Thank you, Martin (Eastwell), for this; indeed, in a previous mail I
   suggested something not unsimilar to what you are saying below (albeit
   your analysis is more complete). However, I imagined that both changes
   TI to TO  and Bass + Octave to unisson (on certain bass courses) might
   have coincided, and even be triggered by the arrival of a new bass
   string, with better high freqency behaviour (low impedance?) also
   permitting a change from 6c to 7c, and later the supposed 9c of Dowland
   (etc).
   I mused that "Together, better basses, TO, and Unisons could have
   allowed better exploration of the bass register"
   http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg24565.html
   However, "trigger" is clearly an exaggeration, as I myself use TI with
   my 7c Renaissance lute having unissons on 5c, whereas I use TO on my
   11c baroque lute.
   Martin Shepherd also argues that conservative tradition could have
   caused some (eg Cutting) to hang on to TI, after others (perhaps
   Dowland) had changed over to TO. Does that mean they also refused any
   string upgrades? Not necessarilly, I imagine.
   Your idea that TO brings a clearer sound, thus compensating for the
   darkness of the unissons, is rather different to mine, and perhaps
   demonstrably better (not necessarilly precluding the arrival of a
   better bass string).
   I agree that with Renaissance TO the thumb is probably not that far
   from the bridge. Of course, with the later extreme advanced thumb ETO,
   the fingers are closer to the bridge and the thumb further away (not
   that this effects your analysis).
   Best wishes
   Anthony
     __________________________________________________________________

   De : Martin Eastwell <[email protected]>
   A : Anthony Hind <[email protected]>
   Envoye le : Samedi 26 Novembre 2011 0h14
   Objet : Re: [LUTE] Re: Le Roy Dentice and Octave stringing
   Hi Anthony
   Having looked up Martin Shepherd's 2007 post from your link
   [1]http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg19978.html
   I'm quite convinced by the Holborne and Cutting examples he gives-
   > Cutting, Galliard, Euing f.29 (Burgers no.22)bar 13:
   >
   > -----------------!-------------
   > -a---a-c-d---b---!-------------
   > ---d-----------a-!-b-a-b-------
   > -----------------!-------------
   > -c---------c-a---!-------a-c---
   > -----------------!-d---------d-
   >
   > (the two notes on the 5th course in the second bar could be an octave
   > higher)
   >
   > Holborne, Patiencia, Euing f.39v. (aus dem Spring no.23) bar 52:
   >
   > --c-----c-------!---
   > --c-----c---f---!-a-
   > --f-e-c-e-f-c-e-!-a-
   > --------e-------!-b-
   > ----------------!-c-
   > --c-------------!---
   > (the "f" on the 2nd course resolves onto the upper octave "b" of the
   4th
   > course)
   >
   > Dowland, Queen Elizabeth's Galliard, VLL Galliard 2(Poulton no.41)
   bar 6:
   >
   > -f--c-d---!-a-----c---a-!---
   > -c--a-a---!-a-----c-----!-e-
   > ----------!-------f-e---!-a-
   > -e--a-c-a-!-------------!---
   > ----c-----!-e-c---------!-c-
   > -c----a---!-d---c-------!---
   >
   > (the descending scale c4, a4, e5, c5 needs to be an octave higher to
   > connect with the f3 in the 4/3 suspension at the cadence.  Octaves on
   > courses 4 and 5 solve the problem.  Octave on course 5 also allows
   the
   > "e" to resolve at the correct octavein the final chord)
   >
   > (Yes I know VLL is the very source where Dowland recommends unisons,
   but
   > this piece was written before 1591 as it appears in Dd.2.11 as "K
   > Darcyes Galliard" (f.59) - K.Darcy became Lady Clifton in 1591).
   >
   > Sorry about the lack of rhythm signs
   -less so by the Dowland-I see what he means, but it doesn't sound bad
   to me.
   In connection with Cutting and Dowland (or has someone already pointed
   this
   out?), it is worth mentioning that William Barley's "A new book of
   Tabliture" (1596) reprints Le Roy's Instructions, complete with
   directions
   for octave stringing on courses 4 to 6, and the lute music in the book
   is
   all by either Dowland or Cutting, and for 6 course lute (though the
   orpharion and bandora sections of the book use 7 courses.
   My feeling about octave vs. unison stringing is that it is to some
   extent
   connected with the change to thumb outside technique. Assuming all gut
   stringing and thumb under technique, my experience of many years is
   that
   lutes with unison stringing sound rather murky. The basses have lost
   the
   brightness provided by octave strings, and the warm treble sound
   inherent in
   thumb under technique seems to merge with them in a rather
   unsatisfactory
   manner. Played thumb out, where the fingers are significantly closer to
   the
   bridge (relative to the thumb), the brighter treble seems to be lifted
   out
   of the texture by virtue of a different tone colour. The comments in
   the
   Stobeus Ms instructions seem to be thinking along the same lines: "For
   it
   has been shown to be much better to strike with the thumb outwards.
   This
   sounds clearer, crisper and brighter. The other sounds very dull and
   muffled."
   This reminds me very much of the sort of things mix engineers in the
   rock/pop world do. They are very concerned that each instrument in a
   band
   should occupy its own space in the frequency spectrum, and not get in
   each
   other's way. Often they will electronically equalise sounds to make
   this
   work-for example filtering the low frequencies off a strummed acoustic
   guitar so that it does not conflict with the bass. On its own, the
   guitar
   sounds poor, but it "sits better" in the mix.
   I'll be talking about this and related things at a meeting of the UK
   Lute
   society in Feb.
   Best wishes
   Martin (Eastwell, not Shepherd!)
   On 25/11/2011 15:54, "Anthony Hind" <[2][email protected]> wrote:
   >    Bruno, I think it may depend on the stringing you use. Some 5th
   course
   >    basses really do need octave stringing, but 5c unissons with
   Venice
   >    Meanes do seem acceptable.
   >    In fact, I adopted this pattern, with unissons from 5c up, because
   I
   >    assumed it to be a possible historical late renaissance tuning,
   for a 7
   >    course lute with the 7th tuned to D ; but didn't quite like the
   result
   >    with a pair of 5c unisson Lyons. The Lyons would no doubt have
   been
   >    better with an octave, but what bothered me was a sort of break in
   the
   >    Meanes area, between the 5c Lyons and the 4c HTs. I wanted a more
   >    homogenous sound for 5c and 4c.
   >    This was the reason for which I adopted Venices, as I could have
   >    Venices unissons both on 5 and 4c (there are no Lyons available
   for
   >    4c). I felt the result was both more Meanes homogenous, and the
   Venices
   >    had sufficient harmonicity, not to absolutely cry out for octaves,
   as
   >    the Lyons did (nothing wrong with the lyons per se)
   >    %
   >    Like yourself, I was striving to achieve the best sound with a
   >    particular lute type and stringing; however, as Martin Shepherd
   has
   >    explained, the music might actually indicate quite a different
   string
   >    pattern:
   >    "One of my examples from Cutting (not in the message you quote, I
   >    think) is the Pavan "Sans per" and its galliard, which makes
   extensive
   >    use of a 7th at D but only makes sense with an octave on the 4th
   >    course. This suggests he had good enough strings to be able to do
   >    complicated stuff with the 7th course but still used an octave on
   the
   >    4th (out of tradition? habit? because he simply liked it that
   >    way?)."Martin
   >    %
   >    This rather goes against looking for one "perfect" stringing for a
   lute
   >    (as I admit I was doing), I suppose we should restring for each
   piece,
   >    or ideally have several lutes tuned for the pieces we intend to
   play.
   >    %
   >    Martin goes on to explain, that even Dowland's music seems to be
   >    calling for octaves on 4 and 5c, in spite of his "theoretical"
   support
   >    of unisson:
   >    %
   >    "The music often suggests octaves when a cadence is resolved at
   the
   >    "wrong" octave, or a scale passage jumps octave for no apparent
   reason,
   >    or a note which is needed for correct voice leading or point of
   >    imitation is apparently missing but supplied by the upper octave
   of a
   >    lower course."(...)
   >    %
   >    (...)
   > Dowland, Queen Elizabeth's Galliard, VLL Galliard 2(Poulton no.41)
   bar 6:
   >
   > -f--c-d---!-a-----c---a-!---
   > -c--a-a---!-a-----c-----!-e-
   > ----------!-------f-e---!-a-
   > -e--a-c-a-!-------------!---
   > ----c-----!-e-c---------!-c-
   > -c----a---!-d---c-------!---
   >
   > (the descending scale c4, a4, e5, c5 needs to be an octave higher to
   > connect with the f3 in the 4/3 suspension at the cadence.  Octaves on
   > courses 4 and 5 solve the problem.  Octave on course 5 also allows
   the
   > "e" to resolve at the correct octavein the final chord). Martin"
   > %
   > [3]http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg19978.html
   > Regards
   > Anthony
   >
   >
   __________________________________________________________________
   >
   >    De : Bruno Fournier <[4][email protected]>
   >    A : Anthony Hind <[5][email protected]>
   >    Cc : Miles Dempster <[6][email protected]>;
   "[7][email protected]"
   >    <[8][email protected]>
   >    Envoye le : Vendredi 25 Novembre 2011 15h12
   >    Objet : [LUTE] Re: Le Roy Dentice and Octave stringing
   >      I personally like the sound of octaves starting on the 5th
   course and
   >      going down.A  I have always found the 4th in octaves to be
   difficult
   >    at
   >      tuning.A  On my soprano lute 6 course however, I use unisons.
   >      A
   >      Bruno
   >      On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Anthony Hind
   >    <[1][1][9][email protected]>
   >      wrote:
   >        A  You are right of course, A and I do have unissons on the
   fourth
   >        and
   >        A  fifth, but octaves beginning on the 6th.
   >        A  I wasn't thinking straight, but vaguely remembering that
   someone
   >        jumped
   >        A  to the conclusion that because I
   >        A  had unissons on the fifth I also had them on the sixth,
   which of
   >        course
   >        A  is not at all the same thing. Appologies, Miles and
   Matthias,
   >    for
   >        A  my half-awake state, in spite of the late hour.
   >        A  Regards
   >        A  Anthony
   >        A  A
   >
   __________________________________________________________________
   >        A  De : Miles Dempster <[2][2][10][email protected]>
   >        A  A : Lute List <[3][3][11][email protected]>
   >        A  Envoye le : Vendredi 25 Novembre 2011 14h43
   >        A  Objet : [LUTE] Re: Le Roy Dentice and Octave stringing
   >        A  My understanding is that, generally speaking, the purpose
   of the
   >        octave
   >        A  is to brighten up a course which would otherwise sound too
   >    muddy.
   >        A  Since 'muddiness' increases with string thickness, if the
   5th
   >        course
   >        A  doesn't need an octave, then why would the 4th course would
   need
   >        one?
   >        A  Miles
   >        A  On 2011-11-25, at 8:04 AM, Anthony Hind wrote:
   >        A  > A Matthias, I am not quite sure why we may infer the
   >    following:
   >        A  > A "I understand the author as saying that a) he himself
   has an
   >        octave
   >        A  > A string
   >        A  > A with his 5th course, as opposed to b) Dentice and
   followers
   >        A  (Italians
   >        A  > A in
   >        A  > A general?) who have unisons for the 5th course. One may
   infer
   >        that
   >        A  > A Dentice
   >        A  > A also had unisons for his 4th course." Mathias
   >      A  > A I have unissons on the 5th course of my 7c lute, but
   octaves
   >    on
   >      my
   >      A  > A fourth, but perhaps I have missed something.
   >        A  > A Regards
   >        A  > A Anthony
   >        A  > A
   >        A
   >    __________________________________________________________________
   >        A  >
   >        A  > A De : Mathias Roesel
   <[1][4][4][12][email protected]>
   >        A  > A A : 'Lute Net' <[2][5][5][13][email protected]>
   >        A  > A Envoye le : Jeudi 24 Novembre 2011 17h35
   >        A  > A Objet : [LUTE] Re: Le Roy Dentice and Octave stringing
   >        A  >> Neverthelesse the Tune self of the same .F. Is found in
   the
   >        same
   >        A  >> compainie, and eight of the greate fift stryng:
   >        A  >> which reason could not be in Lutes, tuned after the
   manner of
   >        A  Fabrice
   >        A  > A Dentice
   >        A  >> the Italian, and other his followers. Where those
   strynges
   >        that
   >        A  > A satnde
   >        A  > A twoo and
   >        A  >> twoo together, bee sette in one Tune and not by eightes,
   >    which
   >        thei
   >        A  > A do for
   >        A  > A a
   >        A  >> perfection of harmonie, in avoiding many unissons, which
   >    those
   >        eight
   >        A  > A would
   >        A  >> cause."
   >        A  >> 2. I understand Le Roy is saying that Dentice used a
   unison
   >        5th
   >        A  > A course,
   >        A  > A not just a
   >        A  >> unison 4th. Is this right?
   >        A  > A I understand the author as saying that a) he himself
   has an
   >        octave
   >        A  > A string
   >        A  > A with his 5th course, as opposed to b) Dentice and
   followers
   >        A  (Italians
   >        A  > A in
   >        A  > A general?) who have unisons for the 5th course. One may
   infer
   >        that
   >        A  > A Dentice
   >        A  > A also had unisons for his 4th course.
   >        A  > A Mathias
   >      A  > A To get on or off this list see list information at
   >        A  >
   >        A
   >
   [1][3][6][6][14]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >        A  >
   >        A  > A --
   >        A  >
   >        A  > References
   >        A  >
   >        A  > A 1.
   >
   [4][7][7][15]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >        A  >
   >        A  --
   >        A  --
   >        References
   >        A  1. mailto:[8][8][16][email protected]
   >        A  2. mailto:[9][9][17][email protected]
   >        A  3.
   >
   [10][10][18]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >        A  4.
   >
   [11][11][19]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >      --
   >      A
   >      Bruno Cognyl-Fournier
   >      A
   >      [12]www.estavel.org
   >      A
   >      --
   >    References
   >      1. mailto:[12][20][email protected]
   >      2. mailto:[13][21][email protected]
   >      3. mailto:[14][22][email protected]
   >      4. mailto:[15][23][email protected]
   >      5. mailto:[16][24][email protected]
   >      6.
   [17][25]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >      7.
   [18][26]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >      8. mailto:[19][27][email protected]
   >      9. mailto:[20][28][email protected]
   >      10.
   [21][29]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >      11.
   [22][30]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >      12. [23][31]http://www.estavel.org/
   >
   >    --
   >
   > References
   >
   >    1. mailto:[32][email protected]
   >    2. mailto:[33][email protected]
   >    3. mailto:[34][email protected]
   >    4. mailto:[35][email protected]
   >    5. mailto:[36][email protected]
   >    6. [37]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >    7. [38]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >    8. mailto:[39][email protected]
   >    9. mailto:[40][email protected]
   >  10. [41]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >  11. [42]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >  12. mailto:[43][email protected]
   >  13. mailto:[44][email protected]
   >  14. mailto:[45][email protected]
   >  15. mailto:[46][email protected]
   >  16. mailto:[47][email protected]
   >  17. [48]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >  18. [49]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >  19. mailto:[50][email protected]
   >  20. mailto:[51][email protected]
   >  21. [52]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >  22. [53]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >  23. [54]http://www.estavel.org/
   >

   --

References

   1. http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg19978.html
   2. mailto:[email protected]
   3. http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg19978.html
   4. mailto:[email protected]
   5. mailto:[email protected]
   6. mailto:[email protected]
   7. mailto:[email protected]
   8. mailto:[email protected]
   9. mailto:[email protected]
  10. mailto:[email protected]
  11. mailto:[email protected]
  12. mailto:[email protected]
  13. mailto:[email protected]
  14. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  15. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  16. mailto:[email protected]
  17. mailto:[email protected]
  18. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  19. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  20. mailto:[email protected]
  21. mailto:[email protected]
  22. mailto:[email protected]
  23. mailto:[email protected]
  24. mailto:[email protected]
  25. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  26. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  27. mailto:[email protected]
  28. mailto:[email protected]
  29. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  30. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  31. http://www.estavel.org/
  32. mailto:[email protected]
  33. mailto:[email protected]
  34. mailto:[email protected]
  35. mailto:[email protected]
  36. mailto:[email protected]
  37. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  38. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  39. mailto:[email protected]
  40. mailto:[email protected]
  41. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  42. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  43. mailto:[email protected]
  44. mailto:[email protected]
  45. mailto:[email protected]
  46. mailto:[email protected]
  47. mailto:[email protected]
  48. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  49. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  50. mailto:[email protected]
  51. mailto:[email protected]
  52. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  53. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  54. http://www.estavel.org/

Reply via email to