Could that mea
--- En date de : Mar 27.1.09, Gordon Gregory
<[email protected]> a A(c)crit :
De: Gordon Gregory <[email protected]>
Objet: [LUTE] Re: Melchior Neusidler
A: "'Lute Net'" <[email protected]>
Date: Mardi 27 Janvier 2009, 11h43
I find this confusing and always have. The Marsh manuscript has a
similar convention (i.e. the frets go "l"=10th fret,
"m"=12th fret and
there would seem to be no 11th fret).
We're told that they generally didn't have body frets so why didn't
they
just use l=10, m=11, n=12? Why did they not want to play an F# in the
highest octave, they seem to be happy to use one in the lower octaves?
If they did want an
F# and did have body frets, then the lack of an 11th
fret would usually mean that fretting on the table where the 11th fret
would have been, wouldn't work because the lower height of the table
would cause the string to touch the 12th fret.
Or am I confused as usual?
Regards, Gordon
-----Original Message-----
From: Stewart McCoy [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 9:34 AM
To: Lute Net
Subject: [LUTE] Melchior Neusidler
Dear Richard,
Presumably he didn't have an 11th fret, so his 11th fret is our 12th, if
you see what I mean. :-)
A similar thing happens, if I remember right, in the Holmes MSS in
Cambridge, where the letter "m" is used for the 12th fret.
Best wishes,
Stewart McCoy.
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Yates [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 27 January 2009 03:06
To: 'lute-cs.dartmouth.edu'
Subject: [LUTE]
Melchior Neusidler
Why does M. Neusidler (Intabolatura di Liuto, 1566) uses the symbol 'X'
for
the tenth fret but 'XI' for notes that would normally be on the twelfth
fret?
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
