On May 1, 2007, at 9:29 AM, Andrew Gibbs wrote: > Is it right to think that thumb-out is the historically correct > technique for lute music composed post 1600?
Both techniques were in evidence, but thumb-under was predominant: it's the best way to play the 16th-century polyphonic music. As the thumb took on a more independent role as the bass player in later music, the technique changed accordingly. I think they were going for a different kind of sound with the later music, although thumb- under was probably used with "old tuning" by some players all the way down to Zamboni. > Did lute players all > over Europe switch to thumb-out around 1600? Apparently. > And this might be a > silly question: are there any players today who use both techniques: > thumb-in for renaissance pieces and thumb-out for baroque? Not a silly question at all: I use both techniques. With thumb-out my RH fingers are still extended forward, only not quite so much as with thumb-in. > I am (perhaps overly) > concerned with historical correctness. Nothing wrong with that. To me, tone quality is also a historical consideration: I think that knowledge of historical techniques is important from the point of view of the qualities of tone and articulation they produce. David Rastall [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.rastallmusic.com -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
