Le 14 mai 08 à 18:00, Ron Andrico a écrit :
To All:
This is an interesting discussion about frets, double or single. I
think there is no reason to doubt Dowland's recommendations for
fret sizes (fourth string for the first fret). Is is possible to
infer that his guidelines indicate much larger string diameters,
and probably a lower pitched tuning?
Best wishes,
Ron Andrico
www.mignarda.com
Ron
You are right, it seems to me, in pointing out that there are at
least two possible interpretations of the difference between
Dowland's advice and what is done today: 1) The Dowland first fret is
equivalent in diameter to today's fourth string, which would mean it
is thinner than usually today (and the action probably lower); or 2)
Dowland's fourth string was equivalent to today's first fret, which
would mean that the fourth string was thicker than it is usually
today (and so probably at a lower tension).
I suppose various in between interpretations would be possible, as we
have no precise measure of the typical diameter of Dowland's fourth
string. All we know is that there is a relation between the two, but
we can only guess at the value of either, through the sort of logic
advanced on Mimmo Peruffo's historic string page, by guessing the
likely value of the first string, and applying principles of equal
tension by touch to the other strings.
However, with a possible double first course, this might not be easy
to guess at.
Combined with what Tony just tells me in his message, I better put
away the plane with which I was just about to shave off a few
millimeters from my finger-board.
Anthony
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 12:54:06 +0000> To: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Fret diameters, a geometrical approach> > >
Thank you for this.> > When you say 'not to be taken literally', I
presume you mean because he was (through neccessity) obliged to
link the same size of two frets with just one gut lute string,
rather casting doubt on the general (small) size of the frets. If
he had wanted to imply thicker frets he could have just as easily
started with the 'Tenor' (5th course), but he didn't.> > MH> > PS
Incidentally the 'Other Necessary Obs...' are by John D not
Robert.> > > > > --- On Wed, 14/5/08, Gernot Hilger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > > From: Gernot Hilger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > Subject: [LUTE] Fret diameters, a
geometrical approach> > To: "lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Net"
<lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>> > Date: Wednesday, 14 May, 2008, 1:39 PM>
> There has been some discussion about !
fret diameters lately.> > For those > > who might be interested, I
did some quick and dirty> > geometry with > > Excel and have put
this online> > (http://www.jsbach.mynetcologne.de/ > > frets). The
results come with no warranty, of course> > because there may > >
be some bugs hidden. Also, the effects of meantone> > temperament
are not > > yet included. These are anyway much smaller than the> >
effects of > > different fret diameter strategies.> > > > The gist
is that there are almost no differences between> > different > >
strategies except for the Robert Dowland method which is> > clearly
not > > to be taken literally.> > > > Have fun> > g> > > > > > > >
To get on or off this list see list information at> > http://
www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html> > >
__________________________________________________________> Sent
from Yahoo! Mail.> A Smarter Email http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/
nowyoucan.html> >
_________________________________________________________________
With Windows Live for mobile, your contacts travel with you.
http://www.windowslive.com/mobile/overview.html?
ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_mobile_052008
--
