This is not a problem that only affects one aspect of performance. We have musicology in the lute world, but we don't really have peer-reviewed musicology for performance practice. That's because the circle is too small. One could review an article or a recording by one's colleague, and really take it to task on the basis of methodology, history, style, and so on. And believe me, there is plenty of room for discussion--which is completely usual, like any other branch of scholarship. That isn't done, and it won't be done. So basically a lot of the research we have has not been fully tested from multiple angles. That calls into question so much of historical performance that it makes good sense to use other methods, as well as examine new methods. The single strings instruments were simply reverse engineered from the music by performers. That creates a starting point, and we can re-examine how to solve these problems, maybe move on to something better. Here's a couple of musicological examples: 1. I have never heard a recording of renaissance lute music that uses renaissance ornamentation 2. I have never heard a recording of Dowland's Lachrimae consort music on instruments (violins, viols, lute) from 1603 (maybe there is one, would love to hear it) Of these, the first is of course the most intriguing, but it is the second that is the hardest problem to solve. What this means, going forward, is that we live in good times. We still have room to create stunning works of art that draw on history and imagination: It hasn't all been done; it's only just begun.
-- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
