Dear Jaroslaw
Thank you again for raising the discussion. I quite understand
and am very happy that you are busy, a very good thing for a musician.
It happens that I have to travel for the next few weeks (unfortunately,
not on tour as for yourself), so it would be best for me to gather my
thoughts, and come back to this after Christmas. I have just been able
to respond punctually on one or two questions.
On the question of the tendency to putrify, or simply to be badly made
of Lyons according to Mace. The important thing to notice is that this
is not true of the Pistoys (according to him). Interestingly a few
years before, the Burwell text indicates that Lyons and Romans are
excellent strings and none other any good.
Barbieri's research came up with documents showing that French
merchants, presumably from Lyons actually brought a model of string to
the Roman atelier (probably new basses for the new French lute) and
from then on during a fairly long period imported a huge ammount of
strings from Rome. It seems that the Lyons strings were outsourced. Now
the demands being very large, perhaps this did result in a slip in
quality (as this tends to do now).
In Burwell there is no mention of Pistoys. Is it possible that the
Pistoy basses that are mentioned in Mace were the response of other
Italian string makers to the huge output of sometimes sub standard
basses from Rome? Well this is just speculation; and whether, the one
type were loaded and the other not is of course further speculation.
The ones from Rome could just as well have been rather badly loaded.
It would not be surprising however, if an important musician of the
time, as Charles Mouton certainly was, seems to have been "caught" by
de Troy using those very best bass types.
So much for now, but I will be pleased to come back to our discussion
in the new year (something to look forward to).
Regards
Anthony
----- Mail original -----
De : "jaroslawlip...@wp.pl" <jaroslawlip...@wp.pl>
AEUR : lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Cc :
EnvoyA(c) le : Mercredi 28 novembre 2012 22h53
Objet : [LUTE] Re: Pistoys prone to rot (and string structure)
according to Mace?
Dear Anthony,
As I said before, Martyn or Howard may be right, but if one reads the
whole context it seems rather unlikely. Mace uses the word aEURzdecay"
in places where he definitely means decomposition. The quote about an
old oak in my previous message maybe a good example. You can't expect
that he meant aEURzpoor quality oak". He talks about a rotting,
decomposing old tree. And he had a good sense of observation. For
example he mentions that gut strings swell when there is a moisture in
the air. The fact that he goes on saying that small Lyons are
constantly rotten aEURzand good for little, but to make frets of",
doesn't contradict anything as probably a rotting string wouldn't be
rotten on the whole length, but in a couple of limited places, so using
the remaining sound part seems to be a very good idea.
I agree with you that small Lyons were probably HT.
Anthony, I will answer you later as I am very pressed for time these
days. I will have much more time before Christmas. Meanwhile you'll
probably write more too, no?
All the best
Jaroslaw
----- Original Message ----- From: "Anthony Hind"
<[1]agno3ph...@yahoo.com>
To: "howard posner" <[2]howardpos...@ca.rr.com>; "howard posner"
<[3]howardpos...@ca.rr.com>; "Martyn Hodgson"
<[4]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk>
Cc: <[5]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 4:37 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Pistoys prone to rot (and string structure)
according to Mace?
> Dear Jaroslaw
> Unfortunately I don't have time just now to reply in any detail about
all these interesting questions you raise, but I will nevertheless do
so, as soon as I have enough time to do your analysis justice.
> Just on this issue of the meaning of rottenness. I find that Martyn
did have a good point. Mace does say that Lyons tend to be rotten, but
then goes on to say that they are only fit to be used as frets. Of
course this could just be a figure of speech, but taken literally a
decaying string should not be fit for making frets. This leads Martyn
to consider that "rotten" here rather means a poor string. Although,
assuming the other meaning (putrified) I suppose it might still be
possible to use the parts of the string that were not rotten?
> %
> If small Lyons did tend to rot (while Pistoys didn't), I would agree
with Jaroslaw that this could perhaps imply that Lyons had not
undergone quite the same treatments (loading/curing) as Pistoys.
However, Mace only says this of small Lyons (presumably Meanes which
would not have been loaded) but not of Lyons Basses, which he just says
are not particularly good.
> %
> Another point might be that, if we are to take Mace's remark
literally, and believe that Lyons Meanes might have worked as frets,
then this could possibly also tell us something else about the
structure of Lyons. Might this not imply that Lyons were HT rather than
more elastic ropes. I am frankly not sure about this, but would a soft
flexible Venice twine rope work well as a fret. Don't we need a certain
hardness in a fret? Might this not imply that Lyons (at least Lyons
Meanes) were HT? But this remains an open question, as I just don't
have any experience with trying out twine, or indeed tresses, as frets
(perhaps they do work?), and Mace's words might not have been intended
literally.
> %
> Venice Octaves:
> Now if, as suggested by Mace, Pistoys had the same structure as
Venice Catlines, then his remarks about using Venices Meanes for
Octaves, could also possibly tell us something about Pistoys.
> %
> An indication that Mace's Venice Catline Meanes were perhaps twine
ropes, comes from the fact that he advises players to use Venice Meanes
both for 5c and 4c, but also for all octaves but only down to 7c (but
not for 6c Octave, for which he advises treble Minikins). This could
imply that the Venice Meanes structure would not allow them to be made
thin enough for 6c (on my lute 4c and 7c Octave are about the same size
near 80, while 6c Octave and 3c treble are around 60). I notice that
MPs twines only go down to 70 (not small enough for 6c Octave), while
of course an HT can be made much smaller. On the other hand tresses
(Dan's Pistoys for example) only seem to go down to about 100. This
limit could perhaps be inherently determined by the varying structure:
single element HT, opposed to two element twine, and three element
tress (where perhaps the fewer the elements the smaller the string can
be made?).
> If this corresponds to a general rule about twine, HT, and tress
structure (but perhaps it doesn't?), then Mace's Venices might have
been twines (the only ones to go down to 7c octave but no further?).
> Now, if Mace was further correct in considering that Pistoys were
thick Venices then these might also have been twine.
> However, in contrast, I notice that while Mace mentions that small
Lyons Meanes were also often used for octaves, he does not mention any
similar limit on their use (down to 7c). This could be an omission, as
he doesn't advise their use, but we find the same sort of comment in
Burwell, where the use of Small Lyons Meanes are also advised for
octaves. However, here again there is no limit indicated on their use
(say down to 7c). There is no mention at all of Venices in Burwell, so
there is no possible contrast indicated.
> %
> If the presence of this comment about a size constraint for Venice
octaves (in Mace) but no similar comment for Lyons octaves (in Mace or
Burwell) is at all significant, then this could be another indication
of a structural difference between Venices and Lyons; perhaps we have a
small clue here that Lyons Meanes (and perhaps also basses?) were HT,
while Venices (and possibly Pistoys?) were twine.
> %
> Well, I am drawing strong conclusions from a few passing remarks, and
so I quite understand if anyone considers this pure speculation.
> Thank you Jaroslaw for raising all this, I will try to get back to
you on other points, as soon as possible?
> Regards
> Anthony
>
> ----- Mail original -----
> De : howard posner <[6]howardpos...@ca.rr.com>
> AEUR : [7]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
> Cc :
> EnvoyA(c) le : Mardi 27 novembre 2012 21h51
> Objet : [LUTE] Re: Are Pistoys prone to rot according to Mace?
>
>
> On Nov 27, 2012, at 10:35 AM, [8]jaroslawlip...@wp.pl wrote:
>
>> The word "decay" reappears several times in the technical part of
Music's
>> Monument, always in conjunction with the word "rottenness". This
can't be
>> coincidental.
>
> You may be right about Mace using "rottenness" in the modern sense of
"decomposition of organic material," but in the 1600's "decay" was not
that specific in meaning. It could mean any deterioration or decline.
> A flood would decay when its waters ebbed.
> Pepys wrote in 15 May 1663 that "the Dutch decay [in the East Indies]
exceedingly."
> The King James Bible (1611) uses decay to indicate a person's
financial or civic decline: "If thy brother be waxen poor and fallen in
decay with theeaEUR|" (Leviticus 25:35).
> In Ben Jonson's play Catline (I'm not kidding) Act II scene 2, a
character says "She has beene a fine Ladie, And, yet, she dresses
herselfe, (except you Madame) One of the best in Rome: and paints, and
hides Her decayes very well."
>
> It appears that "decay" in Mace's time was less likely to convey the
sense of decomposing than "rot" itself was.
>
> The obvious question is: if Mace had wanted to convey the sense of
decomposing, moldering, festering gut strings unequivocally, was there
a better word than "rotten"? The obvious answer is: I don't know.
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at
> [9]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>
>
>
>
--
References
1. mailto:agno3ph...@yahoo.com
2. mailto:howardpos...@ca.rr.com
3. mailto:howardpos...@ca.rr.com
4. mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
5. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
6. mailto:howardpos...@ca.rr.com
7. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
8. mailto:jaroslawlip...@wp.pl
9. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
