Michael
As an amateur, I was in the position that I felt I could only
justify purchasing one Renaissance lute. I was also hoping to venture
later into 11c French Baroque music.
I therefore had to make a compromise, and chose the 7c Gerle, because
this actual model is used by Jacob Heringman on his Siena record
http://magnatune.com/artists/heringman
http://tinyurl.com/2so2sh
He uses it for track 7. a four-part Fantasia from the Medici Lute
Book, and also for the few Dance pieces.
I figured that because of its Bologna form, it would do for the
Italian repertoire, and because of its 7c status, it would be alright
for most Elizabethan music, too, even if perhaps, by that period
multi ribbed Paduan lutes might have become more popular.
Indeed, I notice this Dowland concert in which Jacob used the very
same lute, at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~lsa/old/Cleveland2004/Ellen-
JacobConcert.html
http://tinyurl.com/324kog
The actual lute I tried at Martin Haycock's belonged to Liz Kenny.
The balance and sound seemed very good, and that two such excellent
professional lutists had chosen this model seemed a further
guarantee. You can see front and back of the lute, here:
http://tinyurl.com/2ca4cp
http://tinyurl.com/38ypxx
However, it IS a compromise, if a very good sounding lute, especially
in gut. I have controlled the slight tendency to bass heaviness on
the Gerle, by adopting Aquila Venice twine on the diapason of the 6th
and on the 5th through to the 4th. This has a very good high
frequency response, and has helped open out the sound, that was
already very sweet, but with excellent projection. I have a Gamut
gimped on the 7th.
I could also have adopted a 6c lute, as these were used throughout
the same period, and are often considered the ideal Renaissance lute
in their poise and balance, but I hoped that using gut basses would
control the "the sympathetic ring" of a 7c when playing 6c Milan.
Indeed, Stephen Gottlieb made an excellent 8c 64 cm Rauwolf
mutiribbed lute, for a guitarist who had completed, or was
completing, his "Masters program requirements". While this was strung
in gut, the sympathetic ring of the 7 and 8c does not seem "too
overpowering", as can be heard in his rendering of da Milano at
http://www.myspace.com/lute
On the other hand, I do have to admit that when Jacob played the
Siena repertoire at Caen (a year ago), he brought his 6c Andy
Rutherford lute. You can see the photos of this here, by going to
http://tinyurl.com/2njg45
and clicking on the thumb nails.
About string length, I also asked advice on this issue from Jacob
Heringman, but I can only "quote" from memory. This was not set down
in any formal way that can actually make it truly quotable.
He said he preferred longer string lengths for a solo instrument, and
that anything longer than 60 has more expressive capability, 64 or 67
or even 71 were all excellent string lengths according to the
player's stretch.
However, he also added that the hand has a wonderful ability to
adapt, and that a longer string length doesn't make the music that
much harder to play (it might even be easier as you move up to higher
positions on the neck). The main problem would be the pitch issue, if
you play with other people.
I seem to remember several lute makers saying that guitar necks were
much longer than the average lute neck, and that caused no problem
for guitarists. Perhaps, there is a neck-width issue, also to contend
with, on modern lutes. Original lutes may have had narrower necks. I
imagine string spacing must also be taken into account in relation to
stretch.
There was a lute meeting in London, not so long ago, two or three
years, where a number of long necked Renaissance lutes, Warwick Bass
lutes and C36 Venere Tenor lutes, were demonstrated with 67 cm and
over string length, and I believe it was argued that many more long
necked solo instruments would have existed, and that the modern
tendency for 60 cm and below, may not be historical. Of course, so
many large lutes have been Baroqued, and it is sometimes difficult to
conjecture their original string length.
I have to admit that I did "chicken out" and go for a 60 cm lute.
Regards
Anthony
Le 26 nov. 07 =E0 07:24, Michael Bocchicchio a ecrit :
>
> People who have purchased lutes from me in the past have all
> come to me with the common wisdom that the 8c. is the standard.
> Why would this be? Is it true now? Was it true in the past or
> something like that? Furthermore, for who? A first time buyer? A
> graduate school student studying guitar , who will only need one
> lute to complete the Masters program requirements? A Renaissance
> Fair performer? I wonder if this notion is a holdover from a time
> when historical or true
> lutes were hard to come by and players had to chose instruments
> for their versatility rather than for their appropriateness for a
> given period of music.
> In fact, it seems to me that the greater body of Renaissance lute
> music is for 6 and 7c instruments. Eight course music seems
> limited to the very end of the 16th century, and mostly English.
> French music seems to jump from 7c to 10c beginning with Francisque
> c.1600. I'm not quite sure about how the dates went for Italy,
> Netherlands, and Germany, but it would seem that 8c music is a
> small body of music by comparison, no? If I have made too gross a
> generalization or am just plain wrong, please correct me.
> Even as an amateur player, I know that the instrument needs to fit
> the music---why would you want the sympathetic ring of an 8c when
> playing Milan? As a luthier, I fined that the popular 58-62cm
> instruments do best as 6 and 7 courses as a large bridge can choke
> a small sound board. I would think a 7c at 62-63cm is a good way
> to go, but appear to be "going against the grain".
> If an 8c is "the standard", can someone explain this to me?
>
> --
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at
> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
