This discussion of little finger on the top is most timely for me.   I have 
recently been changing the angle at which I hold my right hand so as to get the 
thumb striking the strings of each course together.  I've also moved the 
position of my hand to just behind the rose (rather than over the rose).  Both 
of these adjustments have an audible effect on the sound; a positive effect, as 
I hear it.  I have also been trying to keep my little finger resting on the top 
in the same spot as long as I am on a given course (it naturally has to move 
when the hand moves to another course).  The advantage of this is not obvious 
to me, but I intend to keep listening to myself and seeing how my hand feels as 
I get more used to this technique.  Up until now I have let the little finger 
brush the top but not anchored it in one spot.  Whatever technique gives the 
best sound and feels most comfortable is ultimately what I will adopt.  I have 
been curious as to why the anchored little finger is!
  so much advocated, from a strictly pragmatic point of view.

As I have said here before,  historical practices are naturally of interest.  
But I'm not convinced that the evidence is complete enough for us to fully 
understand them.  And also, as I believe both luthiers and string makers today 
have admitted, our knowledge there is incomplete also.  Gut strings today are 
not exactly the same as they were in the 16th century;  synthetic strings are 
totally modern.  And today's instruments are probably not exact replications 
either.  So,  might we not take what we think we know about historical 
techniques and adapt them to what best seems to suit our contemporary 
instruments and strings?  

Ned
On Apr 1, 2011, at 10:50 AM, Mayes, Joseph wrote:

>   All of the players who learned to play their instrument with the little
>   finger down will agree with you. There is copious evidence for this
>   method being used in the 16th and 17th centuries. Early guitar tutors
>   also suggest planting the little finger. What I am saying is that it is
>   unnecessary, and has little or no beneficial effect on the sound
>   produced. Also - it was obviously not universal for lutes, archlutes,
>   guitars, what have you.
>   Joseph Mayes
>   On 4/1/11 6:59 AM, "Martyn Hodgson" <[1][email protected]>
>   wrote:
> 
>     You are quite right - your email attached one of Jospeh Mayes to
>     whom I should have directed that particular observation. I'm pleased
>     you agree the little finger resting on the belly is a necessary part
>     of historical lute technique.
> 
>     MH
>     --- On Fri, 1/4/11, alexander <[2][email protected]> wrote:
> 
>     From: alexander <[3][email protected]>
>     Subject: [LUTE] Re: Stability of lute in playing fast.
>     To: "Martyn Hodgson" <[4][email protected]>
>     Cc: "JosephMayes" <[5][email protected]>, "Herbert Ward"
>     <[6][email protected]>, "[7][email protected]"
>     <[8][email protected]>
>     Date: Friday, 1 April, 2011, 11:04
>     Oh, yes, another thing, how did you come to a conclusion that i am
>     arguing against the little finger support while i am arguing that
>     only such a support allows to produce a decent sound on a lute?.. al
>     ray
>     On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 10:05:16 +0100 (BST)
>     Martyn Hodgson <[9][email protected]
>     <[10]http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=hodgsonmartyn@yaho
>     o.co.uk> > wrote:
>> 
>>   Dear Alexander,
>> 
>>   What evidence do you have that early lutes (I presume you're
>     referring
>>   to 16th century instruments) were strung at a lower tension
>     than
>>   similar size later lutes?
>> 
>>   And what evidence do you have that the tension of a guitar
>     around 1800
>>   was 7 Newtons?
>> 
>>   Early evidence on the use of placing the little finger on the
>     belly is
>>   unequivocal - if we wish to attempt to reproduce what the Old
>     Ones
>>   themselves heard it is clearly necessary to adopt the same
>     techniques.
>> 
>>   MH
>> 
>     To get on or off this list see list information at
>     [11]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
> 
>   --
> 
> References
> 
>   1. file://localhost/net/people/lute-arc/[email protected]
>   2. file://localhost/net/people/lute-arc/[email protected]
>   3. file://localhost/net/people/lute-arc/[email protected]
>   4. file://localhost/net/people/lute-arc/[email protected]
>   5. file://localhost/net/people/lute-arc/[email protected]
>   6. file://localhost/net/people/lute-arc/[email protected]
>   7. file://localhost/net/people/lute-arc/[email protected]
>   8. file://localhost/net/people/lute-arc/[email protected]
>   9. file://localhost/net/people/lute-arc/[email protected]
>  10. http://uk.mc263.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
>  11. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
> 



Reply via email to