From: Daniel Winheld <[email protected]>
Subject: [LUTE] Re: a modern lute duet by Gilbert Isbin
To: [email protected]
Date: Tuesday, March 29, 2011, 12:11 PM
Excellent discussion- as to modern
classical guitar "vs" renaissance
lute; some exchanges work, some don't. I've been testing
these waters
very intensely since getting a new 8 course from Dan
Larson.
Unbelievably resonant instrument, depth of response beyond
anything
I've ever owned or played previously. The Villa-Lobos Etude
#1 is a
great arpeggio study for thumb-index alternation, either
thumb out or
in; but I would never play it on the lute in concert. A
surprising
number of Villa-Lobos' other guitar works do sound good on
this
particular lute (differences in individual instruments can
affect
what works/doesn't work almost as much as different species
of
instrument) -and of course, as Martin notes, you run right
off the
rails technically with many pieces. But it's good training
to dance
one's way right up to the sound hole playing the works that
test &
extend the lute's limits, but don't quite exceed it.
All technical stumbling blocks resolved, it seems to still
be a
"cultural" thing; the European lute family is and no doubt
will
always be- for the most part- a back-from-the-dead, loving
retrieval
of our nearly lost instrumental musical heritage, redolent
of
particular times and places, not mention musical-social
associations.
In our minds, at least. One violates- or just pushes- these
important
values/associations very carefully. Again, for my own
amusement, I
have found that five of the dozen or so guitar arrangements
of Astor
Piazzolla sound brilliant on the lute; actually even better
in some
ways. (Lute sound- even with all gut stringing- cuts like
an arrow
vs. guitar sound- smashes through like a bullet. Perfect
for Tango)
-but I may never perform them in concert. A relevant
and important
point; none of these works by Piazzolla were actually
written for
guitar- they have been played on everything from solo
bandoneon,
guitar, or piano, to quintets and full orchestrations.
Music of a
certain universal plasticity (like so much of Bach's suites
&
partitas) is fair game for many different modes of
presentation.
But what "should" be the lute's cultural range-
technical/sonic range
being easily quantifiable- is a delicate, thorny aspect of
this
discussion.
Dan
>Hi All,
>
>A few thoughts off the top of my head (not as far up as
it was):
>
>I would say to a composer - listen carefully to the
sound of a
>proper lute strung with gut strings. You will
hear the difference
>between that and the modern guitar.
>
>Also, bear in mind that although pushing boundaries can
be
>interesting, the lute is historically quite limited in
range - in
>terms of the fingerboard, there are only eight tied
frets, after
>that you're up in the gods. Unless you're writing
for baroque lute
>of course, in which case you've got a couple of extra
frets.
>
>Think about octaves. They were usually ignored by
the intabulators
>of old, but they were there - so when composing, you
really have to
>think about what kind of octave doubling (however
subtle) is
>acceptable.
>
>Temperament is another issue. The old guys mave
have used some
>approximation to equal temperament, but that doesn't
necessarily
>equate to total freedom in terms of modulation, or the
way the open
>strings of the instrument resonate. Some notes
are more equal than
>others.
>
>Special effects (harmonics, tapping the soundboard,
etc) are not, as
>far as we know, part of historical lute
technique. It is therefore
>a matter of taste whether to extend the "normal"
technique of the
>instrument in various ways, but there is always a
danger of making
>it sound like something it isn't.
>
>Historically most lutenists were obsessed by trying to
reproduce
>vocal polyphony. Perhaps the organ has more in
common with the lute
>than the guitar....
>
>Best wishes,
>
>Martin
>
--
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
