Looking at the "whole package" let's consider these two situations:
1. My old pal Joe Mays plays with nails.
2. My archlute student has a very fine archlute by A. Holtz with this
set-up:
Single stringing throughout; Nylon, Carbon, and wire overspun basses.
Very thick, single gut frets.
At nearly 67 cm. SL he has it- Nominal "G" instrument- cranked up
to A-440. ("I'm an A-440 kinda guy." he tells me.)
OK, who is less "HIP"? We have had fingernails since, oh, about the
early Triassic era when our primitive, pre-lute plucking ancestors were
using their nails to claw bugs out from under rocks and presumably not
bothering each other over the appropriateness of such usage.
We all know about the provenance of the other stuff in #2.
I think I would rather hear Joe play that archlute- nails, teeth,
mustache, and all- IF it was set up with:
Double gut courses 1 or 2 - 7 and gut diapasons,
Doubled frets, and of sizes more typically used back in the day; e.g,
Dowland's sizing as he gives it in the "Varietie"
Pitched no higher than a gut chanterelle will stand it for at least a
week (if played no nails- another YMMV factor, of course!) I think about
F, or A=392 for nominal "G" instrument. You can select whichever Italian
city you want between Venice and Palermo from 1590 to 1740 to decide
what nominal pitch you want to call it.
-Than to keep enduring the sound of this instrument as it's currently
set up. But, my student knows it's not optimal and is willing to address
the issues, one by one.
And of course, as mentioned, we are all different- some can't sound good
on any instrument- even modern classical guitars- with nails, and other
conscientious, well trained players get beautiful sound on guitars as
well as lute family/old & double-strung instruments with nails. I've
also heard no-nails players whose tone quality on the lute was worse
nails on a blackboard. I'm one of the perhaps more normal/boring ones
who has chosen the no-nail compromise route for best all-around sound on
most of my instruments.
"On my 19th century Lacote guitar copy, no-nails sounds perfect and full."
Sterling, I would trade my modern classical guitar for yours in a heartbeat if you were crazy
enough to do so. David van Ooijen has really fine sounding one also. I just bought what I
could afford, and it actually is pretty good for what it is & costs. For maximizing
nonails response I will be experimenting with carbon fiber/KF and maybe NewNylgut stringing.
Maybe also a very light tension set, but tuned up to F or let's say "E" at old
Venetian pitch of A-465.
Dan
On 12/10/2013 12:10 PM, sterling price wrote:
Perhaps one reason nails are used on modern classical guitars is the
very thick soundboard and high tension strings. On my 19th century
Lacote guitar copy, no-nails sounds perfect and full.
The sound of nails on plastic strings is sometimes grating to me. On
the other hand, for me growing nails is less trouble than playing
without as it takes more upkeep to keep them short enough...
Sterling
On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 12:42 PM, "guitarandl...@earthlink.net"
<guitarandl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
I like nails, the sound of nails. I like nylon strings.
Who knows what they would have used if they had modern strings, 600
sandpaper, and diamond files, not to mention super glue.
I always think the point is to make pleasing music and have fun.
It doesn't matter to me how anyone plays. Do what makes you happy and
have fun.
Allan
-----Original Message-----
>From: "Mayes, Joseph" <[1]ma...@rowan.edu>
>Sent: Dec 10, 2013 11:23 AM
>To: Bruno Correia <[2]bruno.l...@gmail.com>, List LUTELIST
<[3]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
>Subject: [LUTE] Re: Bream Collection... I just noticed
>
>I play the lute, archlute and vihuela with nails for the same reason
that I
>play the classical guitar with nails: because it sounds better!
>Of course, by that I mean it sounds better to me. Nails give the
attack a
>precision that flesh does not. It also comes closer, IMHO to the sound
>usually described in historical sources as desirable on lute -
silvery,
>tinkling, etc.
>Many sources tell us not to use nails - which they wouldn't have
bothered to
>do if people were not doing it that way.
>I don't play with flesh, I don't ride my horse to the gig, and I don't
>attend any bear-bating.
>
>
>My $.02
>
>Joseph mayes
>
>
>On 12/10/13 11:05 AM, "Bruno Correia" <[4]bruno.l...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Here we go again with the nails issue. There are many sources
>> describing the use of flesh as the best way to sound upon the
lute,
>> however, the use of nails was certainly a possibility. But only
because
>> three cats used it doesn't mean it was the general taste of those
>> times. Just because Jimi Hendrix played with his teeth doesn't
>> mean that everyone does it today. I could only justify the nails
if I
>> still played the classical guitar, otherwise what benefit would
it
>> bring?
>> 2013/12/10 Martin Shepherd <[1][5]mar...@luteshop.co.uk>
>>
>> Well, there's Piccinini, who recommends playing with nails, and
>> Mace, who says that some people do it and think it's the best
way,
>> but he says it might be OK in an ensemble but doesn't like it
for
>> solo playing. There may be others - Weiss? Vihuela
references? I'm
>> sure others can help.
>> Martin
>>
>> --
>>
>> References
>>
>> 1. mailto:[6]mar...@luteshop.co.uk
>>
>>
>> To get on or off this list see list information at
>> [7]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>
>
>
>
--
References
1. mailto:ma...@rowan.edu
2. mailto:bruno.l...@gmail.com
3. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
4. mailto:bruno.l...@gmail.com
5. mailto:mar...@luteshop.co.uk
6. mailto:mar...@luteshop.co.uk
7. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
