I'm not sure how intonation could be a factor for any competently made instrument. Strictly up to the player and her strings, I would think. On Apr 8, 2012, at 5:14 PM, Mark Warren wrote:
> How about adding reasonably accurate intonation to the list? Granted, that > may be more often a property of the set-up than the 'goodness' of the lute > itself, but still... > > On 4/8/2012 4:57 PM, Mathias Rösel wrote: >>> Aside from the essential question of acoustics, and the aesthetics of >>> physical appearance, how about lasting quality? It may sound good "right >>> out of the box", but what's it like after it been under tension for a year >>> Where's the >>> action? Is the rose bulging up to the strings? Do the pegs work? Bars >>> intact? >>> Bridge still on? >> When I bought my first lute in 1983 from Budget Instruments (8c after >> Hieber) it was commonly understood that the soundboard would be dead within >> 20 or so years. As a matter of fact, it's still sounding resonant, and >> everything is just fine with it. Certainly a good lute. >> >> Mathias >> >> > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
