No, it doesn't - that's part of the myth. This has interesting implications for our usual thinking about string tensions in general - I think we are still using tensions somewhat higher than our 16th/17th century forebears, and it doesn't always lead to a better result: When it comes to music of c.1600 and later, one obvious reason is that we tend to play over the rose rather than close to the bridge, and therefore require much higher tensions to get a suitable "feel" to the strings. Another factor (which leads to a further error in the same direction) is our use of overspun strings, which are so flexible that they require higher tensions in order to give a "feel" which we can cope with. The worst case of this is using overspun strings on lutes with extended basses (theorboes, archlutes, swan-neck lutes) where the problems of using an overspun string become really acute. The old guys had none of these problems, of course. M
On 17/05/2015 16:43, Ed Durbrow wrote: On May 12, 2015, at 7:24 PM, Martin Shepherd <[1][email protected]> wrote: the key to which, by the way, is to use relatively high tension for the octave string (about the same as the lower octave) rather than the lower tension which remains common in modern times. Why is this? Doesn't higher tension result in a louder tone? Ed Durbrow Saitama, Japan [2]http://www.youtube.com/user/edurbrow?feature=watch [3]https://soundcloud.com/ed-durbrow [4]http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/ __________________________________________________________________ [5]Avast logo This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. [6]www.avast.com -- References 1. mailto:[email protected] 2. http://www.youtube.com/user/edurbrow?feature=watch 3. https://soundcloud.com/ed-durbrow 4. http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/ 5. http://www.avast.com/ 6. http://www.avast.com/ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
