Let's think the other way around. What data would you have that
contradicts the size and double stringing of the surviving instruments?
Is an engraving by Castaldi more important than the surviving
instruments and all the iconography? What justifies the theorbo's
double reentrant tunning if not because of its size? A What's the role
of the theorbo as a continuo instrument? Should it be powerful? I think
so, then it should be big enough (nowadays just a good amp is needed -
tube like to be more historical).A
What kind of sources besides iconography and surviving instruments?
Well, there might be some text sources. But essentially that's pretty
much what we have and will ever have.A
No, I think there is a statistical fallacie here: surviving
instruments
can not be used to estimate the original theorbo population. To do
so
you'd first need to formulate your question(s), then pick a relevant
set
of samples and have them survive (a rather absurd idea). The
survival of
a theorbo might be caused by rather distorting reasons: maybe the
isntrument was especially beatiful, or impressive (if so, you'd
expect
larger instruments to survive) or so useless/bad that it wasn't
played
until totally broken. Or too big to be reworked into a baroque
lute/gallichon/mandora.
A Cheers, RalfD
A If that's not enough let's demolish all our ideas of lute practice
and construction. Who can be sure 100% of anything?
Regards.
--
Bruno Figueiredo
A
Pesquisador autA'nomo da prA!tica e interpretaAS:A-L-o
historicamente informada no alaA-ode e teorba.
Doutor em PrA!ticas InterpretativasA pela
Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro.
--
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
