Not sure I understand your question, but not all chords are playable by
everyone on all lutes.
However, most chords can be played on most lutes.
If I had small hands, I could go to a smaller theorbo, or avoid certain
chords, but it isn't really an issue for me.
OTOH, if I had very large hands, lets say 50 percent larger, I could
play a 90/180cm no problem and it would "seem" as if I were playing a
60 cm lute.
Similarly, a modest 33 percent difference would yield an effective play
ratio from 80 to 60. My teacher could easily stop two double courses
with the tip of the index finger; I cannot.
And there is that one E major chord that I can't play on most lutes.
But on my mandolin, it is a piece of cake.
So then if there were chords that you could not play on a 60 cm lute,
that would equate to 33+ person on the 80cm, disregarding for the
moment the distinct advantage of a single strung theorbo.
One can also calculate the effective span of the instrument according
to spacing. So for example, certain chords become playable when you
narrow the spacing. In practice, I don't notice any "gosh I can't reach
those chords" moments until I go above 85cm. But if I had smaller
hands, that number would of course be significantly different; larger
hands, and I would wonder what people were talking about. It would not
register.
Another way to look at it is that try as I might, I cannot palm a
basketball. All I can do is dribble.
dt
__________________________________________________________________
From: Martyn Hodgson <[email protected]>
To: lute <[email protected]>; David Tayler <[email protected]>
Sent: Sun, April 15, 2012 12:49:39 AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Lute size and set-up was Re: What makes a good
lute?
Thank you David,
But the point being made was that it may well not be that '90 percent
that are still set up wrong' as you assert but that the player's
posture is wrong (eg holding cradled in the lap and/or too close to
horizontal) and/or the plucking position is inappropriate. If these
defects, of the player not the instrument, are attended to you may
not
find that such a large proportion of large instruments are 'set up
wrong'.
Regarding your observation about Lynda Sayce's playing: ' As far as
chords on the theorbo, Linda does a great job, I just saw a vid of
her
playing the Stabat Mater, and if one had large hands, one could of
course play every chord.'' , what precisely is meant by 'play every
chord' . Are you suggesting that all nominal G lute chords should be
playable on a theorbo?
Martyn
--- On Sat, 14/4/12, David Tayler <[1][email protected]> wrote:
From: David Tayler <[2][email protected]>
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Lute size and set-up was Re: What makes a good
lute?
To: "lute" <[3][email protected]>
Date: Saturday, 14 April, 2012, 22:11
Absolutely agree that technique is important!
But those 90 percent that are still set up wrong, ouch! all those
missed notes, so unnecessary.
On a double strung instrument, it is a cart-horse scenario. You
cannot
develop technique unless the spacing is correct, just like you
can't
dance in the wrong trousers. Pedaling the cart and horse
backwards.
Main reason people don't make a good sound: wrong setup.
So, you may say, I don't want to replace my lute or drill out the
bridge--fair enough! Try one of mine first. You will be convinced
in
five minutes and also reap the health benefits of a stay in
California.
The spacing at the rose to which you refer is part of the
equation.
Three points determine the string lines: bridge, nut, plucking
point
(string thickness as well, if you don't measure from the edges).
I'm now doing some super-macro videos that show how the strings
vibrate
in tandem when spaced correctly. It is very interesting!
As far as chords on the theorbo, Linda does a great job, I just
saw
a
vid of her playing the Stabat Mater, and if one had large hands,
one
could of course play every chord.
And if one didn't have large hands, one could change the spacing
to
play everything as well--no double strings on the modern theorbo
to
go
twang in the night.
dt
__________________________________________________________________
From: Martyn Hodgson <[1][4][email protected]>
To: [2][5][email protected]
Cc: Lute Dmth <[3][6][email protected]>;
[4][7][email protected]
Sent: Wed, April 11, 2012 1:46:06 AM
Subject: Lute size and set-up was Re: What makes a good lute?
David,
Clearly the overall size of an instrument and things like string
spacing are relevant to the ease of playing. But if a player
struggles
with a particular size and/or specification of lute, before
jumping
to
erroneous conclusions it's important to see if the player's
posture
and
hand position/technique are not the real culprits.
Regarding the 'wrong' size instrument: a player may seem to
struggle
with a larger instrument than that they are used to simply
because
they
are holding it an unsuitable/inappropriate manner - rather that
their
arms/hands are intrinsically incapable of the stretch required.
For
example, if a player holds a large lute instrument as a modern
'classical' guitar (ie cradled low down in the lap and at a
relatively
low angle to the ground) they may find left arm stretch
difficulties
which can readily be overcome by adopting a posture with the
instrument
resting on the right thigh (as often seen in early
representations).
This can result in the instrument now being held some 10/15cm to
the
player's right and bringing the nut a similar distance closer to
the
left hand and so stretches which had previously seemed difficult
may
be
more readily achieved. Holding a large instrument in a more
upright
position also helps since it better fits with the
arm/body geometry and increases the effective stretch of the left
arm.
The end result of all this is to give up to 15cm extra left arm
stretch
and thus increasing the effective left arm stretch from, say,
76cm
string length to around 90cm.
Similarly, if a player is playing well up to the rose rather than
close
to the bridge, the natural tapering of string separation from
bridge
to
nut will result in a small, but noticeable, reduction in string
separation at the actual plucking point which is not the fault of
the
string spacing at the bridge but of the player's own technique.
Finally, specifically with regard to the theorbo, as Lynda Sayce
points out ([1][5][8]http://www.theorbo.com/Theorbo/Theorbo.htm),
if a
theorbo player is trying to employ ordinary lute fingered chords,
rather than those appropriate to the theorbo, they may also
struggle.
In short, before blaming an instrument's size and specification
the
player should look to themselves first and ensure the problem
isn't
with their own posture and technique.
Martyn
--- On Mon, 9/4/12, David Tayler <[6][9][email protected]>
wrote:
From: David Tayler <[7][10][email protected]>
Subject: [LUTE] Re: What makes a good lute?
To: "lute" <[8][11][email protected]>
Date: Monday, 9 April, 2012, 22:27
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 <[2][9][12][email protected]>
To: Lute List <[3][10][13][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][4][11][14]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1.
[5][12][15]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. [13][16]http://www.theorbo.com/Theorbo/Theorbo.htm
2.
[14][17]http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
o.uk
3.
[15][18]http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected].
edu
4.
[16][19]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
5.
[17][20]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1.
[21]http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
.uk
2.
[22]http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
3.
[23]http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
4.
[24]http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
5. [25]http://www.theorbo.com/Theorbo/Theorbo.htm
6.
[26]http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
7.
[27]http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
8.
[28]http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
9.
[29]http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
10.
[30]http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
11. [31]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
12. [32]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
13. [33]http://www.theorbo.com/Theorbo/Theorbo.htm
14.
[34]http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
15.
[35]http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
16. [36]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
17. [37]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. mailto:[email protected]
2. mailto:[email protected]
3. mailto:[email protected]
4. mailto:[email protected]
5. mailto:[email protected]
6. mailto:[email protected]
7. mailto:[email protected]
8. http://www.theorbo.com/Theorbo/Theorbo.htm
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. http://www.theorbo.com/Theorbo/Theorbo.htm
17. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
18. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
19. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
20. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
21. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
22. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
23. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
24. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
25. http://www.theorbo.com/Theorbo/Theorbo.htm
26. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
27. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
28. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
29. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
30. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
31. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
32. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
33. http://www.theorbo.com/Theorbo/Theorbo.htm
34. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
35. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
36. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
37. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
