On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 22:25:45 +0100, Monica Hall wrote > Well - I read it years ago and just re-read it! I have never tried > it out. This is what he says... > > "It is a small piece of wood running > alongside the bridge and placed under the strings which was used by > vihuelistas as a subsidiary bridge. It must have been set very > near the permanent bridge otherwise its pressure would have damaged > the face of the instrument,
It's hard to imagine that the (rather small) downward pressure wold cause damage to the top. > and it must have raised the strings very > slightly above their natural height, for the combination of both > these factors - the elevation and shortening of the strings made a > difference of only a tone." You need a rather substantial distance from the bridge to raise by semitone - pretty much the same size as the first fret ;-) Raising the pitch by raising the strings doesn't really work: it will totally destroy intonation and playability. And let's not forget: the first string is supposed to be close to the breaking point, so the tension can't really be raised (that's what raising the strings would do). > He makes the point that they did it in this way because the vihuela > had only 10 frets and a capo on the fingerboard would have reduced > this to 9. and lutes only had 7 or 8 frets ... > He likens it to an adjustable saddle on a modern guitar > but as I don't play the modern gutiar I can't comment on that! Adjustable bridges serve a differnt purpose - they correct the difference in string diameter and flexibility. > As I said I have never heard anyone elses' opinion but I assume Cook > tried it out. The frets are adjustable I suppose..... Take your baroque guitar and move the frets toward the saddle, for something like 1-2 cms ... ;-) It won't work and I don't think he ever tried this on a real reconstruction. Cheers, RalfD > Monica > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gary R. Boye" <[email protected]> > To: "Monica Hall" <[email protected]> > Cc: "Dan Winheld" <[email protected]>; "Lutelist" <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 9:13 PM > Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Capo use on early instruments > > > Monica: > > > > Interesting; but wouldn't that throw off the fretting (i.e., the frets > > would be placed for the wrong overall length of the string)? It would > > sound awful up the neck, unless you began moving all of the frets around . > > . . > > > > Gary > > > > Dr. Gary R. Boye > > Professor and Music Librarian > > Appalachian State University > > > > On 9/25/2013 3:54 PM, Monica Hall wrote: > >> Yes - now I recall that someone called Frederick Cook wrote quite a few > >> articles about the vihuela in the 1970s including one "The capo tasto of > >> the vihuela". His suggestion was that the "panezuela" was some kind of > >> wooden device. He says the word is derived from the verb "panear" which > >> means "to run along side". But he thinks it was placed alongside the > >> bridge rather than the nut and has even included a drawing of how he > >> thinks it worked. "Pontezuela" is more likely to refer to the bridge > >> than the nut. > >> > >> The article was in the periodical "Guitar and Lute", no. 8, Jamuary 1979. > >> I have never discovered what other people thought of his suggestion. > >> > >> Monica > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Winheld" <[email protected]> > >> To: "Lutelist" <[email protected]> > >> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 8:34 PM > >> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Capo use on early instruments > >> > >> > >>> Monica, Stephen, et al- > >>> > >>> I also remember the English (tenative?) translation of the Bermudo > >>> "panezuelo"- seems like it would have to be some sort of > >>> movable/removable nut, stopping the strings from below as opposed to > >>> our modern capos; which presumably would not have worked too well > >>> without being subjected to very fussy construction details, when you > >>> consider the difficulty of such a device- it would have to stop the > >>> thickest gut basses along with their octave strings with equal firmness. > >>> > >>> And then, with multi course lutes & cambered fingerboards it would > >>> become truly not worth the effort. And, inasmuch as pitch was so > >>> fluid, unstandard, and musicians- esp. the more highly > >>> trained/educated- could no doubt transpose more skillfully than most > >>> of us can these days, the capo might not even have been a passing > >>> thought. > >>> > >>> This panazuelo as a nut business seems more likely (if I'm not > >>> completely off the wall here) in view of the general opinion that open > >>> string sound was the more highly esteemed instrument sound, vs. > >>> fingered notes- indeed, one of the vihuelists considered it "the best > >>> you can get" from the instrument, almost seeming to regard frets and > >>> fingered notes as a necessary evil. Certainly any capo device would be > >>> regarded as something that would "choke" the very essence of > >>> lute/vihuela sound. Polar opposite to Jazz electric guitarists, who > >>> seemed to me to avoid open strings as much as possible. > >>> > >>> Dan > >>> > >>> On 9/25/2013 11:56 AM, Monica Hall wrote: > >>>> There is a passage in Bermudo which seems to refer to the use of some > >>>> sort of device to raise the strings of the vihuela a semitone or a > >>>> tone. It is in Book 2, Chapter 36 f.30. It is referred to as a > >>>> "panezuelo" which literally seems to mean a handkerchief but there is > >>>> some doubt as to whether this is really what it means. He says that > >>>> experienced players place this under the strings close to the nut > >>>> (pontezuela) and this rasies the pitch of the strings. > >>>> > >>>> Maybe someone more of an expert on Bermudo can elucidate. > >>>> > >>>> Monica > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> To get on or off this list see list information at > >>> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > >> > >> -- R. Mattes - Hochschule fuer Musik Freiburg [email protected]
