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/
