Hi All,
I agree with Ron that you can invent new instruments if you like, but
it's not going to get you any closer to anything the old guys might have
used. It goes without saying that we cannot recreate historical
instruments, or sounds, or audiences (why would we want to?), but what
we can do is try to get a bit closer to the physical properties of the
instruments and strings that were used when the music was originally
being created. A modest goal, but quite difficult enough. You might
ask why would we want to do that, and I think different people would
give different answers. Personally, I think the attempts to recreate
historical instruments (not just lutes, but harpischords and everything
else) have often resulted in new insights which we would never have had
if we had simply continued playing modern instruments.
On the subject of audiences, I agree that the primary function of a
musician is to entertain the audience, but the instincts and
intelligence of that audience should never be underestimated. I don't
think there are many audiences out there who are really interested in
exactly when a particular piece was first published (people who
introduce pieces from the platform please note), but there are hardly
any who can't sense condescension or a lack of genuine engagement. So
no Disneyfication for me, just the essence will do nicely. It has
always amazed me how the most "untutored" audiences can respond with
delight to some obscure piece of 16th century polyphony, partly because
they've never heard anything like it before, but partly (I hope) because
of the apparent commitment and genuineness of the performers.
M
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
