Dear Benjamin and all, I have enjoyed this discussion, with its many threads, on gut strings. I have used all-gut stringed lutes for going on 18 years now, and I am still not completely decided on the best manner in which to string a lute.
I do have 2 instruments strung in synthetic strings as well. I especially like using them in the summer months, as the widely ranging temperature and humidity conditions make the instrument less stable during hot, humid summers. Another factor I have noticed during the summer is actually the sound of the gut strings. They sound less brilliant, more like a "thud" sound in humid conditions. I have never experienced rotting, of any gut string. Even when I put on an 'older' new gut string (purchased years ago) I find essentially no difference. I share your frustration with wound strings, as they provide a sound of long sustain and too bright, in my opinion. Because they are so much clearer in sound, they are much less forgiving in nature than a gut bass. In terms of gut stability, yes they (gut) tune much faster than synthetics. A new 5th course in nylgut will take about 5 months to totally stretch out!!! I have been performing in all-gut lutes for many years, and i have not had tuning problems with performance. There is a trick to it.....Since the instrument _and_ strings need to settle into their environment, I need to get my instruments in the performance venue at least 2 & 1/2 hours prior to the concert. This is most convenient, but merely letting the lute and strings settle into their new home for 2.5 hours is a very effective way of equilibrating the instruments and strings. Then, the lute stays in excellent tune. In fact, this past winter, I had a concert with Tom Walker, in which we played a program of French baroque lute duets, in 2 identically purely gut-strung baroque lutes (no metal). Tuning was spot on, and we did not have to do_ any _tuning, with exception of changing the bass pitches on different tunings. On this discussion, we are focusing totally on strings, where the lute also plays a great role in tuning stability. A different room for performance will throw any lute (out of tune) a little, until it settles in to the new environment. Incidentally, both of these instruments are a new experiment, which is pure gut throughout, no metal (i.e., no gimped or loaded, etc). These lutes are in equal tension, using pure gut, as described by Mersenne. I really like the results this far. The 2 lowest courses, D and C, are certainly less brilliant than if one used metal in the string, but the instrument overall sounds more beautiful, in my opinion. The 11th course is huge... I think the size is 2.02. IThe result is a warm, even sound, where the entire instrument seems to be of a similar sound. At this point, I like the pure gut basses better than loaded, densified, gimped, or wound gut basses. My 415 cents worth. ed At 05:05 AM 10/7/2012, Benjamin Narvey wrote: >Dear All, > >In fact, what I "thought" I normally found was that gut strings get >settled in faster, but are more prone to movement than synthetics on >a day to day basis, where synthetics can take weeks to settle down >(gut minutes/hours), but once they do they can be settled for ages. >I thought (and for nylon still do think) that all things considered >one tunes around 10% more with gut strings than synthetics >(considerable, but manageable). > >While I do find that the nylgut is pretty stable, as is nylon, I >have had horrible experiences with carbon strings (when touring in >NYC, Roman!) which kept on climbing in hot stage conditions >(sometimes by nearly a semitone). This was on an excellent theorbo >by Klaus Jacobsen. The gut and nylon strings on the same >theorbo/conditions were vastly more stable. > >On the theorbo I am currently playing (which is admittedly a rubbish >instrument by a certain French luthier who will remain anonymous) I >find it is the overwound strings that are moving around the most. As >I said, I brought the lute 'round to a good luthier, who reworked >the pegs to minimise slippage, and this had helped enormously. That >said, the three overwound strings continue to go wildly out of tune >- much, much more than the nylgut, nylon, and much more than the GUT >on the same instrument with the same pegs. In this case, it must be >the metal windings that so contribute to the utter lack of stability. > >I have toured in the tropics (Ile de la Reunion, a French territory >in the south Indian Ocean) with a 100% humidity index. It took >several days for my theorbo, gut strings (and myself!) to adjust, >but once this happened, the instrument was remarkably stable: at >100% humidity there was nowhere left for the strings/instrument to >move! Funnily enough, the theorbo was noticeably heavier by several >hundred grams due to the water weight. > >Sam: I get my plain gut from Nick Baldock. To be honest, I am not >sure if it is varnished or not. Following historical sources, I tune >my top string to just below breaking point, and the rest a >tad lower. This means I use very high gauges (normally nothing >thinner than .46, often much thicker, for chanterelles). These tops >last weeks, if not months, with heavy playing. There is no problem >in humid conditions, as anyone who heard my concert last year at the Marin >Marais Festival in Paris can attest (aside from the normal 10% extra >tuning that gut requires over nylon). > >So, I suppose what I am saying is that while nylon/nylgut are more >stable than gut (once they settle in; gut is much more stable right >away) I see no advantage with carbon or overwound strings with >regards to gut when it comes to tuning. They are at least as >difficult to tune as gut, with the added disadvantage of sounding >(in my view) utterly rubbish. > >My 392 cents. > >Best, >Benjamin > >Sent from my iPhone > >On 5 oct. 2012, at 10:18, Benjamin Narvey <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Dear Luters, > > > > I know that much has been made about tuning issues pertaining to > gut strings, but it strikes me now how little has been said about > the same difficulty with synthetics/modern strings. > > > > For the first time in ages I am playing on a modern-strung > theorbo belonging to a student of mine for rehearsals of a "Fairy > Queen" while I impatiently await the arrival of my new "double > luth" in some weeks (more on this giraffe anon). I am simply aghast > at how badly carbon strings go out of tune, even though they are > "not supposed to". (Nylon/nylgut fares better.) Indeed, the (ugh) > overwound Savarez "guitar" bass strings are the worst offenders of > all, going madly out of tune sometimes: not surprising they are so > sensitive given how metal is such a superb conducting material. The > tuning got so sticky I actually took the instrument to a lutemaker > since I thought it had to be peg slippage, but no. And of course, > with all these different modern materials, the different string > types are going out if tune differently. Superb. > > > > I just can't believe I forgot about how difficult tuning > synthetics can be. But more importantly, it leads me to question > what the point of playing on synthetics is: after all, the reason > why players use them is since they are supposed to bally well stay > in tune... and I am really not so sure given my current experience > that they do this better than gut. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Benjamin > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html Edward Martin 2817 East 2nd Street Duluth, Minnesota 55812 e-mail: [email protected] voice: (218) 728-1202 http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1660298871&ref=name http://www.myspace.com/edslute http://magnatune.com/artists/edward_martin
