Take a small, thin piece of wood 5mm, 5.2mm and so on
Place it carefully between the paired strings, right at the bridge,
careful not to scratch the soundboard or damage your strings (you can
smooth the wood if you use gut.
Increase the 2nd and 3rd course width until you can hit two strings
clearly and cleanly.
Then measure, then adjust. Start with 5.2mm
If your nut spacing is too close, you can make a very, very thin mark
with a file
Then move one string out wider at the nut.
You will quickly find the best ratio with no math needed :)
Just don't make it too wide, or the total span will be too wide.
If you have very small hands, you may have to go with "roughly
parallel" where the spacing is narrow at the bridge and a bit wider at
the nut. But I dodn't advise this as it does not always work.
Gottlieb's lutes are sometimes set up perfect in "narrow, roughly
parallel" And they are really nice lutes, very interesting sound.
When I was 17, I guess this would be 1972, I just could not stand this
buzz. So I took a chopstick, and made tiny spacers for the nut.
I made a nut, then sawed it into slices. Each slice was a pair of
strings, and I moved the pieces around till I figured it out.
Buzz free since then.
However, the thin lines is easier. You can make a practice nut if you
do not want to mess up the one you have.
Incidentally, course two MUST and I mean MUST lie under the knuckle, or
you will never make a good bar chord sound. That's another story....
Basically, with the right stroke, and the right setup, the lute is easy
to play, because it was an instrument that everyone played.
However, if you have not learned to strike two strings dead on, you may
have some difficulty. Most people do not have the right stroke because
the spacing is wrong.
Then someone like Ron McFarlane can show you, or a few other people, to
hit two strings.
'That's where the pedagogical skill comes in. It takes ten minutes,
plain and simple, to show someone. Maybe someone could do it in five.
I made a lute video recently with a macro cam that shows the stroke I
use, but you are free to find your own, and everyone's hand is
different.
There is no "right" way to play. But the buzzing, the splats, it is too
much--I find it unacceptable. Sure you can edit them all out in a
recording--and that is exactly what happens.
But what is the point?
Your choice, ten years or ten minutes! Personally, if I had a lute that
was not set up right, I would sell it. Too much aggravation. But some
people don't mind, and the vast majority of people think their lute is
"just right", so that is really OK, as well.
dt
__________________________________________________________________
From: William Samson <willsam...@yahoo.co.uk>
To: David Tayler <vidan...@sbcglobal.net>
Cc: Lute List <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Wed, April 25, 2012 11:32:00 AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: What makes a good lute?
I haven't come across that formula David. Can you please point me to
a
source for the recipe? It could save a lot of time and money!
Thanks,
Bill
From: David Tayler <[1]vidan...@sbcglobal.net>
To: William Samson <[2]willsam...@yahoo.co.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, 25 April 2012, 18:57
Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: What makes a good lute?
Simple geometry.
It's all been worked out, unlike forty years ago when we worked it
out.
No different from buying clothes.
dt
At 11:55 PM 4/9/2012, you wrote:
A luthier would need a formula relating hand dimensions (hand span,
fistmele and so on) in order to build a lute that's exactly the
right size for a particular player. Without such a formula, all
the
luthier gets is a headache when asked to build a lute that's the
right size for a particular player.
If it's down to the player to decide what spacings they need, how
will they determine that without having a selection of instruments
to try first? Not as easy as in the time of Laux Maler as David
Van
Edwards so amusingly pointed out!
I don't see how making exact copies of original instruments
actually
helps here - There are variations in these too - Compare, for
example the well-known 7c Hieber with the 7c Venere of about the
same size (58/59cm?). The Hieber has a wide string spacing at the
nut end, and the Venere is almost impossibly narrow here for most
players I know. Otherwise, there's not a lot of difference in
dimensions - bridge spacing, scale, body dimensions . . .
I sympathise with your point of view, but can't see how these
objectives can be achieved in practice without buying, trying and
then rejecting a goodish number of instruments.
Bill
From: David Tayler <[3]vidan...@sbcglobal.net>
To: lute <[4]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Monday, 9 April 2012, 22:27
Subject: [LUTE] Re: What makes a good lute?
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][5]willsam...@yahoo.co.uk >
To: Lute List <[2][6]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu >
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] [7]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. [4][8]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. mailto:[9]willsam...@yahoo.co.uk
2. mailto:[10]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
3. [11]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
4. [12]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. mailto:vidan...@sbcglobal.net
2. mailto:willsam...@yahoo.co.uk
3. mailto:vidan...@sbcglobal.net
4. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
5. mailto:willsam...@yahoo.co.uk
6. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
7. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
8. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
9. mailto:willsam...@yahoo.co.uk
10. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
11. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
12. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
