> Indeed, I quite understand that lute structure, could seem totally > uninteresting to someone who just leaves all this to his lute maker. > Such a person may not care at all for what is on the inside of his lute.
more likely they have eyes glazed over when the discusion goes technical. I know mine do when I get involved in any discusion that attempts to describe sound, all the terms used for that have other meanings to me and are unintuitive. Until you have actually taped on a number of plates and managed to hear differences between them I supose its all a muddle of half-digested theory. > Insufficient cross-"discipline" discussion? Quite. The periodical published by FoMRHI provided a place where makers could talk to each other semi-formally, exposing preliminary papers, discusing technology, testing novel theorys. Sadly, the originators failed to locate suitable replacements when it came time for them to retire, and it has died. A new forum has grown up on the internet, MIMF.com, but it has a broader readership, tho there are many good public spirited makers on it who contribute freely of their time and knowledge, and lots of amateurs presenting them with questions, somehow it doesnt work as well as FoMRHI did. -- Dana Emery To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
