We do know that Mimmo and others have measured a bunch. More than just a few, but of course not all them. (We don't even have all of them.) What would be real significant would be any old bridges that deviate from this- big holes for big gut strings. THAT would provide fuel for some real lutelist wars- and of course more research, speculation, etc. By the way, do we have at least a couple of old 6-course bridges? I'd love to know the size of the hole for the 6th course fundamental. If it's the same size as 6th course holes from say 1590 - 1620, then we have a real conundrum vis-a-vis the string technology revolution that Mimmo refers to in the late 16th century that allowed the use of bass unisons and the whole new low bass range.
Dan > >>How many lutes were mesured for bridge hole's >>>diameter? 10, 20 or 30? > >I dnot see that we need a complete or even a substantial survey. > >Any instance where the bridge was conceived as we see it and the diapason >holes are significantly smaller than the holes for stoped basses is >evidence tht smaller diameter strings were conciously used, if that then >obliges the use of strings denser than natural, loading of some sort is >indicated, if not overspin, then chemical. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
