I've just tried your experiment. Wow, it really works! I've also tried playing my lute using good earplugs, and then touching the lute with my teeth. The difference in volume is enormous. Thanks
All the best JL Wiadomość napisana przez A.J. Padilla MD w dniu 8 paź 2012, o godz. 17:52: > The musica viva website describes the dyphone as having two necks, 180 > degrees apart. > Unless the fingerboards (and bowls???) were reversed front-to-back as well, > one would have to be played "lefty." > Anybody got a picture? > > I just love the part about touching the dypone with the teeth - That's > conductive hearing as opposed to air transmission. > You can do a modern experiment on this, duplicating an old but quite > reliable hearing phenomenon (which I use to impress my medical students). > Take a tuning fork (128 Hz works best, but anything about that range will be > ok), tap it to produce the sound, and touch it to the middle of the > forehead. > Under normal circumstances, the sound should sound equal in both ears. > Stick a finger in one ear to occlude the air conduction. > The sound (of the tuning fork on your forehead) will "magically" become > louder in the occluded ear. That's conduction hearing loss, and indeed very > responsive to sound coming through the teeth. > Something to do with brain compensation, but what do I know, I do glands all > day.... > > - And for the lefty lute, treat with ambidextrose.... > > Al > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Jaroslaw Lipski > Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 10:08 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [LUTE] Re: the point of synthetics - eccentric Mace > > Dear Martyn, Sam, Mathias, Bill and all, > > Thank you very much for your supportive words. I absolutely agree with what > you wrote Martyn about Mace. > Besides it depends how one understands eccentricity. Viewing it from our > modern world's perspective he could be called by many as a very eccentric > man. However when trying to imagine the world he was living in and > considering his personal situation one can reevaluate his image. Not a young > man, who worked most of his life as a musician, loosing his hearing, who's > existence was grossly dependent on the income from his pupils. What was he > to do? Go to the doctor and ask for a hearing aid? No ,existing technology > didn't know such a thing. So Mace decided to cope with the situation on his > own. He invented an instrument that united 2 lutes in one, because this > construction enabled the biggest resonance that could be achieved on a lute. > Then, he invents a method of transmitting vibrations by touching the dyphone > with his teeth. How can one call it? I would say that taking into > consideration all the circumstances, he was very creative, ingenious, and > had a very artistic soul. Beeth! > oven had a similar problem. He was trying to hide the fact that he was > deaf, and managed to play only by feeling vibration of a grand piano in his > body. > Now, obviously when examining historical sources one has to be careful, but > it is not a good idea to suspect anything a person writes only because he > looks or sounds strange to us. I don't like theoretical, artificial > constructions that could undermine credibility of almost any source like > this - the same day Mace went to the market in order to buy some strings , > he had his glasses stained by blood from the pork he was preparing for the > dinner, therefore he could see only rotten red gut etc. > All in all, Musick's Monument is a very valuable historical source for me > and I will return to this reading in future with pleasure. > > All the best > > Jaroslaw > > > > WiadomoĹ>Ä? napisana przez Martyn Hodgson w dniu 8 paĹş 2012, o godz. 09:43: > >> >> Dear Jaroslaw, >> >> I don't think you need be dismayed by Howard Posner's comments: he seems > only willing to accept evidence if given under cross examination in his > local criminal law court. >> >> For most of us this degree of scepticism is not necessary and we are > prepared to take historical sources at face value unless and until we find > compelling reasons to suggest otherwise - indeed, the study of early sources > is a cornerstone of historical research. It is not really credible that Mace > would have filled this major life's with unsubstantiated personal, and > incorrect, opinion: even in 1676 there would have been people around to draw > attention to any blatant inaccuracies. >> >> In short, I think you're quite right to use Mace as a good source of > contemporary English practice. >> >> MH >> >> --- On Sun, 7/10/12, JarosĹ,aw Lipski <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> From: JarosĹ,aw Lipski <[email protected]> >> Subject: [LUTE] Re: the point of synthetics - Rather the movement of >> the whole lute >> To: [email protected] >> Date: Sunday, 7 October, 2012, 23:52 >> >> Howard, >> >> No offence I hope? I really wouldn't like to take part in an exchange of > arguments that go far from the subjects most of the lute-listers are > interested in. However I am forced to answer some of your arguments. >> Firstly, most of the expressions I used were exact quotations of your > post. I only added some that were logical consequences of what you wrote, > but I am sorry if you didn't mean it. >> Secondly, Mace had built the dyphone. Please read carefully on page 203: >> "The only instrument in being of that kind; and but lately invented, by > myself, and MADE WITH MY OWN HANDS, in the year 1672" Then he describes why > he had built it and how it sounded etc. >> Thirdly, having an assumption that so many people lack credibility and > therefore one can not seriously take into consideration books from the past > written by a man who showed some signs of eccentricity is rather not > practical IMO as musicology doesn't equal law. We can't call witness Mace. >> And finally, yes the whole discussion began from Benjamin and his > observations on behavior of gut strings versus synthetics, but I think he > explained recently that he was misunderstood, because he meant that > synthetics are in fact more stable, however gut reaches certain, lets call > it a state of equilibrium faster. I can confirm this opinion. I play both > gut and synthetics. It takes more time for synthetics before they start to > behave normally, but then, they do not react to changes of humidity, only > temperature. The only thing that I would add to his post is that gut strings > don't go out of tune because of high humidity, but because of the changes of > humidity. So practically there may be a situation that you kept your lute 2 > hours before the recital in the place where you are supposed to play, then > you enter a stage and it happens that there came quite a lot of people to > listen to you (obviously they all breath exhaling a lot of moisture), the > hall is not very spacious, a! > nd! >> your very carefully prepared tuning goes to pieces. The assumption is > though that you have a big audience, ha, ha :). Another thing that I would > like to add is that wire wounds in fact go out of tune because they are made > of 2 different materials which behave differently - a synthetic core and a > wire. The good news is that its movement is very predictable, so once you > get used to it, it takes only seconds to correct. >> Hope we safely came into some conclusions. >> >> Best >> >> JL >> >> >> >> WiadomoĹ>Ä? napisana przez howard posner w dniu 7 paĹş 2012, o godz. > 23:25: >> >>> On Oct 7, 2012, at 12:14 PM, Jarosâ?oeaw Lipski <[email protected]> > wrote: >>> >>>>>> So you see Mace as an oddball, inaccurate observer, someone quick >>>>>> to jump to odd conclusions, old deaf man who had lost touch with >>>>>> reality, an idiot who constructed an instrument impossible to >>>>>> play etc >>>>> >>>>> What I said was: "I'm not inclined to regard Mace as a scientific > observer; more like the eccentric uncle who makes dubious sweeping > pronouncements at family dinners." >>>>> >>>> Well, I've quoted your own words, but maybe you had something else on > mind, sorryâ^'â^'. >>> >>> No, *I* quoted my own words, which did not include "idiot," "old," "lost > touch with reality," or "etc." I didn't opine about how quickly he reached > his conclusions (he doesn't strike me as a man who did anything quickly). I > also didn't say "mentally ill." I certainly didn't say he actually had a > dyphone built, notwithstanding what he wrote. >>> >>> I spend a lot of time professionally evaluating whether things witnesses > tell me are credible; many are not, for all sorts of reasons, the most > common being triumph of vantage point over all other considerations (just > this morning I read through 18 "character" letters written to convince me > that a person was honorable and honest; none of them mentioned his felony > fraud conviction, leaving me to wonder if the writers even knew why they > were writing). >>> >>> We all know the world is full of ostensibly normal and sane persons who > reach positions of prominence and responsibility saying things that are not > credible; in my country they tend to get nominated for public office a lot. > >>> >>> Although we seem to have "pivoted," as Mitt Romney might say, into a > discussion of how reliable a witness Mace was, this thread began when > Benjamin Narvey -- a person normally given to reasonable observations and > conclusions -- said he'd had an experience from which he concluded (or > re-concluded) that synthetic strings are harder to keep in tune than gut, > and carbon fiber are particularly difficult. I think he's extrapolating too > much from too small a sample, and his experience is atypical of most > experiences with synthetics and gut; certainly it's different from mine. I > think a musicologist of the 23rd century reading Musick's EMail Monument, a > collection of Narvey messages on a hard drive that survived the Great > Warming Catastrophe of 2089, would likely be misled on that particular > point, even though Benjamin is not an "old deaf man who had lost touch with > reality," although he may be one if he's still around in 2089. >>> -- >>> >>> To get on or off this list see list information at >>> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >>> >> >> >> > > > -- > >
