Thanks for your vote of confidence, Martyn, but it worries me that we modern makers are too slavish in our adherence to a few (perhaps rather atypical) historical lutes. Obviously I think it's important to study the evidence we do have, but as I'm making a Gerle at the moment I'm acutely aware of the fact that it's not really a "proper" 6c lute because of the circumstances of its commission for a "cabinet of curiousities". There was nothing exotic or curious about a lute in 1580, so perhaps the motivation for its inclusion was that it was made of ivory (as I think were other objects in the cabinet). One could even argue that it was not made to be played!

Difficult business, lutemaking....

Best wishes,

Martin

On 22/04/2012 15:44, Martyn Hodgson wrote:
    Hi Bill,

    There are many difficulties with bringing early ('historical') lutes
    back into use: some of the very real aspects of fragility have been
    touched on. But it also depends on what we mean by an 'historical'
    instrument since leaving aside one class of lute (more later), almost
    all the earliest lutes have been converted to later forms (with a few
    exceptions such as the Gerle) with many more courses and it's pretty
    clear that even at the time these had limited shelf life if kept at
    tension and regularly played (eg Mace's advice to take off and repair
    the belly as being something that one might expect to have to do - or
    have done).  Indeed, it may be that, counter -intuitively, the more
    ornamental instruments may be better candidates for modern playing (eg
    the more ornate Tielke lutes) since they may have endured only light
    use and been kept safe as decorative objects -  but one doubts if any
    collection would allow them to be strung up and played since a premium
    is placed on such objects by museum curators as ornate artistic
    artefacts (look at how the V&A treated their instrument collection all
    for the sake of few frocks) and these are protected like the crown
    jewels.

    So what we are left with is a sort of self-selected group of
    instruments, often in a very poor state and very much changed, to
    attempt to bring back to some sort of playing condition. Personally,
    because so much of such a re-incarnation is highly speculative,  I
    would far prefer to see these instruments conserved in their present
    state for research and future generations.

    However, on the bright side, I'm not so sure that there are no active
    'historical' (ie old) lutes. Leaving aside the old instruments which
    have been rebirthed (such as Bailes's probable original gallichon
    converted to an 11 course lute or even Lindberg's re-invention of a
    Rauwolf lute) there are in fact some lutes which are in playable
    condition: some 18th century mandoras!  I've had the privilege of
    playing a couple (a Stautinger and Anon) but, for safety, strung at
    lower tension than I use on a modern reconstruction. Both instruments
    were playable and, indeed, I think would have been able to take
    significantly higher tensions. In both cases the only significant
    'restoration' which would be necessary to put them back into everyday
    practical use would be to reset the neck which had lifted a little.
    However even this modest move I would nowadays resist - far preferring
    to see old lutes conserved (there are so very few compared with
    fiddles) and allowed to be copied.

    Some of the reasons for violin survival have also been mentioned but
    one is, I believe, that the domed construction is enormously strong
    and, like the the arched bridge, is able to withstand much larger
    forces before major distortion.  Nevertheless, some flat belied
    instruments can be succesfully restored to playing condition:
    witness the harpsichord.  But even with these, although the soundboards
    are often horribly distorted, the heavy framing on all but the lightest
    of Italian instruments allows such restringing.  Indeed, when I first
    played in ensemble with Peter Holman I remember with amazement how he
    used to cart his original Kirkman (unrestored - with treble cheek
    lifted to boot) around in a van. But in truth the renasissance of the
    modern harpsichord probably owes more to makers who eschewed the
    Pleyels, Gobles, etc and sought to copy historic models than to
    restringing a few old instruments.

    So all power to modern makers like Martin who seek out original
    specimens from which to base their instruments - and shame on those
    collections and collectors who do not allow open access to their
    historic instruments for this purpose.....

    regards

    Martyn







    --- On Sun, 22/4/12, William Samson<[email protected]>  wrote:

      From: William Samson<[email protected]>
      Subject: [LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
      To: "Christopher Stetson"<[email protected]>
      Cc: "Lute List"<[email protected]>
      Date: Sunday, 22 April, 2012, 8:09

       I agree with most of the comments you make, Chris.
       I have a couple of lutes that are between 30 and 40 years old - one
    of
       them (with a Sitka spruce soundboard) sounded better when new and
    now
       sounds quite harsh in comparison to its earlier state.  The other
    one
       (Swiss pine soundboard) has improved with age and although the
    bridge
       had to be glued back on a few years ago, I find it is easier now to
       produce a nice tone from it than when it was new.  The caveat is, of
       course, that all this is quite subjective and my technique has
    changed
       radically over the past 40 years - from guitar technique with nails,
       guitar technique without nails, pinky-down-thumb-inside technique,
    and
       nowadays the thumb creeping outside and also playing closer to the
       bridge to emulate how I think the old ones played their lutes in the
       17th century.
       Where I take issue, though, is that as far as I can tell Mace
    doesn't
       advocate regular replacement of the soundboard.  He does, however,
    give
       instructions on how to carefully remove the soundboard, repair loose
       bars, cracks etc, and glue it back down satisfactorily once repairs
    are
       done.
       I keep hearing stories of lutes, just a decade or two old, having
    their
       soundboards replaced with brand new ones.  I can't understand the
       motivation behind this unless the old soundboard was made of very
    poor
       wood or very badly made.  Generally speaking, though, I find that
    the
       older soundboards are made from better wood, with a tighter grain,
    than
       is generally available nowadays.  My gut feeling is that the tone
    and
       response of the instrument is dominated by the soundboard, so
    replacing
       a soundboard with a new one could radically alter the way the
       instrument sounds.  I wonder what seemingly irreparable soundboard
       faults cause players to throw away the whole soundboard in exchange
    for
       a new one?
       Anyway, if you are thinking of replacing your soundboard, I'll
    happily
       pay postage and packing expenses if you'll send your old one to me
    :)
       Bill
       From: Christopher Stetson<[1][email protected]>
       To: [2][email protected]
       Sent: Sunday, 22 April 2012, 2:59
       Subject: [LUTE] Re: Why no active historical lutes?
         Hi, everyone,
         I've been waiting for one of the luthiers on the list to reply,
    but
         since they haven't, I'll toss in that it's my understanding that
    the
         physical forces of strings pulling on the glued-down bridges of
       lutes,
         which then torque the bridge against the very thin soundboard, are
         quite different from those of strings pushing down on violin
    bridges,
         which transmit the force downward onto the more robust, carved
         soundboards, all of which results in lutes tending to come apart
    more
         quickly than violins do.  Also, I believe that in the opinion of
       some,
         at least, because of these different structures and forces, while
         violins tend to sound better as they age, the sound quality of
    lutes
         (and guitars with glued-down bridges) tends to deteriorate over
    time.
         Perhaps some luthier list-members could confirm, deny, or nuance?
         Doesn't Mace talk of having his soundboards replaced on a regular
         basis?
         Best to all, and keep playing.
         Chris.
         On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Edward Mast
    <[1][1][3][email protected]>
         wrote:
           I think one or two may have survived un-modified (perhaps the
           "Messiah"?).  Also, Yo Yo Ma 'de-modified' one of his strad
    cellos
           (I believe I've read this), reconfiguring it as a Baroque
           instrument.  (How much of a shame the modifications are depends
       upon
           who you're talking with, of course).
           -Ned
         On Apr 21, 2012, at 5:00 PM, Sam Chapman wrote:
         >  Just for the record, I don't think any of those Stradivarius
       violins
         >  are in anything like their original condition. Which is a real
       shame.
         >
         >  All the best,
         >
         >  Sam
         >
         >  On 20 April 2012 20:23, Herbert Ward
       <[2][2][4][email protected]>
         wrote:
         >>
         >>  According to Wikipedia, there are many Strativarius violins
         >>  in active use today:
         >>
       [3][3][5]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stradivarius_instrumen
    ts
         >>
         >>  But I never hear of anyone playing a historical lute routinely.
         >>  In fact, it seems rare for anyone to even handle one.
         >>
         >>  Is this because the thin soundboard becomes fragile with age?
         >>
         >>  --
         >>
         >>
         >>
         >>  To get on or off this list see list information at
         >>  [4][4][6]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
         >
         >
         >
         >  --
         >  Sam Chapman
         >  Oetlingerstrasse 65
         >  4057 Basel
         >  (0041) 79 530 39 91
         >
         >
         --
       References
         1. mailto:[5][7][email protected]
         2. mailto:[6][8][email protected]
         3.
    [7][9]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stradivarius_instruments
         4. [8][10]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
       --
    References
       1. mailto:[11][email protected]
       2. mailto:[12][email protected]
       3. [13]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stradivarius_instruments
       4. [14]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
       5. mailto:[15][email protected]
       6. mailto:[16][email protected]
       7. [17]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stradivarius_instruments
       8. [18]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

    --

References

    1. 
http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
    2. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
    3. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
    4. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
    5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stradivarius_instruments
    6. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
    7. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
    8. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
    9. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stradivarius_instruments
   10. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   11. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
   12. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
   13. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stradivarius_instruments
   14. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   15. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
   16. http://us.mc817.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]
   17. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stradivarius_instruments
   18. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html



Reply via email to