On Mar 27, 2010, at 7:10 AM, Lynda Kraar wrote: > I re-read this quote (Big D/Besard): > > "Secondly, set on your Bases, in that place which you call the sixt string, or > vi; these Bases must be of one bignes, yet it hath beene a generall custome > (although not so much used any where as here in England) to set a small and a > great string together, but amongst learned Musitions that custome is left, as > irregular to the rules of Musicke." > > Does this mean that octaved courses went of out fashion, or that they were > only in fashion in England for awhile?
I think it means it's common practice, but he doesn't like it because it screws up the counterpoint to have voices jumping octaves when they go between the fifth and sixth courses (or whichever courses, since fifth and fourth courses in other times and places were also in octaves). > I would think that after stressing in the earlier part of the post that the > highest string was the loudest, perhaps this was a way of making the lower > courses sound louder? The idea of a great disparity in loudness between the top string isn't found in this source (or any source that I can recall) but was David Tayler's surmise. Nonetheless, a common explanation for octave stringing is that it made the basses more brilliant. Another fairly obvious explanation is that they liked the sound of octaves, as witnessed by octaves activated with one key on harpsichords and organs, and didn't do it on the treble strings of lutes because it wasn't possible. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
