Another source that recommends practicing on a tough-to-play lute is
the Mary Burwell book.
"It will be good to play [. . .] upon a lute something high in strings
and the strings something big. Practicing upon such a lute, it will
strengthen the hands and make you play admirably well when you play
upon a more easy lute."
Bill
From: Daniel Winheld <[email protected]>
To: Lute List <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, 10 April 2012, 18:57
Subject: [LUTE] Re: What makes a good lute?
Although the shoe analogy can be taken too far, it is true that one
edge of the double-edge sword of too many historical sizes, shapes,
set-ups that can lead the player/builder dynamic astray is also that
other edge provides more opportunity to get it right; and was
consciously done so:
"Everyone can have an instrument made for his hand. The size of the
hand, and slender, thick, short, and small fingers do not affect it in
the slightest, unless something is wrong with the hand."
Ernst Gottlieb Baron, "Study of the Lute" 1727, D.A. Smith translation.
"First and formost chuse a Lute neither great nor small, but a midling
one, such as shall fit thine hand in thine owne judgement. Yet I had
rather thou didst practice at first on a Lute that were somewhat
greater and harder, vnless thy hand be very short: because that is good
to stretch the sinews, which are in no sort to be slackned." John
Baptisto Besardo of Visonti, "Necessarie Observations Belonging to the
Lute, and Lute Playing" -English version in Robert Dowland's "Varietie
of Lute Lessons", 1610
Dan
>> No one would wear size 4 or size 11 shoes if they are a size 9, and
yet, that is precisely what happens. Sadly, people are rarely fitted to
the lute, even though the lute is from the age of "custom made"
On Apr 10, 2012, at 7:55 AM, Daniel Winheld wrote:
>> My teacher told me that you don't choose a lute, it chooses you.
Maybe
>> that is true.
>
> That is true, you know it when you feel it, but it may take years of
playing experience on many instruments to finally recognize that
"right" and perfect match up when it happens. My once-in-a-lifetime
lute didn't show up until 2010- and I have been playing lutes for about
40 years, and I wasn't even looking for a new R-lute anymore.
>
> Sometimes one never finds a "perfect" instrument and does the best
one can- and IF it's a fabulous sounding instrument it is well worth
the effort. That describes my vihuela- my one instrument that has been
built scrupulously faithful to a specific, original model; except for
the spacing/set-up meeting my hands- but only 90% of the way. Size
10-1/2 "shoe" for my size 11 "foot".
>
> With some instruments you just don't get the full range of shoe
sizes. Modern classical guitars are always going to be 64 or 65 cm. or
close- radically change that, and you no longer have a proper "E"
instrument. Or not one that sounds good. Of course one can get a terz
guiitar- size and pitch of an alto/high tenor lute.
>
> There was a New Yorker article some years ago about a woman- concert
level trained pianist- whose sole job for the Steinway company was
matching prospective buyers to the instrument of their dreams. Players
would try dozens, scores, of pianos until they found the "right" one-
out of seemingly identical instruments, all built to identical specs,
to a level of standardization that lutenists, luthiers, (and even
guitarists for that matter) can't even dream of. To my knowledge, only
one great historical pianist had an instrument built to his specs.
Joseph Hoffman; early 20th century. He had all the keys shave a little
& more closely spaced to match his smaller-than-Rachmaninoff"s hands.
And of course Glenn Gould personally obsessed his instruments to
incredible degrees.
>
> Sometimes the instrument can be set up to meet your hands, sometimes
you train your hands to meet the instrument. Sometimes it's a bit of
both. The shoe analogy breaks down at this point, and of course we
haven't even touched on that "historical" thing. Anyway, an Edlinger
Burkholtzer is no longer a Burkholtzer Burkholtzer.
>
> Dan
>
> On Apr 9, 2012, at 2:27 PM, David Tayler wrote:
>
>> Ninety percent of the lutes I see are set up wrong and are also the
>> wrong size for the person playing. I doubt that this will change
>> anytime soon: once someone buys the wrong size instrument, they
either
>> keep it or trade it in for another one that is the wrong size.
>> So I would rate size and setup as the number one issue, based on my
>> experience that the player will have to go through a very long
>> retraining period
>> after learning on a lute that is the wrong size. Why pedal
backwards?
>> Of the setup issues, the number one issue is the span and spacing.
>> Without the right span and spacing, which reconciles two numbers,
the
>> size of the hand (and fingers) and the rules which govern the span
and
>> spacing of strings. Without these two numbers in balance, it is
>> impossible, or very difficult to make a good sound.
>> When these numbers are in balance, it is easy to make a good sound;
in
>> fact, it is difficult to make a bad sound. No one would wear size 4
or
>> size 11 shoes if they are a size 9, and yet, that is precisely what
>> happens. Sadly, people are rarely fitted to the lute, even though
the
>> lute is from the age of "custom made". Equally sadly, most people
do
>> not understand the basic physics of twang, thwack and pluck, which
>> involves some simple experiments with a special bridge and nut that
are
>> universally adjustable. Generally speaking, and I mean VERY
generally,
>> the plucking-point spacing is wrong, that is, the place where you
>> actually pluck the string, and it is almost always too narrow.
However,
>> it is the ratio of the bridge to nut, factoring the string length,
and
>> figured at YOUR plucking point that gives numbers for the "thou
shalt
>> not buzz" dimensions. Empirically, anyone can see that the spacing
is
>> different at any point on the string.
>> A player with years of experience can give you some advice, after
>> watching you play, about the setup. You may have to compromise
somewhat
>> on the overall span, or use a sliding scale so that the treble has
more
>> room.
>> After these two biggies, there is a seemingly endless list of
features,
>> all of which are important. And here you will need some experience
to
>> guide you.
>> However, I would add that most lutes made nowadays are not copies
of
>> originals. They are rescaled, resized, rebarred, rebridged,
reglued,
>> revarnished.
>> Available is everything: everything-except-original.
>> Now, you may want that. Personally, I think everyone needs a
reality
>> check instrument that is a copy of an original. Otherwise, it is
just a
>> guitar, basically, with wonky pegs.
>> Since you asked about sound in your list, it is no fun playing a
>> monochromatic instrument of any kind, but that is just a personal
>> preference. I would say most lutes made today lean towards
>> monochromatic.
>> Main thing is to make a good sound. If you aren't making a
beautiful
>> sound, it isn't you: your lute is set up wrong, is the wrong size,
or
>> both.
>> Lute players may think that their feet are the wrong size, but when
you
>> think about it, this cannot be the case. Everyone is different, and
the
>> instrument must fit.
>> My teacher told me that you don't choose a lute, it chooses you.
Maybe
>> that is true.
>> dt
>>
__________________________________________________________________
>>
>> From: William Samson <[1][email protected]>
>> To: Lute List <[2][email protected]>
>> Sent: Sat, April 7, 2012 6:25:47 AM
>> Subject: [LUTE] What makes a good lute?
>> I haven't really got much to add to the subject line. I've been
>> chatting with Rob about this and various points have emerged I'd
be
>> interested in hearing what priorities you might put on the
various
>> characteristics of a lute in deciding if it's 'good' or
otherwise.
>> The kinds of things that have come up are (in no particular
order):
>> * playability (action, string spacing etc)
>> * sound (which I can't easily define)
>> * authenticity of design/construction
>> * materials used
>> * quality of craftsmanship
>> * reputation of maker
>> Of course these are rather broad headings and might easily be
>> refined,
>> clarified or broken down.
>> Thoughts, please?
>> Bill
>> --
>> To get on or off this list see list information at
>> [1][3]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>>
>> --
>>
>> References
>>
>> 1. [4]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
>>
>
>
>
--
References
1. mailto:[email protected]
2. mailto:[email protected]
3. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
4. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
