I disagree Matthew,
   Bear in mind that thin gut strings stretch and thus thin significantly
   when up to tension. So your 0.40 would be closer to 0.37 when up to
   pitch. I was basing tension calculations (as they ought to be for
   accuracy) on stretched/thinned strings: thus the 0.34mm string would be
   around 0.37 unstretched..........  not a million miles from your 0.40mm
   unstretched!  Perhaps a matter of taste.
   For example, I employ an unstretched 0.40mm diamter plain gut on my G
   lute (@A415) with string length of 64cm (which is roughly equivalent to
   your ).40 unthinned at 60cm @A440) - but this follows the early advice
   to use bigger strings on bigger lutes which ensures a similar feel
   rather than he same tension.  I prefer 0.37mm on a small lute of 60cm.
   rgds
   Martyn
     __________________________________________________________________

   From: Matthew Daillie <dail...@club-internet.fr>
   To: "lute@cs.dartmouth.edu" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
   Sent: Tuesday, 12 December 2017, 11:55
   Subject: [LUTE] Re: A stringing question for Sellas E. 545
   There are two issues: the length and the diameter. It is not easy to
   find thin gauge gut strings long enough for a 130 cm diapason. A string
   of 0.34 is incredibly thin. I don't even know if they are available and
   if they are, they certainly wouldn't last long. I very much doubt that
   historical string makers were able to produce gut strings for lutes of
   such a small diameter. A gut string of 0.40 would be more appropriate
   for the top course of a renaissance lute in G at 60 cm.
   Best,
   Matthew
   On 12/12/2017 12:25, Martyn Hodgson wrote:
   > Dear Magnus,
   >    I really don't see what the problem is: for a theorbo with doubled
   >    octave strung basses, if your highest pitched open 7th course bass
   >    octave is g (assuming a theorbo in nominal A), then for, say, a
   tension
   >    around 3.2KG (obviously less than if single strung) the diameter
   of a
   >    plain gut string of length 130cm is about 0.34mm.
   >    This size is readily available in gut and is, indeed, the sort of
   >    diameter required for the first course of a common renaissance
   lute (at
   >    nominal G). In short, the gut size available then, as now, for
   lute
   >    first course would have been equally available for the 7th course
   >    octave of the first bass of a short second necked theorbo.
   >    However, as Martin Shepherd points out, the present day state of
   this
   >    instrument may not be as it first left the maker's workshop.....
   >    Longer basses may have been present originally.
   To get on or off this list see list information at
   [1]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   --

References

   1. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

Reply via email to