Le 20 sept. 07 =E0 10:44, Anthony Hind a ecrit :
Le 19 sept. 07 =E0 16:43, David Rastall a ecrit :
> On Sep 18, 2007, at 5:05 PM, Anthony Hind wrote:
>
>> Could lutes made for outdoor use have been built differently
>> from chamber lutes? Perhaps, if they did once exist, they would have
>> been prone to damage, and may not have survived. They also could have
>> been less ornate and so of less value, and relatively easily
>> discarded.
>
> Now that's a point I hadn't considered when talking about those "lute-
> hoots" we used to have in the old days: we were all students so most
> probably we were all playing student lutes, which would have been not
> as sophisticated in their projection as professional concert
> instruments, but hardier and more suited to quantity of sound rather
> than quality.
David
Well my reasoning comes from the relatively high proportion of ivory
(or ivory and ebony) lutes that have survived (see the Dean castle
collection <http://www.futuremuseum.co.uk/images/cache/
Img285S1000.jpg>). It would seem that the most ornamental lutes,
which were the least played, would have had a better chance of
surviving than any others. One possible (but not necessary) correlate
to this, could be that less ornate working lutes might have had a
greater chance of disappearing. The actual surviving lutes may not be
particularly typical of the majority of early lutes. Indeed in the
Musee de la Musique in Paris, I think there are only two surviving
fairly early French lute (the Jean Des Moulins lute 1644: http://
mediatheque.cite-musique.fr/SIMClient/Consultation/Binaries/Image.asp?
INSTANCE=MULTIMEDIA&eidmpa=CMIM000016847)
which has some likeness to the Charles Mouton lute, and an Angelique,
anonyme, France, fin 17 =E8me, E.980.2.317,
(http://mediatheque.cite-musique.fr/SIMClient/Consultation/Binaries/
Image.asp?INSTANCE=MULTIMEDIA&eidmpa=CMIM000019592).
Actually, I just picked up the superb "cahiers du musee de la musique
N=B0 7", les luths (Occidents), and the authors regret exactly this (P.
7), that the only surviving lutes are those which have fine
decorations or use noble materials (exotic woods, ivory,
tortoiseshell) and very few working musician's lutes (which could
give much more relevant information) have survived.
I would, nevertheless, very much suggest that any lutist try to
procure this beautiful edition, in spite of this regret.
>
> My 6-course is Engleman spruce and cherry, and is well-suited to
> outdoor playing. The cherry wood makes for a very bright, almost
> piercing sound. In fact I bought it for use as an ensemble
> instrument, and it actually works in that capacity than as a solo
> instrument.
>
Well, perhaps this lute is more typical of working lutes than the
surviving lutes indicate. Presumably not the Engleman spruce, but
perhaps the Cherry wood. I don't think there are any early surviving
English or Dutch lutes. It could be that lute makers were rare
outside the areas where spruce was abundant (actually, these are the
areas from which most surviving lutes come). Indeed, the Jura forest
area, and in particular the Swiss Jura, still does have a presence of
instrument makers near the spruce woods); but were very few lutes
made elsewhere, or were they simply less treasured?
While trying to decide what Baroque 11c lute to choose, I was
acutely aware that modern trends to the choice of Frei lutes for
French Baroque music could just be due the chance survival of a
Warwick Frei lute in England, where much of the first research into
"authentic" lutes was carried out, and the chance survival of the
Burwell lute book (also in England), in which such lute types happen
to be mentioned. Indeed the preference for this shape does appear to
be contradicted even by the rounder lutes shown on the Denis Gaultier
"Rhetorique des Dieux" tabulature.
Because of this penury of data, I suppose we do tend to grab at the
few existing lutes and the occasional passing allusion to reinforce
the ideas we have about the instruments of a period.
I mention this in passing, as I have just ordered one myself, and
wonder whether I have not just gone along with a trend, that Jakob
Lindberg's playing of Denis Gaultier on his rounder shaped Rauwolf
shows can be broken with success.
I have moved slightly from the original question, but it is basically
the same problem.
We must not necessarily assume that we know what all lutes were like,
any more than we can be completely sure about the state of the gut
strings of that time.
David van Ooijen's use of carbon "Seagear fishing line straight from
the reel " in his recent outdoor performance is most appropriate, as
he was , after all, "In a harbour in front of boats",
(showing all those fishermen what can be done with their strings!)
but no doubt, also, because the high humidity would have effected
modern gut. This does not necessarily mean that gut would have been
absolutely unusable outdoors at earlier times
There could perhaps have been many ways of "tanning" the gut that
left it less effected by humidity or stress. It seems that research
is still being carried out by some string makers into these sorts of
early "chemical" treatments. The problem is that these recipes would
have been kept secret and handed down if at all, within a workshop,
or family.
Reminds me of the extraordinary ways children in England treat their
horse chestnuts or "conkers" (pickling and roasting them), with
secret recipes handed down from father to son
to make them ultra-resistant when doing battle. Some proudly claiming
"centurians" that have lasted several hundred battles.
Oups I am straying off topic again
Regards
Anthony
>
>
> David R
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at
> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
