Dear Howard
There is also quite a lot of speculation in your answer, however I doubt very much if Mace could be so poetic and enigmatic in the book which was to simplify things. He was defending lute's position amongst instruments so he tried to make explanations as easy as possible. For us it's not easy because we didn't live at that time. IMO he talks about most common things (obviously except his dyphone, but in this case he wanted to show people his invention). I really doubt very much that he would be inclined to make generalization after examining just a one string and immediately wanting to share his discovery with the whole world. In this case the whole book would be of little value for anyone. But I don't thing this is the case. He clearly explained that many kinds of strings were commonly dyed. Then he proceeded to give his opinion on which ones were good, and which he found commonly faulty. This would be quite a normal thing to write in a handbook. As far as your objections concerning unusual colors are concerned please have a look at the 12c lute's bridge detail of Bilcius painting (2nd half of the 17th c). It shows string colors from bright yellow, orange, till various shades of blue. Obviously our arguments prove nothing (either way), we are just speculating, but I find it entertaining to dig in some details :-) Best wishes Jaroslaw Wiadomość napisana przez howard posner w dniu 7 paź 2012, o godz. 01:22: > On Oct 6, 2012, at 12:45 PM, Jaros“aw Lipski <jaroslawlip...@wp.pl> wrote: > >> Maybe, but then how will you explain a quote from Mace p.66: >> "I have sometimes seen strings of a yellowish color very good; yet but >> seldom; for that color is a general sign of rottenness, or of the decay of >> the string. There are several sorts of colored strings, very good; but the >> best was always the clear blue; the red commonly rotten." >> As far as I understand red color is a most popular color of loaded string. >> If this is so, how then they could be commonly rotten? > > There's a lot of speculation in your question. Here's more. > > Mace may have been describing minor differences in color. > > He could have been describing a string as "red" or "yellow" for all sorts of > reasons: inherent color of the intestine, impurities in the processing, some > microbial or fungal contaminant, the color of Mace's spectacles or the kinds > of candles he used, the string maker cutting his finger while he made the > string and twisting his own blood into the string (I think I just created the > "Red Violin" theory of string making), Mace examining the string while the > sun was setting--who knows? > > Obviously, I'm not inclined to regard Mace as a scientific observer; more > like the eccentric uncle who makes dubious sweeping pronouncements at family > dinners. Maybe he got one reddish string once and didn't like it, and > generalized in a way that most of us do in casual conversation. > > Most of the gut strings I've used could be described as yellow, and none have > been rotten. > > And what's with "clear blue?" > -- > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >
