tension? When the oversoun strings were more common (end of the 17th c. and begin of the 18th c.) new types of lutes were built: 13-course lutes with bass rider (ca. 1718, only some centimeters longer, perhaps they used the string from the 10th and 11th for the new 12th and 13th course?) and swan-neck lutes (ca. 1732 with a ratio of ca. 3:4). (But be careful: The earliest known swan-neck is a Angelique of Tielke from 1680 with a ratio of ca. 2:3 - the same ratio as for Liuti attiorbati.) For me it's astonishing to see that the question of strings and string material - who is certainly the main reason for the different developments of lute constructions and perhaps a very important reason for the htechnique change - was such a long time neglected. And now a question for all: Who knows a person who has to do with the history of textile technique in the 15th until the early 19th century - especially silk? Andreas -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
