Indeed Chris: Mace reports the usual common practice but , as you say,
he employs a single loop. This was also discussed earlier (when this
subject was previously aired some years ago). In particular, I find the
double fret beds in so that one loop takes the wear and the other
provides the clean break. If Mace's experience was so beneficial, I
wonder why the vast majority of historic iconography shows double
loops?...
MH
__________________________________________________________________
From: Christopher Wilke <[email protected]>
To: Christopher Wilke <[email protected]>; Martyn Hodgson
<[email protected]>; Matthew Daillie
<[email protected]>; "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, 9 March 2018, 14:07
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Loose frets
And of course, my experience was also born out by Mace in 1676 who
gives instructions for double frets, but actually recommends using a
single fret, because,
"...it is not only sooner done, and with a shorter string; but
chiefly,
it does (assuredly) cause a clearer sound from the string stopt;
which
must needs be granted, if it be considered, that the string lying
upon
this only round single fret, cannot but speak clear, when as (on the
contrary) it lying upon two, (as in the double fret it does) it
cannot
be thought to speak so clear, because, that although it lie hard and
close, upon the uppermost of the two, next the finger, yet it cannot
lie so close and hard, upon the undermost; so that it must needs fuzz
a
little..."
Chris
[1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
On Friday, March 9, 2018, 8:52 AM, Christopher Wilke
<[1][email protected]> wrote:
Martyn,
I've actually had the opposite experience with the durability of
double
frets. Their practical lifespan isn't as long as single frets
precisely
because the side closest to the bridge takes the wear, leaving an
uneven relation to the bridge side. This means they start buzzing
very
soon after being put on. (I used double frets on one of my albums.
The
track running order differed from the order in which they were
recorded, but you can tell in exactly what sequence the pieces were
done by the sound of the frets. By the end of the session, the
fingered
bass notes started growling like a fretless bass. And that was only
over a few days of heavy playing!) Single frets, by comparison, can
theoretically last until the "bridge side" is the fret above it.
Another obvious disadvantage to double frets - they of course take
up
twice the fret gut. I'm not so deep in the pockets that I can
afford
to
fret twice the number of instruments I actually own!
I suspect double frets may have made more sense with historical
gut,
which was obviously more pliable and probably softer and more
elastic
than what we have available today.
Chris
[1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
On Friday, March 9, 2018, 7:10 AM, Martyn Hodgson
<[2][2][email protected]> wrote:
I'm pleased to hear it. Another advantage of double frets is
that,
being twice the length, the their elastic deformation and
recovery
is
physically superior to a single: in short, you can move them
around
more (if you're that way inclined) without them becoming as loose
as
a
single loop would.
A yet further advantage is that the loop closer to the nut takes
most
of the wear leaving the fret loop closer to the bridge with a
cleaner
take-off for a longer period than a wholly single loop.
rgds
MH
__________________________________________________________________
From: Matthew Daillie <[2][3][3][email protected]>
To: "[3][4][4][email protected]"
<[4][5][5][email protected]>
Sent: Friday, 9 March 2018, 11:33
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Loose frets
I've never had issues with single knots.
Best,
Matthew
On 09/03/2018 11:39, Martyn Hodgson wrote:
> Indeed. And it also depends whether single fret loops are
employed
> (something of a modern fad) rather than the better, and
easier
to
tie
> firmly, historical double fret loops
To get on or off this list see list information at
[1][5][6][6]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1.
[6][7][7]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. [8][8]https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/?.src=iOS
2. mailto:[9][9][email protected]
3. mailto:[10][10][email protected]
4. mailto:[11][11][email protected]
5. [12][12]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
6. [13][13]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. [14]https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/?.src=iOS
2. mailto:[15][email protected]
3. mailto:[16][email protected]
4. mailto:[17][email protected]
5. mailto:[18][email protected]
6. [19]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
7. [20]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
8. [21]https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/?.src=iOS
9. mailto:[22][email protected]
10. mailto:[23][email protected]
11. mailto:[24][email protected]
12. [25]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
13. [26]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. mailto:[email protected]
2. mailto:[email protected]
3. mailto:[email protected]
4. mailto:[email protected]
5. mailto:[email protected]
6. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
7. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
8. https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/?.src=iOS
9. mailto:[email protected]
10. mailto:[email protected]
11. mailto:[email protected]
12. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
13. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
14. https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/?.src=iOS
15. mailto:[email protected]
16. mailto:[email protected]
17. mailto:[email protected]
18. mailto:[email protected]
19. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
20. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
21. https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/?.src=iOS
22. mailto:[email protected]
23. mailto:[email protected]
24. mailto:[email protected]
25. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
26. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
