Hi Paul, I'll be honest, a scale of 65cm would be much more suited for a pitch of F at AD0 - I think you'll find with a lute that is a little larger, like this one, will sound so much better at that pitch. The whole instrument will resonate better if you string it at the pitch it was designed for, as I highly doubt the original instrument was ever tuned to the equivalent of G at AD0, more likely the instrument was at F at modern pitch.
James On 1 January 2013 20:02, Paul Daverman <[1][email protected]> wrote: I am building a 10 cs. lute per Robert Lundberg's plans (10-cs Renaissance Lute, Dieffopruchar 1612). I am to the point where I have begun looking at strings so that I have an idea of diameters, etc. As this is my first lute build, I am looking at Nylgut and am looking to tune to AD0. One of the suppliers to which I have inquired has said that in A440 tuning, they have no strings at 65cm length that can take the tension for the chanderelle (and that no gut could either.) He said that the instrument was probably meant for A92 and while he could supply strings in either tuning, I'd have to look elsewhere for a string for the chanderelle if I chose A440. I am wondering if any of you can talk to this topic. Would I be over stressing the lute if I tune to the modern tuning of A440? Would A392 have been the intended tuning or maybe A415? What other repercussions of tuning one way vs. another should I know about? My music theory is a bit poor - is the difference between going from A440 tuning to A392 really any different that transposing down a (??) major second? Any word to help get all this straight in my mind would be appreciated. While I understand that "pitch" is all relative, I'm having a difficult time getting my arms around the practical understanding of what I should do for stringing. Thanks. Paul -- To get on or off this list see list information at [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. mailto:[email protected] 2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
