I know I'm going to hate myself for saying this, but isn't the G on the fourth course +7 not minus 7, semi ideally? I feel a surreal sense that I have somehow misplaced G. Also, how do you manage the octave A being out by 7 centimes? Not criticizing, just intrigued.
Thanks for the figures. I will digest them slowly like the the python in le petit prince. dt At 02:31 AM 11/13/2007, you wrote: >Dear Martyn > >We seem to be talking about almost the same thing. There's a Dutch >saying I cannot quite translate that goes something like: >communicating is talking as closely as possible about the same >thing, meaning you don't talk about the same thing at all. Human >contact is difficult, each man his own universe in his own head, how >will we ever make contact? > >>> I'm afraid you don't appear to grasp the essentials ><< > >I'm sure your theory is better. When you talked about modulation I >assumed you meant a change of key, or tonal centre, within one >piece. Starting in a-minor, after five bars you find yourself >playing in C-major, cadenses and all. If you'd agree that an >MT-tuned organ can play these modulations, and if you'd agree that >the lute's notes matches those of the organ, you'd agree the lute >can play the modulation. But it appears I've lost you one step >before, as you don't seem to agree the lute can match the organ note >by note. Because of the straight frets: > >the semitone fret intervals on each string do not follow precisely >the same sequence of diatonic and chromatic intervals as you move up >the fingerboard ><< > > >No, you're right, a lute with straight frets is not as perfect as an >organ, but it isn't quite bad either. My simple look on things is >purely practical. If meantone is used by other instruments, how do I >tune my lute to match these? >Let's assume 1/4 comma MT, deviations from ET in cents: > >Eb = 21 >Bb = 17 >F = 14 >C = 10 >G = 7 >D = 3 >A = 0 >E = -3 >B = -7 >F# = -10 >C# = -14 >G# = -17 >D# = -21 > >Lute in g' >Fret = note = cents deviation > >First course: >0 = G = 7 >1 = G# = -24 >2 = A = -7 >3 = Bb = 10 >4 = B = -14 >5 = C = 3 > >Second course: >0 = D = 3 >1 = Eb = 18 >2 = E = -6 >3 = F = 11 >4 = F# = -13 >5 = G = 4 > >Third course: >0 = A = 0 >1 = Bb = 17 >2 = B = -7 >3 = C = 10 >4 = C# = -14 >5 = D = 3 > >Fourth course: >0 = F = 14 >1 = F# = -24 >2 = G = -7 >3 = G# = -31 >4 = A = -14 >5 = Bb = 3 > >Fifth course: >0 = C = 10 >1 = C# = -24 >2 = D = -7 >3 = Eb = 11 >4 = E = -13 >5 = F = 4 > >This gives the following ideal fret positions on all five courses: > >First fret: -24, 18, 17, -24, -24 >Two positions: high is in agreement, low equally so. > >Second fret: -7, -6, -7, -7, -7 >Perfect enough for me. > >Third fret: 10, 11, 10, -31, 11 >Ouch for the G# on the fourth course. Perfect Ab, but otherwise a >note to avoid. The high fret positions are in agreement, though. > >Fourth fret: -14, -13, -14, -14, -13 >Perfect enough for me. > >Fifth fret: 3, 4, 3, 3, 4 >Perfect enough for me. > > >Not too many typos, I hope, however, the math is simple enough to >correct these yourself. Calculating with more decimals will make the >figures agree more in theory, by the way, but is nonsense in >practice. Other varieties of meantone (1/6, 1/7, 1/8 comma) will >give less extreme fret positions, and might make the g# on the >fourth course acceptable, depending on your ears (or ensemble). This >leaves us with the problematic first fret. I, and others, have found >different practical ways of living with that, let it rest for now. >Fretting from 6th fret repeats basically what is done in the first five. > >I think I have shown it is possible to tune a lute in meantone to >match all the notes on the organ, with the practical problems of g# >on fourth course and first fret to be solved in a practical way >(tastini, split fret or avoidance of wrong notes. Been there, done >that, it works). > >I have no idea about historical evidence for this, but I would >assume that a lutenist of old, faced with an organ in meantone, >would come up with something similar to make his life workable. I >see modern viol, violone and lute players move their frets all the >time to match the organ, I see no reason why that would have been >different in olden times. I know that is not evidence, but >musicians' ears and their desires to solve problems cannot have >changed that much. > >Additionally, I find, when tuned in meantone, a part of the lute and >notably theorbo solo repertoire to work very well. That's my liking >only, perhaps, but would a lutenist of old change his frets and >retune for his solo pieces, if these can be played with the frets in >ensemble setup? Purely speculation, no historical evidence, take it >or leave it, but do try it. > >David > >To Roman: last count was closer to 30 than 20, but I'm sure not >nearly as many as POD's, whose solo cds are perhaps the only ones >you've counted. Mine are all ensemble of some sort or other. No big >deal, then. Furthermore, quality is more important than quantity; >only for my late mother was I world-famous, for the rest of the >world I'm just another plucker trying to scrape together an income >from music. Not famous then, please. > > >**************************** >David van Ooijen >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >www.davidvanooijen.nl >**************************** > > > >To get on or off this list see list information at >http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
