[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Martin Shepherd]

Hi Ed,

I was only talking about KF strings.  I imagine it would be impossible 
with any kind of gut string, and of course there is no evidence for it 
in paintings.


I guess (and it is only a guess) that the original gut strings would 
have been quite flexible (and thin) and there would be no particular 
problem tying them to the bridge.  And as Mimmo says, if the strings 
were that thick, why didn't they just make the holes bigger?


Martin

On 15/02/2017 21:32, Ed Durbrow wrote:

Has anyone done a survey of paintings and noticed any indications of thinning 
the strings at the bridge or nut?


   Thinning the string probably does weaken it, but since the strings in
   question are way below their breaking strain that would never be a
   problem.


Ed Durbrow
Saitama, Japan
http://www.youtube.com/user/edurbrow?feature=watch
https://soundcloud.com/ed-durbrow
http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/








--

To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Ed Durbrow]

Has anyone done a survey of paintings and noticed any indications of thinning 
the strings at the bridge or nut? 

>   Thinning the string probably does weaken it, but since the strings in
>   question are way below their breaking strain that would never be a
>   problem. 


Ed Durbrow
Saitama, Japan
http://www.youtube.com/user/edurbrow?feature=watch
https://soundcloud.com/ed-durbrow
http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/








--

To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing (corrected)

[Mimmo Peruffo]

   Hello to anyone
   I have made this video showing the last version of ther CD basses.

   [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKrNCEOfPVM

   there is  a brief text in the video explaining the difference than the
   first CD's types.
   In the video I am a bit tired after this very stresses job.
   Do not worry for that
   Mimmo



   --

References

   1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKrNCEOfPVM


To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing (corrected)

[Anthony Hind]

rter sustain, are more percussive and â¦slightly duller sound
   IMO. KFs work well till 11th course on BQL. I don't like them on
   diapasons. CDs have stronger fundamental, longer sustain (much longer
   than guts) and work very well on diapasons, however their elasticity
   make them work only on instruments with higher than normal action and
   wide string spacing. Also tuning is not ideal.
   > >>
   > >>> Heck, guys, what to do? first or second option?
   > >>> At present the second option is the winner!
   > >> Now, the question is what is your goal in making CD strings. If
   you aim at finding a substitute for gut strings than stiffer strings
   would be better. I am used to gut basses so I like short sustain and a
   little bit stiffer string. If someone played only overwounds he/she
   would probably prefer longer sustain. So the answer to your question
   will depend on whom you'll ask.
   > >> All in all there is no one answer to this question, and probably
   you would have to take into consideration your business strategy.
   > >> Best
   > >> Ciao
   > >>
   > >> Jaroslaw
   > >>
   > >>
   > >>
   > >>
   > >>> ciao to all
   > >>> Mimmo
   > >>>
   > >>> -Messaggio originale- From: Martin Shepherd
   > >>> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 10:22 AM
   > >>> To: Mimmo Peruffo ; Matthew Daillie
   > >>> Cc: Arto Wikla ;  <>[6]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   <mailto:[7]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
   > >>> Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
   > >>>
   > >>> Thanks, Mimmo.
   > >>>
   > >>> I agree absolutely that there is no need to make versions of
   these
   > >>> strings thinner than .80mm.
   > >>>
   > >>> The issue of damping is perhaps the one which worries me most.
   In the
   > >>> case of roped strings, they sound duller than a plain gut string
   of the
   > >>> same size, presumably because of internal friction between the
   strands
   > >>> of the rope.  In the case of rubber strings (sorry!) what worries
   me is
   > >>> that some damping/absorption of energy is happening as the string
   > >>> stretches and contracts with each vibration.  The KF fluorocarbon
   > >>> strings, being solid and stiff, have neither of these damping
   effects.
   > >>> I can imagine that a string which was "floppy" but not especially
   > >>> elastic would work well.
   > >>>
   > >>> I hope that a lower rubber content would allow the strings to
   slide
   > >>> better over the nut, which would also be a welcome
   characteristic.
   > >>>
   > >>> Best to all,
   > >>>
   > >>> Martin
   > >>>
   > >>> On 03/02/2017 10:09, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:
   > >>>> Thank you very much about all these helpfull suggestions, guys.
   > >>>>
   > >>>> actually the gauges from 80 CD till 105CD are made half loaded
   using also a stiffer elastomer.  This combination is perfect fo the
   tonl trasiction betweenj pure gut/nylon/Nylgut to a wound strings, KF
   or CDs etc etc.
   > >>>> I call this range of gauges simply as Meanes. they are still CD
   types however.
   > >>>> In practice they  are around the 5th course of renaissance & d
   minor Lutes.
   > >>>> I have intentionally exluded the  4th courses because make not
   sense at all to use a denser strings on it. The  80 CD is just done for
   those that are curious.
   > >>>>
   > >>>> well, I done the very first prototypes (than cannot be perfect)
   and sent out to some friends to hear their opinions: of course, some of
   them were uneven. Despite that I had very good reports.
   > >>>> Some installed them also like octaves (!): I never realized that
   additional option. However,  I do not raccomend. Octaves normally can
   works at higher working index than a 5 th course;  so they can breack.
   > >>>>
   > >>>> said that, I agree with you Matthew. thanks
   > >>>>
   > >>>> Martin, a stiffer string has an higher elasticity modulus so the
   performances are  less good than those of an equivalent string with
   more elasticity. You probably reffers to the KF strings. However there
   are others parameters at work here, for example the inner damping
   effect is one of them, and it  is not related to the elasticity
   modulus. This explain for example why a special kind of nylon, whose
   density is far le

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Rob MacKillop]

   Not the best audio, but they do seem more gut-like to me.
   Rob

   On 7 February 2017 at 20:28, Mimmo Peruffo
   <[1]mperu...@aquilacorde.com> wrote:

 Here is:
 the not red bass string that is the 11 course   is those made with
 more stiffer elastomer. the turns on the peg where just half. th
 sound has less sustain and it is powerfull and darker. I am very
 happy with it. The 5 course: the string of that course I am playing
 is made with a stiffer elastomer and have the same quantity of
 copper. I like it a lot: less metallic and indeed less stretchly,
 far more blanced.
 [2]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4s4CkDP580=em-uploa
 d_owner
 well i stop here. I have flu now (thanks London!) it is a pity, I
 would like to start to do the batch soon.
 Mimmo
 To get on or off this list see list information at
 [3]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   --

References

   1. mailto:mperu...@aquilacorde.com
   2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4s4CkDP580=em-upload_owner
   3. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Mimmo Peruffo]

Here is:

the not red bass string that is the 11 course  is those made with more 
stiffer elastomer. the turns on the peg where just half. th sound has less 
sustain and it is powerfull and darker. I am very happy with it. The 5 
course: the string of that course I am playing is made with a stiffer 
elastomer and have the same quantity of copper. I like it a lot: less 
metallic and indeed less stretchly, far more blanced.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4s4CkDP580=em-upload_owner

well i stop here. I have flu now (thanks London!) it is a pity, I would like 
to start to do the batch soon.

Mimmo



To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Rob MacKillop]

   That sounds encouraging!
   Rob

   On 7 Feb 2017 14:27, "Mimmo Peruffo" <[1]mperu...@aquilacorde.com>
   wrote:

 well guys, I think to have good news.
 I am doing, right now, the first few strings using a stiffer
 elasthomer and the same quantity of copper powder. I must admit that
 the process is even easy than before.
 The strings are absolutely no false and pretty even.
 The sound: darker and with less sustain, similar to those of the
 2nd generation of the loaded gut strings (venices charged with
 copper powder).
 They stretch less and they are even   more slippering on the nut-
 grooves.
 I am doing the Meanes now. I have a bit of difficoults but I am not
 worry at all. I will find the way soon.
 This is just a short report.
 I will do a short video for my own Youtube channel.
 ciao
 Mimmo
 To get on or off this list see list information at
 [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   --

References

   1. mailto:mperu...@aquilacorde.com
   2. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Mimmo Peruffo]

well guys, I think to have good news.
I am doing, right now, the first few strings using a stiffer elasthomer and 
the same quantity of copper powder. I must admit that the process is even 
easy than before.


The strings are absolutely no false and pretty even.

The sound: darker and with less sustain, similar to those of the  2nd 
generation of the loaded gut strings (venices charged with copper powder).


They stretch less and they are even  more slippering on the nut- grooves.
I am doing the Meanes now. I have a bit of difficoults but I am not worry at 
all. I will find the way soon.

This is just a short report.
I will do a short video for my own Youtube channel.
ciao
Mimmo 




To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Baroque Lute Stringing

[Anthony Hind]

   I don't think I disagree Martyn, you say "Martin's practice of thinning
   at the bridge is probably  to allow the string there to vibrate around
   a clean take off point thus minimising frequency absorption (ie
   damping)", I have used the expression "lowering impedance", ie
   minimising resistance to vibration, or as you prefer, "minimising
   damping" (I was only referring to this marginal effect of whittling
   down) and not suggesting the characteristics of the string as whole are
   not more important.

   I was actually thinking that whittling down a KF string had a similar
   effect to passing only one element of a twine through the bridge hole,
   as Charles Besnainou does with his air core "polyethylene" (or similar)
   twine strings. Of course it is the air core structure that makes that
   string exceptionally low impedance, the passing of only one element of
   the twine through the bridge just further lowers the impedance.
   Similarly the use of a relatively high density KF string should reduce
   impedance compared to a lower density HT gut diapason, the whittling
   down further lowers resistance (or damping) I would not contest that.

   Always a pleasure to discuss these string issues with you,

   Best wishes

   Anthony

   [1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

   Le samedi, février 4, 2017, 10:05 AM, Martyn Hodgson
   <hodgsonmar...@cs.dartmouth.edu> a écrit :

 Thinning of a string will, of course, affect its flexibility where
   the
 thinning occurs but the state of the remainder of the string (ie the
 vast majority of it) remains unchanged and it is this which
   principally
 produces the sound and thus the quality. As remarked earlier,
   thinning
 at the bridge does have a benefit of reducing loss at this point by
 making a more focused take off point rather than one where the string
 can move significantly in the shallower groove produced by a thicker
 string.
 Thus, as we might expect and, indeed, experience the material
 make-up of the totality of the string is what largely produces the
 sound we hear - hence, for example, why loaded gut produces a more
 satisfactory bass than plain gut.
 regards
 Martyn
   __
 From: Anthony Hind <[2]agno3ph...@cs.dartmouth.edu>
 To: Martyn Hodgson <[3]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk>; Martin Shepherd
 <[4]mar...@luteshop.co.uk>; "[5]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu"
 <[6]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
 Sent: Friday, 3 February 2017, 20:45
 Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE]
   Baroque
 Lute Stringing
   Apologies for allowing the incomplete message to shoot forth
   Dear Martyn
 I tend to see methods for reducing the inharmonicity of a
 string
   as simply ways of lowering its impedance to bending while
   maintaining
   its weight: either a) by increasing its elasticity or b) by
   improving
   its flexibility (bendability) through keeping it as thin as
   possible
   for the same weight (particularly near the fixed points from which
   it
   moves). I see loading and thinning at the bridge as similar
   processes
   of type b; while i agree there are many other factors which also
 effect
   the way a string resonates.
   Of course these are merely layman's  weak metaphors for which I
   also
   apologise.
   Best wishes
   Anthony
   [1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
   Le vendredi, fà ©vrier 3, 2017, 4:52 PM, Martyn Hodgson
   <[1][7]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk> a à ©crit :
   Dear Anthony,
   I may well have misunderstood the point you make
   'and the extra diameter beyond the bridge behaving similarly  to
   loading, but as though the loading were more of the same material'
   - surely the physical characteristics of a string largely determine
 the
   sound - else why bother?
   Martin's practice of thinning at the bridge is probably  to allow
   the
   string there to vibrate around a clean take off point thus
   minimising
   frequency absorption (ie damping) and, as Martin said, to avoid
   the
   thickish string buzzing against the bridge.  This is not, of
   course,
 to
   say that the rest of the physical characteristics of the string are
   immaterial! The characteristics of the string and hence sound are
   determined by the totality of the vibrating length and thus the
   material, its dimensions its elasticity, stiffness, etc. Otherwise
 one
   might as well make a string out of anything and it would sound the
 same
   if the bridge thinning were identical ..
   regards
   Martyn

   __
   From: Martin Shepherd <[2]

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Jarosław Lipski]

Hello Anthony,

I am fine, thank you. I haven’t heard from you for a while, but it’s nice 
to see you on our lute list again :)
Actually I meant KF strings. String ends have to be split (whittled if you 
like), otherwise they are so stiff that tying them would be very difficult. 
Also they wouldn’t form a proper knot and initial point of vibration would be 
further away from the bridge. In general this kind of problem is characteristic 
for very stiff strings. Fortunately Venices  due to their rope construction are 
much more pliable, so there is no problem with attaching them at the bridge.

Best wishes

Jaroslaw


> On 04 Feb 2017, at 00:20, Anthony Hind <agno3ph...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello Jaroslaw
> I hope things are going well with you.
> When you say of your Venice, "Yes, mine have split ends at the bridge." Do 
> you mean you have managed to separate the ends of the twine and pass them 
> separately through the bridge hole?
> This is what Charles Besnainou does with his spring twines. This results 
> probably in a lower impedance in the same way as Martin's whittled down KFs, 
> I would suppose?
> Best wishes 
> Anthony 
> 
> 
> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone <https://yho.com/footer0>
> 
> Le vendredi, février 3, 2017, 4:45 PM, Jarosław Lipski 
> <jaroslawlip...@wp.pl <mailto:jaroslawlip...@wp.pl>> a écrit :
> 
> Martin,
> 
> > When I said roped strings were dull compared to plain gut I was talking 
> > only about relatively thin strings, say .80-.90mm.
> 
> I tried both thicker and thinner Aquilla Venice ropes and even on 4th course 
> they sound brighter than plain gut IMHO. But, this discussion only shows how 
> relative our sound perception is.
> > 
> > For the KF strings, the high tensions which many people want to use will 
> > not work because the thicker KF strings are really too thick and stiff to 
> > work.  On the 11th course of an 11c lute I would use nothing larger than 
> > 1.50mm (actual diameter).  I'm using .95 for the 6th course.
> > 
> 
> I am using 1.60 on 11th course and it works fine for me. But again it’s a 
> matter of taste. 
> 
> > Another factor with KF strings is the importance of thinning them where 
> > they go through the bridge and wrap over themselves in front of the bridge. 
> >  If you don't do this, the sound will be dull and you will probably get 
> > problems with the strings buzzing against the top of the bridge.
> > 
> 
> Yes, mine have split ends at the bridge.
> 
> Best
> 
> Jaroslaw
> 
> 
> > Martin
> > 
> > On 03/02/2017 11:39, Jarosław Lipski wrote:
> >> Mimmo,
> >> 
> >>> You experience is that a roped string is duller than a plain gut? I have 
> >>> the contrary. Maybe  it is necessary to know how the roped string was 
> >>> done. Mine is a roped string made with two fresh 'brins' twisted like as 
> >>> rope and then polished. In practice our Venices.
> >> Yes, I use your Venice roped strings and can confirm this. They are 
> >> brighter than plain gut
> >> 
> >>> I would like to buy some KF strings just to do a comparation:
> >> I have both KFs and your CDs and compared them side to side. KFs have 
> >> shorter sustain, are more percussive and …slightly duller sound IMO. KFs 
> >> work well till 11th course on BQL. I don’t like them on diapasons. CDs 
> >> have stronger fundamental, longer sustain (much longer than guts) and work 
> >> very well on diapasons, however their elasticity make them work only on 
> >> instruments with higher than normal action and wide string spacing. Also 
> >> tuning is not ideal.
> >> 
> >>> Heck, guys, what to do? first or second option?
> >>> At present the second option is the winner!
> >> Now, the question is what is your goal in making CD strings. If you aim at 
> >> finding a substitute for gut strings than stiffer strings would be better. 
> >> I am used to gut basses so I like short sustain and a little bit stiffer 
> >> string. If someone played only overwounds he/she would probably prefer 
> >> longer sustain. So the answer to your question will depend on whom 
> >> you’ll ask.
> >> All in all there is no one answer to this question, and probably you would 
> >> have to take into consideration your business strategy.
> >> Best
> >> Ciao
> >> 
> >> Jaroslaw
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >>> ciao to all
> >>> Mimmo
> >>> 
> >>> -Messaggio originale- From

[BAROQUE-LUTE] [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Baroque Lute Stringing

[Martyn Hodgson]

   Thinning of a string will, of course, affect its flexibility where the
   thinning occurs but the state of the remainder of the string (ie the
   vast majority of it) remains unchanged and it is this which principally
   produces the sound and thus the quality. As remarked earlier, thinning
   at the bridge does have a benefit of reducing loss at this point by
   making a more focused take off point rather than one where the string
   can move significantly in the shallower groove produced by a thicker
   string.
   Thus, as we might expect and, indeed, experience the material and
   make-up of the totality of the string is what largely produces the
   sound we hear - hence, for example, why loaded gut produces a more
   satisfactory bass than plain gut.
   regards
   Martyn
 __

   From: Anthony Hind <agno3ph...@cs.dartmouth.edu>
   To: Martyn Hodgson <hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk>; Martin Shepherd
   <mar...@luteshop.co.uk>; "baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu"
   <baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
   Sent: Friday, 3 February 2017, 20:45
   Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Baroque
   Lute Stringing
 Apologies for allowing the incomplete message to shoot forth
 Dear Martyn
   I tend to see methods for reducing the inharmonicity of a
   string
 as simply ways of lowering its impedance to bending while maintaining
 its weight: either a) by increasing its elasticity or b) by improving
 its flexibility (bendability) through keeping it as thin as possible
 for the same weight (particularly near the fixed points from which it
 moves). I see loading and thinning at the bridge as similar processes
 of type b; while i agree there are many other factors which also
   effect
 the way a string resonates.
 Of course these are merely layman's  weak metaphors for which I also
 apologise.
 Best wishes
 Anthony
 [1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
 Le vendredi, fà ©vrier 3, 2017, 4:52 PM, Martyn Hodgson
 <[1]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk> a à ©crit :
 Dear Anthony,
 I may well have misunderstood the point you make
 'and the extra diameter beyond the bridge behaving similarly  to
 loading, but as though the loading were more of the same material'
 - surely the physical characteristics of a string largely determine
   the
 sound - else why bother?
 Martin's practice of thinning at the bridge is probably  to allow the
 string there to vibrate around a clean take off point thus minimising
 frequency absorption (ie damping) and, as Martin said, to avoid  the
 thickish string buzzing against the bridge.  This is not, of course,
   to
 say that the rest of the physical characteristics of the string are
 immaterial! The characteristics of the string and hence sound are
 determined by the totality of the vibrating length and thus the
 material, its dimensions its elasticity, stiffness, etc. Otherwise
   one
 might as well make a string out of anything and it would sound the
   same
 if the bridge thinning were identical ..
 regards
 Martyn
   __
 From: Martin Shepherd <[2]mar...@luteshop.co.uk>
 To: Anthony Hind <[3]agno3ph...@yahoo.com>; JarosÃaw Lipski
 <[4]jaroslawlip...@wp.pl>; "[5]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu"
 <[6]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
 Sent: Friday, 3 February 2017, 15:35
 Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Baroque Lute Stringing
   Thinning the string probably does weaken it, but since the strings
   in
   question are way below their breaking strain that would never be a
   problem.  I have not tried thinning at the nut, but I suspect if it
   could be done it might improve the sound still further.  There is
   something to be said for thinning them where they go through the
   hole
   in the peg, allowing a smaller hole to be used and also making it
   easier to persuade the string to bend around the peg.
   Martin
   On 03/02/2017 15:45, Anthony Hind wrote:
 By thinning them at the bridge, Martin, I suppose this allows the
 diapason to be "seen" (as it were) at the bridge as a thinish
 loaded
 string. The effective resonating diameter being that passing
 through
 the hole and the extra diameter beyond the bridge behaving
 similarly
 to loading, but as though the loading were more of the same
 material
 (albeit with a brake on the harmonicity where the whole string
 psses
 over the nut)? Does the whittling down weaken the string? Could
   you
 also thin it at the nut?
   Best wishes
   Anthony
 [1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
 Le vendredi, fà ©vrie

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Baroque Lute Stringing

[Anthony Hind]

   Hello Jaroslaw

   I hope things are going well with you.

   When you say of your Venice, "Yes, mine have split ends at the bridge."
   Do you mean you have managed to separate the ends of the twine and pass
   them separately through the bridge hole?

   This is what Charles Besnainou does with his spring twines. This
   results probably in a lower impedance in the same way as Martin's
   whittled down KFs, I would suppose?

   Best wishes

   Anthony
   [1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

   Le vendredi, février 3, 2017, 4:45 PM, JarosÅaw Lipski
   <jaroslawlip...@wp.pl> a écrit :

   Martin,
   > When I said roped strings were dull compared to plain gut I was
   talking only about relatively thin strings, say .80-.90mm.
   I tried both thicker and thinner Aquilla Venice ropes and even on 4th
   course they sound brighter than plain gut IMHO. But, this discussion
   only shows how relative our sound perception is.
   >
   > For the KF strings, the high tensions which many people want to use
   will not work because the thicker KF strings are really too thick and
   stiff to work.  On the 11th course of an 11c lute I would use nothing
   larger than 1.50mm (actual diameter).  I'm using .95 for the 6th
   course.
   >
   I am using 1.60 on 11th course and it works fine for me. But again it's
   a matter of taste.
   > Another factor with KF strings is the importance of thinning them
   where they go through the bridge and wrap over themselves in front of
   the bridge.  If you don't do this, the sound will be dull and you will
   probably get problems with the strings buzzing against the top of the
   bridge.
   >
   Yes, mine have split ends at the bridge.
   Best
   Jaroslaw
   > Martin
   >
   > On 03/02/2017 11:39, JarosÅaw Lipski wrote:
   >> Mimmo,
   >>
   >>> You experience is that a roped string is duller than a plain gut? I
   have the contrary. Maybe  it is necessary to know how the roped string
   was done. Mine is a roped string made with two fresh 'brins' twisted
   like as rope and then polished. In practice our Venices.
   >> Yes, I use your Venice roped strings and can confirm this. They are
   brighter than plain gut
   >>
   >>> I would like to buy some KF strings just to do a comparation:
   >> I have both KFs and your CDs and compared them side to side. KFs
   have shorter sustain, are more percussive and â¦slightly duller sound
   IMO. KFs work well till 11th course on BQL. I don't like them on
   diapasons. CDs have stronger fundamental, longer sustain (much longer
   than guts) and work very well on diapasons, however their elasticity
   make them work only on instruments with higher than normal action and
   wide string spacing. Also tuning is not ideal.
   >>
   >>> Heck, guys, what to do? first or second option?
   >>> At present the second option is the winner!
   >> Now, the question is what is your goal in making CD strings. If you
   aim at finding a substitute for gut strings than stiffer strings would
   be better. I am used to gut basses so I like short sustain and a little
   bit stiffer string. If someone played only overwounds he/she would
   probably prefer longer sustain. So the answer to your question will
   depend on whom you'll ask.
   >> All in all there is no one answer to this question, and probably you
   would have to take into consideration your business strategy.
   >> Best
   >> Ciao
   >>
   >> Jaroslaw
   >>
   >>
   >>
   >>
   >>> ciao to all
   >>> Mimmo
   >>>
   >>> -Messaggio originale- From: Martin Shepherd
   >>> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 10:22 AM
   >>> To: Mimmo Peruffo ; Matthew Daillie
   >>> Cc: Arto Wikla ; [2]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   >>> Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
   >>>
   >>> Thanks, Mimmo.
   >>>
   >>> I agree absolutely that there is no need to make versions of these
   >>> strings thinner than .80mm.
   >>>
   >>> The issue of damping is perhaps the one which worries me most.  In
   the
   >>> case of roped strings, they sound duller than a plain gut string of
   the
   >>> same size, presumably because of internal friction between the
   strands
   >>> of the rope.  In the case of rubber strings (sorry!) what worries
   me is
   >>> that some damping/absorption of energy is happening as the string
   >>> stretches and contracts with each vibration.  The KF fluorocarbon
   >>> strings, being solid and stiff, have neither of these damping
   effects.
   >>> I can imagine that a string which was "floppy" but not especially
   >>> elastic would work well.
   >>>
   >>> 

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Baroque Lute Stringing

[Anthony Hind]

   Apologies for allowing the incomplete message to shoot forth

   Dear Martyn
 I tend to see methods for reducing the inharmonicity of a string
   as simply ways of lowering its impedance to bending while maintaining
   its weight: either a) by increasing its elasticity or b) by improving
   its flexibility (bendability) through keeping it as thin as possible
   for the same weight (particularly near the fixed points from which it
   moves). I see loading and thinning at the bridge as similar processes
   of type b; while i agree there are many other factors which also effect
   the way a string resonates.
   Of course these are merely layman's  weak metaphors for which I also
   apologise.
   Best wishes
   Anthony
   [1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

   Le vendredi, février 3, 2017, 4:52 PM, Martyn Hodgson
   <hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk> a écrit :

   Dear Anthony,
   I may well have misunderstood the point you make
   'and the extra diameter beyond the bridge behaving similarly  to
   loading, but as though the loading were more of the same material'
   - surely the physical characteristics of a string largely determine the
   sound - else why bother?
   Martin's practice of thinning at the bridge is probably  to allow the
   string there to vibrate around a clean take off point thus minimising
   frequency absorption (ie damping) and, as Martin said, to avoid  the
   thickish string buzzing against the bridge.  This is not, of course, to
   say that the rest of the physical characteristics of the string are
   immaterial! The characteristics of the string and hence sound are
   determined by the totality of the vibrating length and thus the
   material, its dimensions its elasticity, stiffness, etc. Otherwise  one
   might as well make a string out of anything and it would sound the same
   if the bridge thinning were identical ..
   regards
   Martyn
 __

   From: Martin Shepherd <mar...@luteshop.co.uk>
   To: Anthony Hind <agno3ph...@yahoo.com>; JarosÅaw Lipski
   <jaroslawlip...@wp.pl>; "baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu"
   <baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
   Sent: Friday, 3 February 2017, 15:35
   Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Baroque Lute Stringing
 Thinning the string probably does weaken it, but since the strings in
 question are way below their breaking strain that would never be a
 problem.  I have not tried thinning at the nut, but I suspect if it
 could be done it might improve the sound still further.  There is
 something to be said for thinning them where they go through the hole
 in the peg, allowing a smaller hole to be used and also making it
 easier to persuade the string to bend around the peg.
 Martin
 On 03/02/2017 15:45, Anthony Hind wrote:
   By thinning them at the bridge, Martin, I suppose this allows the
   diapason to be "seen" (as it were) at the bridge as a thinish
   loaded
   string. The effective resonating diameter being that passing
   through
   the hole and the extra diameter beyond the bridge behaving
   similarly
   to loading, but as though the loading were more of the same
   material
   (albeit with a brake on the harmonicity where the whole string
   psses
   over the nut)? Does the whittling down weaken the string? Could you
   also thin it at the nut?
 Best wishes
 Anthony
   [1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
   Le vendredi, février 3, 2017, 2:00 PM, Martin Shepherd
   [2]<[2]mar...@luteshop.co.uk> a écrit :
 Just to explain:
 When I said roped strings were dull compared to plain gut I was
   talking
 only about relatively thin strings, say .80-.90mm.
 For the KF strings, the high tensions which many people want to use
 will
 not work because the thicker KF strings are really too thick and
   stiff
 to work.  On the 11th course of an 11c lute I would use nothing
   larger
 than 1.50mm (actual diameter).  I'm using .95 for the 6th course.
 Another factor with KF strings is the importance of thinning them
   where
 they go through the bridge and wrap over themselves in front of the
 bridge.  If you don't do this, the sound will be dull and you will
 probably get problems with the strings buzzing against the top of the
 bridge.
 Martin
 On 03/02/2017 11:39, JarosÅaw Lipski wrote:
 > Mimmo,
 >
 >> You experience is that a roped string is duller than a plain gut?
   I
 have the contrary. Maybe  it is necessary to know how the roped
   string
 was done. Mine is a roped string made with two fresh 'brins' twisted
 like as rope and then polished. In practice our Venices.
 > Yes, I use your Venice roped strings and can confirm this. They are
 brighter than plain gut
 >
 >> I would like to b

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Baroque Lute Stringing

[Anthony Hind]

   Dear Martyn

 I tend to see reducing inharmonicity of a string as lowering its
   impedance to bending while maintaining its weight.
   [1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

   Le vendredi, février 3, 2017, 4:52 PM, Martyn Hodgson
   <hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk> a écrit :

   Dear Anthony,
   I may well have misunderstood the point you make
   'and the extra diameter beyond the bridge behaving similarly  to
   loading, but as though the loading were more of the same material'
   - surely the physical characteristics of a string largely determine the
   sound - else why bother?
   Martin's practice of thinning at the bridge is probably  to allow the
   string there to vibrate around a clean take off point thus minimising
   frequency absorption (ie damping) and, as Martin said, to avoid  the
   thickish string buzzing against the bridge.  This is not, of course, to
   say that the rest of the physical characteristics of the string are
   immaterial! The characteristics of the string and hence sound are
   determined by the totality of the vibrating length and thus the
   material, its dimensions its elasticity, stiffness, etc. Otherwise  one
   might as well make a string out of anything and it would sound the same
   if the bridge thinning were identical ..
   regards
   Martyn
 __

   From: Martin Shepherd <mar...@luteshop.co.uk>
   To: Anthony Hind <agno3ph...@yahoo.com>; JarosÅaw Lipski
   <jaroslawlip...@wp.pl>; "baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu"
   <baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
   Sent: Friday, 3 February 2017, 15:35
   Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Baroque Lute Stringing
 Thinning the string probably does weaken it, but since the strings in
 question are way below their breaking strain that would never be a
 problem.  I have not tried thinning at the nut, but I suspect if it
 could be done it might improve the sound still further.  There is
 something to be said for thinning them where they go through the hole
 in the peg, allowing a smaller hole to be used and also making it
 easier to persuade the string to bend around the peg.
 Martin
 On 03/02/2017 15:45, Anthony Hind wrote:
   By thinning them at the bridge, Martin, I suppose this allows the
   diapason to be "seen" (as it were) at the bridge as a thinish
   loaded
   string. The effective resonating diameter being that passing
   through
   the hole and the extra diameter beyond the bridge behaving
   similarly
   to loading, but as though the loading were more of the same
   material
   (albeit with a brake on the harmonicity where the whole string
   psses
   over the nut)? Does the whittling down weaken the string? Could you
   also thin it at the nut?
 Best wishes
 Anthony
   [1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
   Le vendredi, février 3, 2017, 2:00 PM, Martin Shepherd
   [2]<[2]mar...@luteshop.co.uk> a écrit :
 Just to explain:
 When I said roped strings were dull compared to plain gut I was
   talking
 only about relatively thin strings, say .80-.90mm.
 For the KF strings, the high tensions which many people want to use
 will
 not work because the thicker KF strings are really too thick and
   stiff
 to work.  On the 11th course of an 11c lute I would use nothing
   larger
 than 1.50mm (actual diameter).  I'm using .95 for the 6th course.
 Another factor with KF strings is the importance of thinning them
   where
 they go through the bridge and wrap over themselves in front of the
 bridge.  If you don't do this, the sound will be dull and you will
 probably get problems with the strings buzzing against the top of the
 bridge.
 Martin
 On 03/02/2017 11:39, JarosÅaw Lipski wrote:
 > Mimmo,
 >
 >> You experience is that a roped string is duller than a plain gut?
   I
 have the contrary. Maybe  it is necessary to know how the roped
   string
 was done. Mine is a roped string made with two fresh 'brins' twisted
 like as rope and then polished. In practice our Venices.
 > Yes, I use your Venice roped strings and can confirm this. They are
 brighter than plain gut
 >
 >> I would like to buy some KF strings just to do a comparation:
 > I have both KFs and your CDs and compared them side to side. KFs
   have
 shorter sustain, are more percussive and â¦slightly duller sound IMO.
 KFs work well till 11th course on BQL. I don't like them on
   diapasons.
 CDs have stronger fundamental, longer sustain (much longer than guts)
 and work very well on diapasons, however their elasticity make them
 work only on instruments with higher than normal action and wide
   string
 spacing. Also tuning is not ideal.
 >
 >> Heck, guys, what t

[BAROQUE-LUTE] [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Baroque Lute Stringing

[Martyn Hodgson]

   Dear Anthony,
   I may well have misunderstood the point you make
   'and the extra diameter beyond the bridge behaving similarly  to
   loading, but as though the loading were more of the same material'
   - surely the physical characteristics of a string largely determine the
   sound - else why bother?
   Martin's practice of thinning at the bridge is probably  to allow the
   string there to vibrate around a clean take off point thus minimising
   frequency absorption (ie damping) and, as Martin said, to avoid  the
   thickish string buzzing against the bridge.  This is not, of course, to
   say that the rest of the physical characteristics of the string are
   immaterial! The characteristics of the string and hence sound are
   determined by the totality of the vibrating length and thus the
   material, its dimensions its elasticity, stiffness, etc. Otherwise  one
   might as well make a string out of anything and it would sound the same
   if the bridge thinning were identical ..
   regards
   Martyn
 __

   From: Martin Shepherd <mar...@luteshop.co.uk>
   To: Anthony Hind <agno3ph...@yahoo.com>; JarosÅaw Lipski
   <jaroslawlip...@wp.pl>; "baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu"
   <baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
   Sent: Friday, 3 February 2017, 15:35
   Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Baroque Lute Stringing
 Thinning the string probably does weaken it, but since the strings in
 question are way below their breaking strain that would never be a
 problem.  I have not tried thinning at the nut, but I suspect if it
 could be done it might improve the sound still further.  There is
 something to be said for thinning them where they go through the hole
 in the peg, allowing a smaller hole to be used and also making it
 easier to persuade the string to bend around the peg.
 Martin
 On 03/02/2017 15:45, Anthony Hind wrote:
   By thinning them at the bridge, Martin, I suppose this allows the
   diapason to be "seen" (as it were) at the bridge as a thinish
   loaded
   string. The effective resonating diameter being that passing
   through
   the hole and the extra diameter beyond the bridge behaving
   similarly
   to loading, but as though the loading were more of the same
   material
   (albeit with a brake on the harmonicity where the whole string
   psses
   over the nut)? Does the whittling down weaken the string? Could you
   also thin it at the nut?
 Best wishes
 Anthony
   [1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
   Le vendredi, février 3, 2017, 2:00 PM, Martin Shepherd
   [2]<[1]mar...@luteshop.co.uk> a écrit :
 Just to explain:
 When I said roped strings were dull compared to plain gut I was
   talking
 only about relatively thin strings, say .80-.90mm.
 For the KF strings, the high tensions which many people want to use
 will
 not work because the thicker KF strings are really too thick and
   stiff
 to work.  On the 11th course of an 11c lute I would use nothing
   larger
 than 1.50mm (actual diameter).  I'm using .95 for the 6th course.
 Another factor with KF strings is the importance of thinning them
   where
 they go through the bridge and wrap over themselves in front of the
 bridge.  If you don't do this, the sound will be dull and you will
 probably get problems with the strings buzzing against the top of the
 bridge.
 Martin
 On 03/02/2017 11:39, JarosÅaw Lipski wrote:
 > Mimmo,
 >
 >> You experience is that a roped string is duller than a plain gut?
   I
 have the contrary. Maybe  it is necessary to know how the roped
   string
 was done. Mine is a roped string made with two fresh 'brins' twisted
 like as rope and then polished. In practice our Venices.
 > Yes, I use your Venice roped strings and can confirm this. They are
 brighter than plain gut
 >
 >> I would like to buy some KF strings just to do a comparation:
 > I have both KFs and your CDs and compared them side to side. KFs
   have
 shorter sustain, are more percussive and â¦slightly duller sound IMO.
 KFs work well till 11th course on BQL. I don't like them on
   diapasons.
 CDs have stronger fundamental, longer sustain (much longer than guts)
 and work very well on diapasons, however their elasticity make them
 work only on instruments with higher than normal action and wide
   string
 spacing. Also tuning is not ideal.
 >
 >> Heck, guys, what to do? first or second option?
 >> At present the second option is the winner!
 > Now, the question is what is your goal in making CD strings. If you
 aim at finding a substitute for gut strings than stiffer strings
   would
 be better. I am used to gut basses so I like short 

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Jarosław Lipski]

Martin,

> When I said roped strings were dull compared to plain gut I was talking only 
> about relatively thin strings, say .80-.90mm.

I tried both thicker and thinner Aquilla Venice ropes and even on 4th course 
they sound brighter than plain gut IMHO. But, this discussion only shows how 
relative our sound perception is.
> 
> For the KF strings, the high tensions which many people want to use will not 
> work because the thicker KF strings are really too thick and stiff to work.  
> On the 11th course of an 11c lute I would use nothing larger than 1.50mm 
> (actual diameter).  I'm using .95 for the 6th course.
> 

I am using 1.60 on 11th course and it works fine for me. But again it’s a 
matter of taste. 

> Another factor with KF strings is the importance of thinning them where they 
> go through the bridge and wrap over themselves in front of the bridge.  If 
> you don't do this, the sound will be dull and you will probably get problems 
> with the strings buzzing against the top of the bridge.
> 

Yes, mine have split ends at the bridge.

Best

Jaroslaw


> Martin
> 
> On 03/02/2017 11:39, Jarosław Lipski wrote:
>> Mimmo,
>> 
>>> You experience is that a roped string is duller than a plain gut? I have 
>>> the contrary. Maybe  it is necessary to know how the roped string was done. 
>>> Mine is a roped string made with two fresh 'brins' twisted like as rope and 
>>> then polished. In practice our Venices.
>> Yes, I use your Venice roped strings and can confirm this. They are brighter 
>> than plain gut
>> 
>>> I would like to buy some KF strings just to do a comparation:
>> I have both KFs and your CDs and compared them side to side. KFs have 
>> shorter sustain, are more percussive and …slightly duller sound IMO. KFs 
>> work well till 11th course on BQL. I don’t like them on diapasons. CDs have 
>> stronger fundamental, longer sustain (much longer than guts) and work very 
>> well on diapasons, however their elasticity make them work only on 
>> instruments with higher than normal action and wide string spacing. Also 
>> tuning is not ideal.
>> 
>>> Heck, guys, what to do? first or second option?
>>> At present the second option is the winner!
>> Now, the question is what is your goal in making CD strings. If you aim at 
>> finding a substitute for gut strings than stiffer strings would be better. I 
>> am used to gut basses so I like short sustain and a little bit stiffer 
>> string. If someone played only overwounds he/she would probably prefer 
>> longer sustain. So the answer to your question will depend on whom you’ll 
>> ask.
>> All in all there is no one answer to this question, and probably you would 
>> have to take into consideration your business strategy.
>> Best
>> Ciao
>> 
>> Jaroslaw
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> ciao to all
>>> Mimmo
>>> 
>>> -Messaggio originale- From: Martin Shepherd
>>> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 10:22 AM
>>> To: Mimmo Peruffo ; Matthew Daillie
>>> Cc: Arto Wikla ; baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
>>> Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
>>> 
>>> Thanks, Mimmo.
>>> 
>>> I agree absolutely that there is no need to make versions of these
>>> strings thinner than .80mm.
>>> 
>>> The issue of damping is perhaps the one which worries me most.  In the
>>> case of roped strings, they sound duller than a plain gut string of the
>>> same size, presumably because of internal friction between the strands
>>> of the rope.  In the case of rubber strings (sorry!) what worries me is
>>> that some damping/absorption of energy is happening as the string
>>> stretches and contracts with each vibration.  The KF fluorocarbon
>>> strings, being solid and stiff, have neither of these damping effects.
>>> I can imagine that a string which was "floppy" but not especially
>>> elastic would work well.
>>> 
>>> I hope that a lower rubber content would allow the strings to slide
>>> better over the nut, which would also be a welcome characteristic.
>>> 
>>> Best to all,
>>> 
>>> Martin
>>> 
>>> On 03/02/2017 10:09, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:
>>>> Thank you very much about all these helpfull suggestions, guys.
>>>> 
>>>> actually the gauges from 80 CD till 105CD are made half loaded using also 
>>>> a stiffer elastomer.  This combination is perfect fo the tonl trasiction 
>>>> betweenj pure gut/nylon/Nylgut to a wound strings, KF or CDs etc etc.
>&

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Baroque Lute Stringing

[Martin Shepherd]

   Thinning the string probably does weaken it, but since the strings in
   question are way below their breaking strain that would never be a
   problem.  I have not tried thinning at the nut, but I suspect if it
   could be done it might improve the sound still further.  There is
   something to be said for thinning them where they go through the hole
   in the peg, allowing a smaller hole to be used and also making it
   easier to persuade the string to bend around the peg.
   Martin
   On 03/02/2017 15:45, Anthony Hind wrote:

 By thinning them at the bridge, Martin, I suppose this allows the
 diapason to be "seen" (as it were) at the bridge as a thinish loaded
 string. The effective resonating diameter being that passing through
 the hole and the extra diameter beyond the bridge behaving similarly
 to loading, but as though the loading were more of the same material
 (albeit with a brake on the harmonicity where the whole string psses
 over the nut)? Does the whittling down weaken the string? Could you
 also thin it at the nut?

   Best wishes

   Anthony

 [1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

 Le vendredi, février 3, 2017, 2:00 PM, Martin Shepherd
 [2]<mar...@luteshop.co.uk> a écrit :

   Just to explain:
   When I said roped strings were dull compared to plain gut I was talking
   only about relatively thin strings, say .80-.90mm.
   For the KF strings, the high tensions which many people want to use
   will
   not work because the thicker KF strings are really too thick and stiff
   to work.  On the 11th course of an 11c lute I would use nothing larger
   than 1.50mm (actual diameter).  I'm using .95 for the 6th course.
   Another factor with KF strings is the importance of thinning them where
   they go through the bridge and wrap over themselves in front of the
   bridge.  If you don't do this, the sound will be dull and you will
   probably get problems with the strings buzzing against the top of the
   bridge.
   Martin
   On 03/02/2017 11:39, Jarosław Lipski wrote:
   > Mimmo,
   >
   >> You experience is that a roped string is duller than a plain gut? I
   have the contrary. Maybe  it is necessary to know how the roped string
   was done. Mine is a roped string made with two fresh 'brins' twisted
   like as rope and then polished. In practice our Venices.
   > Yes, I use your Venice roped strings and can confirm this. They are
   brighter than plain gut
   >
   >> I would like to buy some KF strings just to do a comparation:
   > I have both KFs and your CDs and compared them side to side. KFs have
   shorter sustain, are more percussive and …slightly duller sound IMO.
   KFs work well till 11th course on BQL. I don't like them on diapasons.
   CDs have stronger fundamental, longer sustain (much longer than guts)
   and work very well on diapasons, however their elasticity make them
   work only on instruments with higher than normal action and wide string
   spacing. Also tuning is not ideal.
   >
   >> Heck, guys, what to do? first or second option?
   >> At present the second option is the winner!
   > Now, the question is what is your goal in making CD strings. If you
   aim at finding a substitute for gut strings than stiffer strings would
   be better. I am used to gut basses so I like short sustain and a little
   bit stiffer string. If someone played only overwounds he/she would
   probably prefer longer sustain. So the answer to your question will
   depend on whom you'll ask.
   > All in all there is no one answer to this question, and probably you
   would have to take into consideration your business strategy.
   > Best
   > Ciao
   >
   > Jaroslaw
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >> ciao to all
   >> Mimmo
   >>
   >> -Messaggio originale- From: Martin Shepherd
   >> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 10:22 AM
   >> To: Mimmo Peruffo ; Matthew Daillie
   >> Cc: Arto Wikla ; [3]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   >> Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
   >>
   >> Thanks, Mimmo.
   >>
   >> I agree absolutely that there is no need to make versions of these
   >> strings thinner than .80mm.
   >>
   >> The issue of damping is perhaps the one which worries me most.  In
   the
   >> case of roped strings, they sound duller than a plain gut string of
   the
   >> same size, presumably because of internal friction between the
   strands
   >> of the rope.  In the case of rubber strings (sorry!) what worries me
   is
   >> that some damping/absorption of energy is happening as the string
   >> stretches and contracts with each vibration.  The KF fluorocarbon
   >> strings, being solid and stiff, have neither of these damping
   effects.
   >> I can imagine that a string which was "floppy" but not especial

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Baroque Lute Stringing

[Anthony Hind]

   By thinning them at the bridge, Martin, I suppose this allows the
   diapason to be "seen" (as it were) at the bridge as a thinish loaded
   string. The effective resonating diameter being that passing through
   the hole and the extra diameter beyond the bridge behaving similarly to
   loading, but as though the loading were more of the same material
   (albeit with a brake on the harmonicity where the whole string psses
   over the nut)? Does the whittling down weaken the string? Could you
   also thin it at the nut?

   Best wishes

   Anthony

   [1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

   Le vendredi, février 3, 2017, 2:00 PM, Martin Shepherd
   <mar...@luteshop.co.uk> a écrit :

   Just to explain:
   When I said roped strings were dull compared to plain gut I was talking
   only about relatively thin strings, say .80-.90mm.
   For the KF strings, the high tensions which many people want to use
   will
   not work because the thicker KF strings are really too thick and stiff
   to work.  On the 11th course of an 11c lute I would use nothing larger
   than 1.50mm (actual diameter).  I'm using .95 for the 6th course.
   Another factor with KF strings is the importance of thinning them where
   they go through the bridge and wrap over themselves in front of the
   bridge.  If you don't do this, the sound will be dull and you will
   probably get problems with the strings buzzing against the top of the
   bridge.
   Martin
   On 03/02/2017 11:39, JarosÅaw Lipski wrote:
   > Mimmo,
   >
   >> You experience is that a roped string is duller than a plain gut? I
   have the contrary. Maybe  it is necessary to know how the roped string
   was done. Mine is a roped string made with two fresh 'brins' twisted
   like as rope and then polished. In practice our Venices.
   > Yes, I use your Venice roped strings and can confirm this. They are
   brighter than plain gut
   >
   >> I would like to buy some KF strings just to do a comparation:
   > I have both KFs and your CDs and compared them side to side. KFs have
   shorter sustain, are more percussive and â¦slightly duller sound IMO.
   KFs work well till 11th course on BQL. I don't like them on diapasons.
   CDs have stronger fundamental, longer sustain (much longer than guts)
   and work very well on diapasons, however their elasticity make them
   work only on instruments with higher than normal action and wide string
   spacing. Also tuning is not ideal.
   >
   >> Heck, guys, what to do? first or second option?
   >> At present the second option is the winner!
   > Now, the question is what is your goal in making CD strings. If you
   aim at finding a substitute for gut strings than stiffer strings would
   be better. I am used to gut basses so I like short sustain and a little
   bit stiffer string. If someone played only overwounds he/she would
   probably prefer longer sustain. So the answer to your question will
   depend on whom you'll ask.
   > All in all there is no one answer to this question, and probably you
   would have to take into consideration your business strategy.
   > Best
   > Ciao
   >
   > Jaroslaw
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >> ciao to all
   >> Mimmo
   >>
   >> -Messaggio originale- From: Martin Shepherd
   >> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 10:22 AM
   >> To: Mimmo Peruffo ; Matthew Daillie
   >> Cc: Arto Wikla ; [2]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   >> Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
   >>
   >> Thanks, Mimmo.
   >>
   >> I agree absolutely that there is no need to make versions of these
   >> strings thinner than .80mm.
   >>
   >> The issue of damping is perhaps the one which worries me most.  In
   the
   >> case of roped strings, they sound duller than a plain gut string of
   the
   >> same size, presumably because of internal friction between the
   strands
   >> of the rope.  In the case of rubber strings (sorry!) what worries me
   is
   >> that some damping/absorption of energy is happening as the string
   >> stretches and contracts with each vibration.  The KF fluorocarbon
   >> strings, being solid and stiff, have neither of these damping
   effects.
   >> I can imagine that a string which was "floppy" but not especially
   >> elastic would work well.
   >>
   >> I hope that a lower rubber content would allow the strings to slide
   >> better over the nut, which would also be a welcome characteristic.
   >>
   >> Best to all,
   >>
   >> Martin
   >>
   >> On 03/02/2017 10:09, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:
   >>> Thank you very much about all these helpfull suggestions, guys.
   >>>
   >>> actually the gauges from 80 CD till 105CD are made half loaded
   using also a stiffer elastomer.

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Martin Shepherd]

Just to explain:

When I said roped strings were dull compared to plain gut I was talking 
only about relatively thin strings, say .80-.90mm.


For the KF strings, the high tensions which many people want to use will 
not work because the thicker KF strings are really too thick and stiff 
to work.  On the 11th course of an 11c lute I would use nothing larger 
than 1.50mm (actual diameter).  I'm using .95 for the 6th course.


Another factor with KF strings is the importance of thinning them where 
they go through the bridge and wrap over themselves in front of the 
bridge.  If you don't do this, the sound will be dull and you will 
probably get problems with the strings buzzing against the top of the 
bridge.


Martin

On 03/02/2017 11:39, Jarosław Lipski wrote:

Mimmo,


You experience is that a roped string is duller than a plain gut? I have the 
contrary. Maybe  it is necessary to know how the roped string was done. Mine is 
a roped string made with two fresh 'brins' twisted like as rope and then 
polished. In practice our Venices.

Yes, I use your Venice roped strings and can confirm this. They are brighter 
than plain gut


I would like to buy some KF strings just to do a comparation:

I have both KFs and your CDs and compared them side to side. KFs have shorter 
sustain, are more percussive and …slightly duller sound IMO. KFs work well till 
11th course on BQL. I don’t like them on diapasons. CDs have stronger 
fundamental, longer sustain (much longer than guts) and work very well on 
diapasons, however their elasticity make them work only on instruments with 
higher than normal action and wide string spacing. Also tuning is not ideal.


Heck, guys, what to do? first or second option?
At present the second option is the winner!

Now, the question is what is your goal in making CD strings. If you aim at 
finding a substitute for gut strings than stiffer strings would be better. I am 
used to gut basses so I like short sustain and a little bit stiffer string. If 
someone played only overwounds he/she would probably prefer longer sustain. So 
the answer to your question will depend on whom you’ll ask.
All in all there is no one answer to this question, and probably you would have 
to take into consideration your business strategy.
Best
Ciao

Jaroslaw





ciao to all
Mimmo

-Messaggio originale- From: Martin Shepherd
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 10:22 AM
To: Mimmo Peruffo ; Matthew Daillie
Cc: Arto Wikla ; baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

Thanks, Mimmo.

I agree absolutely that there is no need to make versions of these
strings thinner than .80mm.

The issue of damping is perhaps the one which worries me most.  In the
case of roped strings, they sound duller than a plain gut string of the
same size, presumably because of internal friction between the strands
of the rope.  In the case of rubber strings (sorry!) what worries me is
that some damping/absorption of energy is happening as the string
stretches and contracts with each vibration.  The KF fluorocarbon
strings, being solid and stiff, have neither of these damping effects.
I can imagine that a string which was "floppy" but not especially
elastic would work well.

I hope that a lower rubber content would allow the strings to slide
better over the nut, which would also be a welcome characteristic.

Best to all,

Martin

On 03/02/2017 10:09, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:

Thank you very much about all these helpfull suggestions, guys.

actually the gauges from 80 CD till 105CD are made half loaded using also a 
stiffer elastomer.  This combination is perfect fo the tonl trasiction betweenj 
pure gut/nylon/Nylgut to a wound strings, KF or CDs etc etc.
I call this range of gauges simply as Meanes. they are still CD types however.
In practice they  are around the 5th course of renaissance & d minor Lutes.
I have intentionally exluded the  4th courses because make not sense at all to 
use a denser strings on it. The  80 CD is just done for those that are curious.

well, I done the very first prototypes (than cannot be perfect) and sent out to 
some friends to hear their opinions: of course, some of them were uneven. 
Despite that I had very good reports.
Some installed them also like octaves (!): I never realized that additional 
option. However,  I do not raccomend. Octaves normally can works at higher 
working index than a 5 th course;  so they can breack.

said that, I agree with you Matthew. thanks

Martin, a stiffer string has an higher elasticity modulus so the performances 
are  less good than those of an equivalent string with more elasticity. You 
probably reffers to the KF strings. However there are others parameters at work 
here, for example the inner damping effect is one of them, and it  is not 
related to the elasticity modulus. This explain for example why a special kind 
of nylon, whose density is far less than fluorocarbon sound like this one. It 
was a huge surpris

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Mimmo Peruffo]

Thanks Jaroslaw,
good report indeed.
Actually I have not in mind the business side, it is  just  my love for such 
instrument,  passion, i mean.


In short, I would like to do something that is 'emotional'.  Hared toi 
explain, it is something related to me and my feel when I hear a Lute. The 
Bacon writting is almost  clear to me and i feel in this way.


Said that, it is very interesting your comparation of the CD's with the KF 
ones and with the Venices
I am thinking that these CD's are  to much performant  than the necessity. 
So I am going to prefere the second option: at the end of the day it solve 
also a lot of meccanical problems


Mille grazie
Mimmo

(thanks Anthony)

-Messaggio originale- 
From: Jarosław Lipski

Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 11:39 AM
To: baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

Mimmo,

You experience is that a roped string is duller than a plain gut? I have 
the contrary. Maybe  it is necessary to know how the roped string was 
done. Mine is a roped string made with two fresh 'brins' twisted like as 
rope and then polished. In practice our Venices.


Yes, I use your Venice roped strings and can confirm this. They are brighter 
than plain gut



I would like to buy some KF strings just to do a comparation:


I have both KFs and your CDs and compared them side to side. KFs have 
shorter sustain, are more percussive and …slightly duller sound IMO. KFs 
work well till 11th course on BQL. I don’t like them on diapasons. CDs have 
stronger fundamental, longer sustain (much longer than guts) and work very 
well on diapasons, however their elasticity make them work only on 
instruments with higher than normal action and wide string spacing. Also 
tuning is not ideal.




Heck, guys, what to do? first or second option?
At present the second option is the winner!


Now, the question is what is your goal in making CD strings. If you aim at 
finding a substitute for gut strings than stiffer strings would be better. I 
am used to gut basses so I like short sustain and a little bit stiffer 
string. If someone played only overwounds he/she would probably prefer 
longer sustain. So the answer to your question will depend on whom you’ll 
ask.
All in all there is no one answer to this question, and probably you would 
have to take into consideration your business strategy.

Best
Ciao

Jaroslaw





ciao to all
Mimmo

-Messaggio originale- From: Martin Shepherd
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 10:22 AM
To: Mimmo Peruffo ; Matthew Daillie
Cc: Arto Wikla ; baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

Thanks, Mimmo.

I agree absolutely that there is no need to make versions of these
strings thinner than .80mm.

The issue of damping is perhaps the one which worries me most.  In the
case of roped strings, they sound duller than a plain gut string of the
same size, presumably because of internal friction between the strands
of the rope.  In the case of rubber strings (sorry!) what worries me is
that some damping/absorption of energy is happening as the string
stretches and contracts with each vibration.  The KF fluorocarbon
strings, being solid and stiff, have neither of these damping effects.
I can imagine that a string which was "floppy" but not especially
elastic would work well.

I hope that a lower rubber content would allow the strings to slide
better over the nut, which would also be a welcome characteristic.

Best to all,

Martin

On 03/02/2017 10:09, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:

Thank you very much about all these helpfull suggestions, guys.

actually the gauges from 80 CD till 105CD are made half loaded using also 
a stiffer elastomer.  This combination is perfect fo the tonl trasiction 
betweenj pure gut/nylon/Nylgut to a wound strings, KF or CDs etc etc.
I call this range of gauges simply as Meanes. they are still CD types 
however.
In practice they  are around the 5th course of renaissance & d minor 
Lutes.
I have intentionally exluded the  4th courses because make not sense at 
all to use a denser strings on it. The  80 CD is just done for those that 
are curious.


well, I done the very first prototypes (than cannot be perfect) and sent 
out to some friends to hear their opinions: of course, some of them were 
uneven. Despite that I had very good reports.
Some installed them also like octaves (!): I never realized that 
additional option. However,  I do not raccomend. Octaves normally can 
works at higher working index than a 5 th course;  so they can breack.


said that, I agree with you Matthew. thanks

Martin, a stiffer string has an higher elasticity modulus so the 
performances are  less good than those of an equivalent string with more 
elasticity. You probably reffers to the KF strings. However there are 
others parameters at work here, for example the inner damping effect is 
one of them, and it  is not related to the elasticity modulus. This 
explain for example why a special

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Francesco Tribioli]

> Now, the question is what is your goal in making CD strings. If you aim at
> finding a substitute for gut strings than stiffer strings would be better.
I am
> used to gut basses so I like short sustain and a little bit stiffer
string. If
> someone played only overwounds he/she would probably prefer longer
> sustain. So the answer to your question will depend on whom you'll ask.

I think that if one played only overwound strings he does not really need
loaded synthetic and can continue with wound strings. In my opinion, the CD
should be a replacement for the loaded gut strings, which are too expensive
to produce in all the calibers needed by lutenists. I would vote for the
second option or anything that goes close to the sound and sustain of loaded
gut basses.

Francesco



To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Jarosław Lipski]

Mimmo,

> You experience is that a roped string is duller than a plain gut? I have the 
> contrary. Maybe  it is necessary to know how the roped string was done. Mine 
> is a roped string made with two fresh 'brins' twisted like as rope and then 
> polished. In practice our Venices.

Yes, I use your Venice roped strings and can confirm this. They are brighter 
than plain gut

> I would like to buy some KF strings just to do a comparation:

I have both KFs and your CDs and compared them side to side. KFs have shorter 
sustain, are more percussive and …slightly duller sound IMO. KFs work well till 
11th course on BQL. I don’t like them on diapasons. CDs have stronger 
fundamental, longer sustain (much longer than guts) and work very well on 
diapasons, however their elasticity make them work only on instruments with 
higher than normal action and wide string spacing. Also tuning is not ideal.

> 
> Heck, guys, what to do? first or second option?
> At present the second option is the winner!

Now, the question is what is your goal in making CD strings. If you aim at 
finding a substitute for gut strings than stiffer strings would be better. I am 
used to gut basses so I like short sustain and a little bit stiffer string. If 
someone played only overwounds he/she would probably prefer longer sustain. So 
the answer to your question will depend on whom you’ll ask.
All in all there is no one answer to this question, and probably you would have 
to take into consideration your business strategy.
Best
Ciao

Jaroslaw




> ciao to all
> Mimmo
> 
> -Messaggio originale- From: Martin Shepherd
> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 10:22 AM
> To: Mimmo Peruffo ; Matthew Daillie
> Cc: Arto Wikla ; baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
> Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
> 
> Thanks, Mimmo.
> 
> I agree absolutely that there is no need to make versions of these
> strings thinner than .80mm.
> 
> The issue of damping is perhaps the one which worries me most.  In the
> case of roped strings, they sound duller than a plain gut string of the
> same size, presumably because of internal friction between the strands
> of the rope.  In the case of rubber strings (sorry!) what worries me is
> that some damping/absorption of energy is happening as the string
> stretches and contracts with each vibration.  The KF fluorocarbon
> strings, being solid and stiff, have neither of these damping effects.
> I can imagine that a string which was "floppy" but not especially
> elastic would work well.
> 
> I hope that a lower rubber content would allow the strings to slide
> better over the nut, which would also be a welcome characteristic.
> 
> Best to all,
> 
> Martin
> 
> On 03/02/2017 10:09, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:
>> Thank you very much about all these helpfull suggestions, guys.
>> 
>> actually the gauges from 80 CD till 105CD are made half loaded using also a 
>> stiffer elastomer.  This combination is perfect fo the tonl trasiction 
>> betweenj pure gut/nylon/Nylgut to a wound strings, KF or CDs etc etc.
>> I call this range of gauges simply as Meanes. they are still CD types 
>> however.
>> In practice they  are around the 5th course of renaissance & d minor Lutes.
>> I have intentionally exluded the  4th courses because make not sense at all 
>> to use a denser strings on it. The  80 CD is just done for those that are 
>> curious.
>> 
>> well, I done the very first prototypes (than cannot be perfect) and sent out 
>> to some friends to hear their opinions: of course, some of them were uneven. 
>> Despite that I had very good reports.
>> Some installed them also like octaves (!): I never realized that additional 
>> option. However,  I do not raccomend. Octaves normally can works at higher 
>> working index than a 5 th course;  so they can breack.
>> 
>> said that, I agree with you Matthew. thanks
>> 
>> Martin, a stiffer string has an higher elasticity modulus so the 
>> performances are  less good than those of an equivalent string with more 
>> elasticity. You probably reffers to the KF strings. However there are others 
>> parameters at work here, for example the inner damping effect is one of 
>> them, and it  is not related to the elasticity modulus. This explain for 
>> example why a special kind of nylon, whose density is far less than 
>> fluorocarbon sound like this one. It was a huge surprise to me!
>> 
>> I am thinking that you guys prefer  the second option. To me is even better, 
>> it help to solve some problem becausew they sometime stick on the nut slots/ 
>> grooves.
>> 
>> False strings? yes, with prototypes  can happen. when one start with  the 
>> ufficial produ

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Baroque Lute Stringing

[Anthony Hind]

   Personally I love the singing sustain of the ones I have on my lute
   now, but for many lutenists the elasticity is difficult to deal with,
   both in terms of how it calls for a change in playing technique, and
   also how they tend to stick on the nut. However, I also loved my loaded
   Venice gut, so the second option is also alright with me. Trueness of
   string is of course necessary, but possibly difficult to predict. I
   suppose it may be difficult to obtain even or homogenous mixtures of
   polymer and copper, sometimes just necessary to select the best ones?
   But I suppose the traditional testing between stretched hands (or
   similar) won't work for very elastic strings? I may have been very
   lucky as all mine were very true.

   Best wishes

   Anthony
   [1]Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

   Le vendredi, février 3, 2017, 8:50 AM, Rob MacKillop
   <robmackil...@gmail.com> a écrit :

   Second option for me.
   Rob MacKillop
   > On 3 Feb 2017, at 07:29, Mimmo Peruffo <[2]mperu...@aquilacorde.com>
   wrote:
   >
   >  Thank you for the suggestion Arto.
   >  Unfortunately i cannot do it
   >  I already image how confuse the thing will be with the customers.
   >  This mean the eford to mannage twice products and honestly I do not
   >  like to add cofusion in the factory and with customers already
   stressed
   >  by me!
   >
   >  I should do a choice and in fast time: is it better a more elastic
   >  string like these are (whith problems related to the fact that maybe
   >  stretch tooo much and that the sound is too bright) or it is better
   to
   >  switch to a less elastic plastic support with the advantage that it
   >  stretch less, the sound is darker and with less sustain?
   >  Hard to do the choice: both solutions are ok; i already tried the
   >  second option that is similar to the loaded gut strings
   >  Even Anthony Bailes suggested me the second option.
   >
   >  Strings or not to strings? this is the question
   >
   >  ah ah
   >  (my poor english at work)
   >  Ciao
   >  Mimmo
   >
   >  ps
   >  which are your suggestion guys?
   >
   >
   >
   >  -Messaggio originale-
   >  From: Arto Wikla
   >  Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 9:46 PM
   >  To: Mimmo Peruffo ; [3]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   >  Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
   >
   >  Dear Mimmo,
   >
   >  if you decide to make the loaded nylgut strings (CD) less elastic, I
   >  hope (and wish and urge ;-) ) that you keep also the original
   elastic
   >  version in your repertoire! They work exceptionally well on my Harz
   >  arclute, great stuff.
   >
   >  And big thanks for your invaluable work!
   >
   >  Arto
   >
   >>  On 02/02/17 14:03, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:
   >> Well, seeing this post I have the idea to switch to these stiffer
   >  ones.
   >> at the end of the day they are closer to those loaded strings made
   of
   >  gut.
   >> I will do some samples in advance.
   >> Mimmo
   >
   >
   >
   >  To get on or off this list see list information at
   >  [4]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
   >
   >  --
   >

   --

References

   1. https://yho.com/footer0
   2. javascript:return
   3. javascript:return
   4. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Mimmo Peruffo]

Ok martin
to say all: I have already tried  such stiffer 'rubbers' (ah ah): increasing 
the stiffness at the same metal powder quantity the sound became step by 
step darker with less sustain. Using the most elastic 'rubber' the sound 
open a lot but the string became too stretchly.
You experience is that a roped string is duller than a plain gut? I have the 
contrary. Maybe  it is necessary to know how the roped string was done. Mine 
is a roped string made with two fresh 'brins' twisted like as rope and then 
polished. In practice our Venices.
I would like to buy some KF strings just to do a comparation: some of you 
guys are by chance at the mandolino meeting in London so you can show one to 
me? This make things faster


Heck, guys, what to do? first or second option?
At present the second option is the winner!
ciao to all
Mimmo

-Messaggio originale- 
From: Martin Shepherd

Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 10:22 AM
To: Mimmo Peruffo ; Matthew Daillie
Cc: Arto Wikla ; baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

Thanks, Mimmo.

I agree absolutely that there is no need to make versions of these
strings thinner than .80mm.

The issue of damping is perhaps the one which worries me most.  In the
case of roped strings, they sound duller than a plain gut string of the
same size, presumably because of internal friction between the strands
of the rope.  In the case of rubber strings (sorry!) what worries me is
that some damping/absorption of energy is happening as the string
stretches and contracts with each vibration.  The KF fluorocarbon
strings, being solid and stiff, have neither of these damping effects.
I can imagine that a string which was "floppy" but not especially
elastic would work well.

I hope that a lower rubber content would allow the strings to slide
better over the nut, which would also be a welcome characteristic.

Best to all,

Martin

On 03/02/2017 10:09, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:

Thank you very much about all these helpfull suggestions, guys.

actually the gauges from 80 CD till 105CD are made half loaded using also 
a stiffer elastomer.  This combination is perfect fo the tonl trasiction 
betweenj pure gut/nylon/Nylgut to a wound strings, KF or CDs etc etc.
I call this range of gauges simply as Meanes. they are still CD types 
however.
In practice they  are around the 5th course of renaissance & d minor 
Lutes.
I have intentionally exluded the  4th courses because make not sense at 
all to use a denser strings on it. The  80 CD is just done for those that 
are curious.


well, I done the very first prototypes (than cannot be perfect) and sent 
out to some friends to hear their opinions: of course, some of them were 
uneven. Despite that I had very good reports.
Some installed them also like octaves (!): I never realized that 
additional option. However,  I do not raccomend. Octaves normally can 
works at higher working index than a 5 th course;  so they can breack.


said that, I agree with you Matthew. thanks

Martin, a stiffer string has an higher elasticity modulus so the 
performances are  less good than those of an equivalent string with more 
elasticity. You probably reffers to the KF strings. However there are 
others parameters at work here, for example the inner damping effect is 
one of them, and it  is not related to the elasticity modulus. This 
explain for example why a special kind of nylon, whose density is far less 
than fluorocarbon sound like this one. It was a huge surprise to me!


I am thinking that you guys prefer  the second option. To me is even 
better, it help to solve some problem becausew they sometime stick on the 
nut slots/ grooves.


False strings? yes, with prototypes  can happen. when one start with  the 
ufficial production an extruder plant work exatly in the same even way. 
The first strings are the waste and then the rest are done exactly in the 
same way.
well, I am leaving italy to London so I have not time to re start; I will 
do some samples both for meanes and basses just to see if they actually 
works in the proper way

Be patient again;  i cannot be too fast  here.
Mimmo


-Messaggio originale- From: Martin Shepherd
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 9:35 AM
To: Matthew Daillie ; Mimmo Peruffo
Cc: Arto Wikla ; baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Subject: Re: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

Tout à fait d'accord, Matthew.

I would add that "trueness" is not just a question of intonation when
notes are fretted.  A false string never sounds in tune even as an open
string, and the pattern of vibration makes it buzz against the frets.
If your string heights are high enough that this isn't a problem,
they're too high.

I don't know whether the samples I had from Mimmo some time ago are the
same as the current production, but I thought they were too elastic.  He
did say he was going to make a less elastic version for the thinner
strings, but I don't know whether he's implement

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Martin Shepherd]

Thanks, Mimmo.

I agree absolutely that there is no need to make versions of these 
strings thinner than .80mm.


The issue of damping is perhaps the one which worries me most.  In the 
case of roped strings, they sound duller than a plain gut string of the 
same size, presumably because of internal friction between the strands 
of the rope.  In the case of rubber strings (sorry!) what worries me is 
that some damping/absorption of energy is happening as the string 
stretches and contracts with each vibration.  The KF fluorocarbon 
strings, being solid and stiff, have neither of these damping effects.  
I can imagine that a string which was "floppy" but not especially 
elastic would work well.


I hope that a lower rubber content would allow the strings to slide 
better over the nut, which would also be a welcome characteristic.


Best to all,

Martin

On 03/02/2017 10:09, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:

Thank you very much about all these helpfull suggestions, guys.

actually the gauges from 80 CD till 105CD are made half loaded using 
also a stiffer elastomer.  This combination is perfect fo the tonl 
trasiction betweenj pure gut/nylon/Nylgut to a wound strings, KF or 
CDs etc etc.
I call this range of gauges simply as Meanes. they are still CD types 
however.
In practice they  are around the 5th course of renaissance & d minor 
Lutes.
I have intentionally exluded the  4th courses because make not sense 
at all to use a denser strings on it. The  80 CD is just done for 
those that are curious.


well, I done the very first prototypes (than cannot be perfect) and 
sent out to some friends to hear their opinions: of course, some of 
them were uneven. Despite that I had very good reports.
Some installed them also like octaves (!): I never realized that 
additional option. However,  I do not raccomend. Octaves normally can 
works at higher working index than a 5 th course;  so they can breack.


said that, I agree with you Matthew. thanks

Martin, a stiffer string has an higher elasticity modulus so the 
performances are  less good than those of an equivalent string with 
more elasticity. You probably reffers to the KF strings. However there 
are others parameters at work here, for example the inner damping 
effect is one of them, and it  is not related to the elasticity 
modulus. This explain for example why a special kind of nylon, whose 
density is far less than fluorocarbon sound like this one. It was a 
huge surprise to me!


I am thinking that you guys prefer  the second option. To me is even 
better, it help to solve some problem becausew they sometime stick on 
the nut slots/ grooves.


False strings? yes, with prototypes  can happen. when one start with  
the ufficial production an extruder plant work exatly in the same even 
way. The first strings are the waste and then the rest are done 
exactly in the same way.
well, I am leaving italy to London so I have not time to re start; I 
will do some samples both for meanes and basses just to see if they 
actually works in the proper way

Be patient again;  i cannot be too fast  here.
Mimmo


-Messaggio originale- From: Martin Shepherd
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 9:35 AM
To: Matthew Daillie ; Mimmo Peruffo
Cc: Arto Wikla ; baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Subject: Re: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

Tout à fait d'accord, Matthew.

I would add that "trueness" is not just a question of intonation when
notes are fretted.  A false string never sounds in tune even as an open
string, and the pattern of vibration makes it buzz against the frets.
If your string heights are high enough that this isn't a problem,
they're too high.

I don't know whether the samples I had from Mimmo some time ago are the
same as the current production, but I thought they were too elastic.  He
did say he was going to make a less elastic version for the thinner
strings, but I don't know whether he's implemented this idea or not (can
you tell us, Mimmo?).  I'm slightly puzzled by the suggestion that the
less elastic version would have a duller or darker sound, I would almost
expect the opposite - as a comparison, the KF strings are very stiff but
sound bright.

It would be such a shame if after all his efforts we end up with a
string which is not as good as the old loaded gut.   Actually the new
string needs to be better than that in terms of trueness.

Best wishes to all,

Martin

On 03/02/2017 09:06, Matthew Daillie wrote:

Dear Mimmo,
In my opinion there are two factors which need to be given priority 
even before judging the sound of a string. Firstly it has to be true 
(with no problems of intonation going up the fingerboard for stopped 
strings) and secondly it has to be playable: on a well-made and well 
set up lute, it must not catch on the nut, buzz, hit a neighbouring 
string, hit against the fingerboard, or cause any other extraneous 
noises. If a string has the potential to sound wonderful but does not 
meet these two criteria, then it

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Mimmo Peruffo]

Thank you very much about all these helpfull suggestions, guys.

actually the gauges from 80 CD till 105CD are made half loaded using also a 
stiffer elastomer.  This combination is perfect fo the tonl trasiction 
betweenj pure gut/nylon/Nylgut to a wound strings, KF or CDs etc etc.
I call this range of gauges simply as Meanes. they are still CD types 
however.

In practice they  are around the 5th course of renaissance & d minor Lutes.
I have intentionally exluded the  4th courses because make not sense at all 
to use a denser strings on it. The  80 CD is just done for those that are 
curious.


well, I done the very first prototypes (than cannot be perfect) and sent out 
to some friends to hear their opinions: of course, some of them were uneven. 
Despite that I had very good reports.
Some installed them also like octaves (!): I never realized that additional 
option. However,  I do not raccomend. Octaves normally can works at higher 
working index than a 5 th course;  so they can breack.


said that, I agree with you Matthew. thanks

Martin, a stiffer string has an higher elasticity modulus so the 
performances are  less good than those of an equivalent string with more 
elasticity. You probably reffers to the KF strings. However there are others 
parameters at work here, for example the inner damping effect is one of 
them, and it  is not related to the elasticity modulus. This explain for 
example why a special kind of nylon, whose density is far less than 
fluorocarbon sound like this one. It was a huge surprise to me!


I am thinking that you guys prefer  the second option. To me is even better, 
it help to solve some problem becausew they sometime stick on the nut slots/ 
grooves.


False strings? yes, with prototypes  can happen. when one start with  the 
ufficial production an extruder plant work exatly in the same even way. The 
first strings are the waste and then the rest are done exactly in the same 
way.
well, I am leaving italy to London so I have not time to re start; I will do 
some samples both for meanes and basses just to see if they actually works 
in the proper way

Be patient again;  i cannot be too fast  here.
Mimmo


-Messaggio originale- 
From: Martin Shepherd

Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 9:35 AM
To: Matthew Daillie ; Mimmo Peruffo
Cc: Arto Wikla ; baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Subject: Re: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

Tout à fait d'accord, Matthew.

I would add that "trueness" is not just a question of intonation when
notes are fretted.  A false string never sounds in tune even as an open
string, and the pattern of vibration makes it buzz against the frets.
If your string heights are high enough that this isn't a problem,
they're too high.

I don't know whether the samples I had from Mimmo some time ago are the
same as the current production, but I thought they were too elastic.  He
did say he was going to make a less elastic version for the thinner
strings, but I don't know whether he's implemented this idea or not (can
you tell us, Mimmo?).  I'm slightly puzzled by the suggestion that the
less elastic version would have a duller or darker sound, I would almost
expect the opposite - as a comparison, the KF strings are very stiff but
sound bright.

It would be such a shame if after all his efforts we end up with a
string which is not as good as the old loaded gut.   Actually the new
string needs to be better than that in terms of trueness.

Best wishes to all,

Martin

On 03/02/2017 09:06, Matthew Daillie wrote:

Dear Mimmo,
In my opinion there are two factors which need to be given priority even 
before judging the sound of a string. Firstly it has to be true (with no 
problems of intonation going up the fingerboard for stopped strings) and 
secondly it has to be playable: on a well-made and well set up lute, it 
must not catch on the nut, buzz, hit a neighbouring string, hit against 
the fingerboard, or cause any other extraneous noises. If a string has the 
potential to sound wonderful but does not meet these two criteria, then it 
is of no use whatsoever.
Once that is established, obviously players want a string with a 
full-bodied and stable tone, enough sustain to make voice-leading a 
pleasure and the instrument to sing to the best of its ability and 
sufficient power to provide convincing projection and resonance.
Personally I am looking for a warm and sweet tone with precise 
fundamentals and enough overtones to make the timbre rich and variable.

Oh dear, that does sound like a holy grail doesn't it?
Fingers crossed!
Best
Matthew





On Feb 3, 2017, at 8:29, Mimmo Peruffo <mperu...@aquilacorde.com> wrote:

   Thank you for the suggestion Arto.
   Unfortunately i cannot do it
   I already image how confuse the thing will be with the customers.
   This mean the eford to mannage twice products and honestly I do not
   like to add cofusion in the factory and with customers already 
stressed

   by me!

   I should do a cho

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Martin Shepherd]

Tout à fait d'accord, Matthew.

I would add that "trueness" is not just a question of intonation when 
notes are fretted.  A false string never sounds in tune even as an open 
string, and the pattern of vibration makes it buzz against the frets.  
If your string heights are high enough that this isn't a problem, 
they're too high.


I don't know whether the samples I had from Mimmo some time ago are the 
same as the current production, but I thought they were too elastic.  He 
did say he was going to make a less elastic version for the thinner 
strings, but I don't know whether he's implemented this idea or not (can 
you tell us, Mimmo?).  I'm slightly puzzled by the suggestion that the 
less elastic version would have a duller or darker sound, I would almost 
expect the opposite - as a comparison, the KF strings are very stiff but 
sound bright.


It would be such a shame if after all his efforts we end up with a 
string which is not as good as the old loaded gut.   Actually the new 
string needs to be better than that in terms of trueness.


Best wishes to all,

Martin

On 03/02/2017 09:06, Matthew Daillie wrote:

Dear Mimmo,
In my opinion there are two factors which need to be given priority even before 
judging the sound of a string. Firstly it has to be true (with no problems of 
intonation going up the fingerboard for stopped strings) and secondly it has to 
be playable: on a well-made and well set up lute, it must not catch on the nut, 
buzz, hit a neighbouring string, hit against the fingerboard, or cause any 
other extraneous noises. If a string has the potential to sound wonderful but 
does not meet these two criteria, then it is of no use whatsoever.
Once that is established, obviously players want a string with a full-bodied 
and stable tone, enough sustain to make voice-leading a pleasure and the 
instrument to sing to the best of its ability and sufficient power to provide 
convincing projection and resonance.
Personally I am looking for a warm and sweet tone with precise fundamentals and 
enough overtones to make the timbre rich and variable.
Oh dear, that does sound like a holy grail doesn't it?
Fingers crossed!
Best
Matthew





On Feb 3, 2017, at 8:29, Mimmo Peruffo <mperu...@aquilacorde.com> wrote:

   Thank you for the suggestion Arto.
   Unfortunately i cannot do it
   I already image how confuse the thing will be with the customers.
   This mean the eford to mannage twice products and honestly I do not
   like to add cofusion in the factory and with customers already stressed
   by me!

   I should do a choice and in fast time: is it better a more elastic
   string like these are (whith problems related to the fact that maybe
   stretch tooo much and that the sound is too bright) or it is better to
   switch to a less elastic plastic support with the advantage that it
   stretch less, the sound is darker and with less sustain?
   Hard to do the choice: both solutions are ok; i already tried the
   second option that is similar to the loaded gut strings
   Even Anthony Bailes suggested me the second option.

   Strings or not to strings? this is the question

   ah ah
   (my poor english at work)
   Ciao
   Mimmo

   ps
   which are your suggestion guys?



   -Messaggio originale-
   From: Arto Wikla
   Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 9:46 PM
   To: Mimmo Peruffo ; baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

   Dear Mimmo,

   if you decide to make the loaded nylgut strings (CD) less elastic, I
   hope (and wish and urge ;-) ) that you keep also the original elastic
   version in your repertoire! They work exceptionally well on my Harz
   arclute, great stuff.

   And big thanks for your invaluable work!

   Arto


   On 02/02/17 14:03, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:
Well, seeing this post I have the idea to switch to these stiffer

   ones.

at the end of the day they are closer to those loaded strings made of

   gut.

I will do some samples in advance.
Mimmo



   To get on or off this list see list information at
   http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   --





---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Matthew Daillie]

Dear Mimmo,
In my opinion there are two factors which need to be given priority even before 
judging the sound of a string. Firstly it has to be true (with no problems of 
intonation going up the fingerboard for stopped strings) and secondly it has to 
be playable: on a well-made and well set up lute, it must not catch on the nut, 
buzz, hit a neighbouring string, hit against the fingerboard, or cause any 
other extraneous noises. If a string has the potential to sound wonderful but 
does not meet these two criteria, then it is of no use whatsoever.
Once that is established, obviously players want a string with a full-bodied 
and stable tone, enough sustain to make voice-leading a pleasure and the 
instrument to sing to the best of its ability and sufficient power to provide 
convincing projection and resonance.
Personally I am looking for a warm and sweet tone with precise fundamentals and 
enough overtones to make the timbre rich and variable.
Oh dear, that does sound like a holy grail doesn't it?
Fingers crossed!
Best
Matthew




> On Feb 3, 2017, at 8:29, Mimmo Peruffo <mperu...@aquilacorde.com> wrote:
> 
>   Thank you for the suggestion Arto.
>   Unfortunately i cannot do it
>   I already image how confuse the thing will be with the customers.
>   This mean the eford to mannage twice products and honestly I do not
>   like to add cofusion in the factory and with customers already stressed
>   by me!
> 
>   I should do a choice and in fast time: is it better a more elastic
>   string like these are (whith problems related to the fact that maybe
>   stretch tooo much and that the sound is too bright) or it is better to
>   switch to a less elastic plastic support with the advantage that it
>   stretch less, the sound is darker and with less sustain?
>   Hard to do the choice: both solutions are ok; i already tried the
>   second option that is similar to the loaded gut strings
>   Even Anthony Bailes suggested me the second option.
> 
>   Strings or not to strings? this is the question
> 
>   ah ah
>   (my poor english at work)
>   Ciao
>   Mimmo
> 
>   ps
>   which are your suggestion guys?
> 
> 
> 
>   -Messaggio originale-
>   From: Arto Wikla
>   Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 9:46 PM
>   To: Mimmo Peruffo ; baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
>   Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
> 
>   Dear Mimmo,
> 
>   if you decide to make the loaded nylgut strings (CD) less elastic, I
>   hope (and wish and urge ;-) ) that you keep also the original elastic
>   version in your repertoire! They work exceptionally well on my Harz
>   arclute, great stuff.
> 
>   And big thanks for your invaluable work!
> 
>   Arto
> 
>>   On 02/02/17 14:03, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:
>> Well, seeing this post I have the idea to switch to these stiffer
>   ones.
>> at the end of the day they are closer to those loaded strings made of
>   gut.
>> I will do some samples in advance.
>> Mimmo
> 
> 
> 
>   To get on or off this list see list information at
>   http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
> 
>   --

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Martyn Hodgson]

   Once again Mimmo, many thanks for all your efforts and for taking the
   trouble to listen to us out here!
   I much liked your old loaded gut and I still have some on various lutes
   (including the 6th course of a large theorbo where it smooths the
   transition to the long basses). Close to these earlier loaded strings
   would be my choice but they should certainly not be less dull or less
   sustain than these. If in doubt perhaps a mixing of the two ingredients
   if this is possible? Sorry to add to your choices.
   regards
   Martyn
 __

   From: Mimmo Peruffo <mperu...@aquilacorde.com>
   To: Arto Wikla <wi...@cs.helsinki.fi>; baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   Sent: Friday, 3 February 2017, 7:29
   Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
 Thank you for the suggestion Arto.
 Unfortunately i cannot do it
 I already image how confuse the thing will be with the customers.
 This mean the eford to mannage twice products and honestly I do not
 like to add cofusion in the factory and with customers already
   stressed
 by me!
 I should do a choice and in fast time: is it better a more elastic
 string like these are (whith problems related to the fact that maybe
 stretch tooo much and that the sound is too bright) or it is better
   to
 switch to a less elastic plastic support with the advantage that it
 stretch less, the sound is darker and with less sustain?
 Hard to do the choice: both solutions are ok; i already tried the
 second option that is similar to the loaded gut strings
 Even Anthony Bailes suggested me the second option.
 Strings or not to strings? this is the question
 ah ah
 (my poor english at work)
 Ciao
 Mimmo
 ps
 which are your suggestion guys?
 -Messaggio originale-
 From: Arto Wikla
 Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 9:46 PM
 To: Mimmo Peruffo ; [1]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
 Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
 Dear Mimmo,
 if you decide to make the loaded nylgut strings (CD) less elastic, I
 hope (and wish and urge ;-) ) that you keep also the original elastic
 version in your repertoire! They work exceptionally well on my Harz
 arclute, great stuff.
 And big thanks for your invaluable work!
 Arto
 On 02/02/17 14:03, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:
 > Well, seeing this post I have the idea to switch to these stiffer
 ones.
 > at the end of the day they are closer to those loaded strings made
   of
 gut.
 > I will do some samples in advance.
 > Mimmo
 To get on or off this list see list information at
 [2]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
 --

   --

References

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

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Rob MacKillop]

Second option for me. 

Rob MacKillop

> On 3 Feb 2017, at 07:29, Mimmo Peruffo <mperu...@aquilacorde.com> wrote:
> 
>   Thank you for the suggestion Arto.
>   Unfortunately i cannot do it
>   I already image how confuse the thing will be with the customers.
>   This mean the eford to mannage twice products and honestly I do not
>   like to add cofusion in the factory and with customers already stressed
>   by me!
> 
>   I should do a choice and in fast time: is it better a more elastic
>   string like these are (whith problems related to the fact that maybe
>   stretch tooo much and that the sound is too bright) or it is better to
>   switch to a less elastic plastic support with the advantage that it
>   stretch less, the sound is darker and with less sustain?
>   Hard to do the choice: both solutions are ok; i already tried the
>   second option that is similar to the loaded gut strings
>   Even Anthony Bailes suggested me the second option.
> 
>   Strings or not to strings? this is the question
> 
>   ah ah
>   (my poor english at work)
>   Ciao
>   Mimmo
> 
>   ps
>   which are your suggestion guys?
> 
> 
> 
>   -Messaggio originale-
>   From: Arto Wikla
>   Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 9:46 PM
>   To: Mimmo Peruffo ; baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
>   Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
> 
>   Dear Mimmo,
> 
>   if you decide to make the loaded nylgut strings (CD) less elastic, I
>   hope (and wish and urge ;-) ) that you keep also the original elastic
>   version in your repertoire! They work exceptionally well on my Harz
>   arclute, great stuff.
> 
>   And big thanks for your invaluable work!
> 
>   Arto
> 
>>   On 02/02/17 14:03, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:
>> Well, seeing this post I have the idea to switch to these stiffer
>   ones.
>> at the end of the day they are closer to those loaded strings made of
>   gut.
>> I will do some samples in advance.
>> Mimmo
> 
> 
> 
>   To get on or off this list see list information at
>   http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
> 
>   --
> 

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Mimmo Peruffo]

   Thank you for the suggestion Arto.
   Unfortunately i cannot do it
   I already image how confuse the thing will be with the customers.
   This mean the eford to mannage twice products and honestly I do not
   like to add cofusion in the factory and with customers already stressed
   by me!

   I should do a choice and in fast time: is it better a more elastic
   string like these are (whith problems related to the fact that maybe
   stretch tooo much and that the sound is too bright) or it is better to
   switch to a less elastic plastic support with the advantage that it
   stretch less, the sound is darker and with less sustain?
   Hard to do the choice: both solutions are ok; i already tried the
   second option that is similar to the loaded gut strings
   Even Anthony Bailes suggested me the second option.

   Strings or not to strings? this is the question

   ah ah
   (my poor english at work)
   Ciao
   Mimmo

   ps
   which are your suggestion guys?



   -Messaggio originale-
   From: Arto Wikla
   Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 9:46 PM
   To: Mimmo Peruffo ; baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

   Dear Mimmo,

   if you decide to make the loaded nylgut strings (CD) less elastic, I
   hope (and wish and urge ;-) ) that you keep also the original elastic
   version in your repertoire! They work exceptionally well on my Harz
   arclute, great stuff.

   And big thanks for your invaluable work!

   Arto

   On 02/02/17 14:03, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:
   > Well, seeing this post I have the idea to switch to these stiffer
   ones.
   > at the end of the day they are closer to those loaded strings made of
   gut.
   > I will do some samples in advance.
   > Mimmo



   To get on or off this list see list information at
   http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

   --

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Arto Wikla]

Dear Mimmo,

if you decide to make the loaded nylgut strings (CD) less elastic, I 
hope (and wish and urge ;-) ) that you keep also the original elastic 
version in your repertoire! They work exceptionally well on my Harz 
arclute, great stuff.


And big thanks for your invaluable work!

Arto

On 02/02/17 14:03, Mimmo Peruffo wrote:

Well, seeing this post I have the idea to switch to these stiffer ones.
at the end of the day they are closer to those loaded strings made of gut.
I will do some samples in advance.
Mimmo




To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Martyn Hodgson]

   Thanks for the clarification Mimmo.
   Unfortunately I'm playing in a concert on Saturday.  The mandolin
   meeting looks very interesting and I'd have liked to have attended that
   too!
   regards
   Martyn
 __

   From: Mimmo <mperu...@aquilacorde.com>
   To: Martyn Hodgson <hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk>
   Cc: Matthew Daillie <dail...@club-internet.fr>; Martin Shepherd
   <mar...@luteshop.co.uk>; "baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu"
   <baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
   Sent: Thursday, 2 February 2017, 12:39
   Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
   Thanks Martyn,
   I mean more predominant fundamental and less sustain, more percussive .
   Bacon is interesting here,
   By the way, I am leaving Italy to,London royal,college .,there is a
   meeting about mandolin this Saturday
   Any chance to,meet,you?
   Mimmo
   > Il giorno 02 feb 2017, alle ore 11:53, Martyn Hodgson
   <[1]hodgsonmar...@cs.dartmouth.edu> ha scritto:
   >
   >  Dear Mimmo,
   >  Thank you for your continuing efforts in manufacturing these
   strings.
   >  I agree with much of what has been said: - especially with Martin
   >  Shepherd about the unfortunate influence rose pluckers have had on
   >  stringing often leading to high tensions of overwound strings in the
   >  bass to avoid rattles. Much of this is caused by the large amplitude
   of
   >  oscillation at the middle of a string when set in motion nearer the
   mid
   >  point than close to the bridge. So playing close to the bridge not
   only
   >  follows the practice of the post-sixteenth century 'Old Ones'  but
   also
   >  leads to real advantages. This manner of playing is, of course, also
   >  linked to the still widespread 'thumb under' school promoted from
   the
   >  1970s onwards as the 'proper true' way to pluck the lute!
   >  I also very much agree with your earlier observation that equal feel
   >  does not mean equal tension - the early writers would surely not
   have
   >  been reporting the outcome of scientific instrument measurements but
   of
   >  how it felt under the fingers when plucking. In short the stiffness
   of
   >  thicker strings of the same material can make them harder to set in
   >  motion and thus mislead into thinking more force is being applied.
   >  Incidentally, there can sometimes be confusion between elasticity
   and
   >  stiffness: elasticity is basically the ability of a material to
   resume
   >  its normal shape after being deformed (in this case stretched - a
   good
   >  thing in this context); whereas stiffness is the force required to
   >  deform (stretch ie displace) the string by an amount. Thus stiffness
   is
   >  related to what happens before a string is released whereas
   elasticity
   >  is what happens after. In this context elasticity is probably a good
   >  thing; stiffness not so.
   >  However my real purpose in writing is to ask precisely what you mean
   by
   >  a 'darker' sound. Is it one with a more predominant fundemental note
   or
   >  what?
   >  regards and, please, keep up the good work
   >  Martyn
   >__
   >
   >  From: Mimmo Peruffo <[2]mperu...@aquilacorde.com>
   >  To: Matthew Daillie <[3]dail...@club-internet.fr>; Martin Shepherd
   >  <[4]mar...@luteshop.co.uk>
   >  Cc: [5]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   >  Sent: Thursday, 2 February 2017, 10:01
   >  Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
   >  Mimmo again;
   >  the Gualtier tbel hs a diffrent interpretation that those relate to
   >  gauges
   >  or gut ribbons.
   >  I will do a article in matter in the next future.
   >  I am going to believe that maybe is better to switch to another
   >  elastomer
   >  whose elasticity is less. I have have already done some tests and I
   >  must
   >  admit that I was in figth with me which put in the market. Tony
   Bailes
   >  topld
   >  me: pout the stiffer one because the osund is darker and they are
   far
   >  less
   >  stretchly. Equal feel versus equal tension: well said dear Martin.
   >  there are
   >  other few things to consider; however the lute setup must be  done
   >  scaled.
   >  Ciao
   >  mimmo
   >  -Messaggio originale-
   >  From: Martin Shepherd
   >  Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 10:26 AM
   >  To: Mimmo ; Matthew Daillie
   >  Cc: [1][6]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   >  Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
   >  Dear All,
   >  If we're really interested in how lutes might have been strung
   >  historically, I think it's important to take the historical evidence
   >  (very little of it, I know)

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Mimmo]

Thanks Martyn, 
I mean more predominant fundamental and less sustain, more percussive .
Bacon is interesting here,
By the way, I am leaving Italy to,London royal,college .,there is a meeting 
about mandolin this Saturday 
Any chance to,meet,you?
Mimmo 

> Il giorno 02 feb 2017, alle ore 11:53, Martyn Hodgson 
> <hodgsonmar...@cs.dartmouth.edu> ha scritto:
> 
>   Dear Mimmo,
>   Thank you for your continuing efforts in manufacturing these strings.
>   I agree with much of what has been said: - especially with Martin
>   Shepherd about the unfortunate influence rose pluckers have had on
>   stringing often leading to high tensions of overwound strings in the
>   bass to avoid rattles. Much of this is caused by the large amplitude of
>   oscillation at the middle of a string when set in motion nearer the mid
>   point than close to the bridge. So playing close to the bridge not only
>   follows the practice of the post-sixteenth century 'Old Ones'  but also
>   leads to real advantages. This manner of playing is, of course, also
>   linked to the still widespread 'thumb under' school promoted from the
>   1970s onwards as the 'proper true' way to pluck the lute!
>   I also very much agree with your earlier observation that equal feel
>   does not mean equal tension - the early writers would surely not have
>   been reporting the outcome of scientific instrument measurements but of
>   how it felt under the fingers when plucking. In short the stiffness of
>   thicker strings of the same material can make them harder to set in
>   motion and thus mislead into thinking more force is being applied.
>   Incidentally, there can sometimes be confusion between elasticity and
>   stiffness: elasticity is basically the ability of a material to resume
>   its normal shape after being deformed (in this case stretched - a good
>   thing in this context); whereas stiffness is the force required to
>   deform (stretch ie displace) the string by an amount. Thus stiffness is
>   related to what happens before a string is released whereas elasticity
>   is what happens after. In this context elasticity is probably a good
>   thing; stiffness not so.
>   However my real purpose in writing is to ask precisely what you mean by
>   a 'darker' sound. Is it one with a more predominant fundemental note or
>   what?
>   regards and, please, keep up the good work
>   Martyn
> __
> 
>   From: Mimmo Peruffo <mperu...@aquilacorde.com>
>   To: Matthew Daillie <dail...@club-internet.fr>; Martin Shepherd
>   <mar...@luteshop.co.uk>
>   Cc: baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
>   Sent: Thursday, 2 February 2017, 10:01
>   Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
>   Mimmo again;
>   the Gualtier tbel hs a diffrent interpretation that those relate to
>   gauges
>   or gut ribbons.
>   I will do a article in matter in the next future.
>   I am going to believe that maybe is better to switch to another
>   elastomer
>   whose elasticity is less. I have have already done some tests and I
>   must
>   admit that I was in figth with me which put in the market. Tony Bailes
>   topld
>   me: pout the stiffer one because the osund is darker and they are  far
>   less
>   stretchly. Equal feel versus equal tension: well said dear Martin.
>   there are
>   other few things to consider; however the lute setup must be  done
>   scaled.
>   Ciao
>   mimmo
>   -Messaggio originale-
>   From: Martin Shepherd
>   Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 10:26 AM
>   To: Mimmo ; Matthew Daillie
>   Cc: [1]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
>   Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
>   Dear All,
>   If we're really interested in how lutes might have been strung
>   historically, I think it's important to take the historical evidence
>   (very little of it, I know) as a starting point, rather than the habits
>   of modern players using modern strings.
>   We have a lot of iconographic evidence (plus the evidence from
>   measuring
>   bridge holes) that bass strings were rather thin - so the conclusion
>   that they were more dense than a plain gut string seems pretty well
>   inescapable.
>   Having said that, the tensions which modern players expect may be too
>   high, for several reasons.  One is that we are accustomed to wound
>   strings, which are very flexible and don't work at all well if they are
>   at too low a tension.  A related problem is that modern players tend to
>   play much further from the bridge than their historical counterparts.
>   Another issue is that we have tended to assume roughly equal tension
>   across all the strings, so we have not experimented much with a
>   tap

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Jarosław Lipski]

Excellent! I am looking forward to it. Please, let us know when they are ready.
Good luck :)

Jaroslaw


> On 02 Feb 2017, at 13:03, Mimmo Peruffo <mperu...@aquilacorde.com> wrote:
> 
> Well, seeing this post I have the idea to switch to these stiffer ones. at 
> the end of the day they are closer to those loaded strings made of gut.
> I will do some samples in advance.
> Mimmo
> 
> ps: long diapason:  I have not in aim to do them for very long diapasons such 
> as chitarrrone. The diapasons are so long for plain gut, not for denser 
> strings.  I have in aim to cover the Archlutes Sellas models, whose 
> string-dipasons has the octaves paired. Octaves are always a good  indicator 
> that it is time to have a denser material than gut or similars
> 
> -Messaggio originale- From: Jarosław Lipski
> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 11:08 AM
> To: baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
> Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
> 
> No problem at all, they could be darker (even better!). Anyway it’s quite a 
> good idea IMHO. If some like overwounds they can always use just…ocerwounds;) 
> I really can’t see any point in imitating overwounds.
> Please let us know if you make a new stiffer batch.
> 
> JL
> 
> 
>> On 02 Feb 2017, at 10:53, Mimmo Peruffo <mperu...@aquilacorde.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Well, Tony Bailes mailed me that:
>> 
>> Writing in 1629 Francis Bacon stresses that low strings should produce a 
>> bass sound: “for we see, that in one of the lower strings of a lute, there 
>> soundeth not the sound of the treble, nor any mixt sound , but onely the 
>> sound of the base.”
>> 
>> Mimmo
>> 
>> ps: I can made them less stretchly using a different elastomer. the problem 
>> is that they became a bit darker in the sound. Any suggestion? I am ready to 
>> start with the big batch. I am a bit worry about those that like that they 
>> are in some way still close to the wound strings
>> 
>> 
>> -Messaggio originale- From: Martin Shepherd
>> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 10:26 AM
>> To: Mimmo ; Matthew Daillie
>> Cc: baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
>> Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
>> 
>> Dear All,
>> 
>> If we're really interested in how lutes might have been strung
>> historically, I think it's important to take the historical evidence
>> (very little of it, I know) as a starting point, rather than the habits
>> of modern players using modern strings.
>> 
>> We have a lot of iconographic evidence (plus the evidence from measuring
>> bridge holes) that bass strings were rather thin - so the conclusion
>> that they were more dense than a plain gut string seems pretty well
>> inescapable.
>> 
>> Having said that, the tensions which modern players expect may be too
>> high, for several reasons.  One is that we are accustomed to wound
>> strings, which are very flexible and don't work at all well if they are
>> at too low a tension.  A related problem is that modern players tend to
>> play much further from the bridge than their historical counterparts.
>> 
>> Another issue is that we have tended to assume roughly equal tension
>> across all the strings, so we have not experimented much with a tapering
>> of tension as we go down into the bass.  One interesting aspect of the
>> iconography is that strings get progressively thicker as they go down
>> into the bass, but not as much as one would expect if the tensions were
>> equal.  To make this concrete, for a descent of an octave (maintaining
>> equal tension) the string should double in diameter, so the 6th course
>> on a 6c lute should be nearly twice the diameter of the 4th.
>> 
>> On the subject of string diameters, Mimmo estimates the thinnest string
>> which could have been made in the past as .42-.44mm. Single top strings
>> will need to be a higher tension than the individual strings of a
>> course, but even so it is more or less inevitable that the tension must
>> be tapered to some degree, otherwise bass strings (and tension) would be
>> enormous.  Mimmo has recently written that equal tension is different
>> from equal "feel", and I agree with his suggestion that (in order to
>> maintain equal feel) thinner strings should therefore be at a higher
>> tension than thicker ones.  I have done this as a matter of instinct for
>> many years - using a higher tension on the second course than on the
>> third, for example.  As an aside, I note that most of us have tended to
>> use octaves at a lower tension than the fundamentals, but the string
>> table i

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Mimmo Peruffo]

Well, seeing this post I have the idea to switch to these stiffer ones. at 
the end of the day they are closer to those loaded strings made of gut.

I will do some samples in advance.
Mimmo

ps: long diapason:  I have not in aim to do them for very long diapasons 
such as chitarrrone. The diapasons are so long for plain gut, not for denser 
strings.  I have in aim to cover the Archlutes Sellas models, whose 
string-dipasons has the octaves paired. Octaves are always a good  indicator 
that it is time to have a denser material than gut or similars


-Messaggio originale- 
From: Jarosław Lipski

Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 11:08 AM
To: baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

No problem at all, they could be darker (even better!). Anyway it’s quite a 
good idea IMHO. If some like overwounds they can always use 
just…ocerwounds;) I really can’t see any point in imitating overwounds.

Please let us know if you make a new stiffer batch.

JL



On 02 Feb 2017, at 10:53, Mimmo Peruffo <mperu...@aquilacorde.com> wrote:

Well, Tony Bailes mailed me that:

Writing in 1629 Francis Bacon stresses that low strings should produce a 
bass sound: “for we see, that in one of the lower strings of a lute, there 
soundeth not the sound of the treble, nor any mixt sound , but onely the 
sound of the base.”


Mimmo

ps: I can made them less stretchly using a different elastomer. the 
problem is that they became a bit darker in the sound. Any suggestion? I 
am ready to start with the big batch. I am a bit worry about those that 
like that they are in some way still close to the wound strings



-Messaggio originale- From: Martin Shepherd
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 10:26 AM
To: Mimmo ; Matthew Daillie
Cc: baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

Dear All,

If we're really interested in how lutes might have been strung
historically, I think it's important to take the historical evidence
(very little of it, I know) as a starting point, rather than the habits
of modern players using modern strings.

We have a lot of iconographic evidence (plus the evidence from measuring
bridge holes) that bass strings were rather thin - so the conclusion
that they were more dense than a plain gut string seems pretty well
inescapable.

Having said that, the tensions which modern players expect may be too
high, for several reasons.  One is that we are accustomed to wound
strings, which are very flexible and don't work at all well if they are
at too low a tension.  A related problem is that modern players tend to
play much further from the bridge than their historical counterparts.

Another issue is that we have tended to assume roughly equal tension
across all the strings, so we have not experimented much with a tapering
of tension as we go down into the bass.  One interesting aspect of the
iconography is that strings get progressively thicker as they go down
into the bass, but not as much as one would expect if the tensions were
equal.  To make this concrete, for a descent of an octave (maintaining
equal tension) the string should double in diameter, so the 6th course
on a 6c lute should be nearly twice the diameter of the 4th.

On the subject of string diameters, Mimmo estimates the thinnest string
which could have been made in the past as .42-.44mm. Single top strings
will need to be a higher tension than the individual strings of a
course, but even so it is more or less inevitable that the tension must
be tapered to some degree, otherwise bass strings (and tension) would be
enormous.  Mimmo has recently written that equal tension is different
from equal "feel", and I agree with his suggestion that (in order to
maintain equal feel) thinner strings should therefore be at a higher
tension than thicker ones.  I have done this as a matter of instinct for
many years - using a higher tension on the second course than on the
third, for example.  As an aside, I note that most of us have tended to
use octaves at a lower tension than the fundamentals, but the string
table in the Gaultier book (discovered by Andreas Schlegel), and my more
recent experiments, suggest perhaps a more equal tension.

As far as the characteristics of the strings is concerned, there are
some apparent contradictions in the historical evidence.  Many paintings
give the impression that the strings were very floppy (compared to
modern gut strings), with lengths of spare string dangling from the
pegbox.  On the other hand, one of the tests for a good string
recommended by Dowland is "stiffness to the finger" (assessed before
putting the string on the lute by pressing the end of the string to see
how bendy it is).  In terms of elasticity, Mace talks about a string
stretching "an inch or two" in the winding up - suggesting a string much
more elastic than almost any modern string.

Then we come to another apparent contradiction on the area 

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re : [BAROQUE-LUTE] Baroque Lute Stringing

[Anthony Hind]

   Presumably FB was talking of dark diapasons and not bass courses
   diapasons with their octaves? Modern wire wounds are very bright and
   there is little need for strong octaves. Personally when using Venice
   gut loaded that were quite flexible and dark, I moved to higher tension
   Venice octaves to compensate the slightly flappy quality of loaded
   basses (which at first had tended to rattle slightly). This works very
   well, the bass initially gives way to the thumb pressure, but the
   higher tension octave gives a delayed resistance (all tendency to
   rattle disappeared). I preferred this to going to a thicker higher
   tension loaded bass which could sometimes sound slightly over damped. I
   have kept these octaves with the new synthetic basses, and the few
   lutenists who have tried my lute found it sounded well with this
   configuration (how well this corresponds to evidence of historic
   stringing, I am not sure. Although where indicated that octaves should
   be played without basses, my octaves have a good tuneful presence,
   which I doubt would be the case with lower tension ones; but along with
   FB some might argue 'basses should be basses', whereas mine have a
   slightly singing Meanes presence to them).

   In the past, I have used first generation stiff HT loaded gut and
   second generation flexible Venice loaded gut and now the flexible
   synthetic ones, and after a time and some tweaking, managed with each
   type. I think the playing style alters somewhat to adapt to stringing
   and tensions, but I can imagine that those used to very stiff
   wirewounds might take some time to adapt. On the other hand, if a
   flexible bass is false, no increased tension of the octave will prevent
   it from rattling.
   Regards
   Anthony

   Le jeudi, février 2, 2017, 10:53 AM, Mimmo Peruffo
   <mperu...@aquilacorde.com> a écrit :

   The Well, Tony Bailes mailed me that:
   Writing in 1629 Francis Bacon stresses that low strings should produce
   a
bass sound: "for we see, that in one of the lower strings of a lute,
   there
   When soundeth not the sound of the treble, nor any mixt sound , but
   onely the
   sound of the base."
   Mimmo
   ps: I can made them less stretchly using a different elastomer. the
   problem
   is that they became a bit darker in the sound. Any suggestion? I am
   ready to
   start with the big batch. I am a bit worry about those that like that
   they
   are in some way still close to the wound strings
   -Messaggio originale-
   From: Martin Shepherd
   Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 10:26 AM
   To: Mimmo ; Matthew Daillie
   Cc: [1]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
   Dear All,
   If we're really interested in how lutes might have been strung
   historically, I think it's important to take the historical evidence
   (very little of it, I know) as a starting point, rather than the habits
   of modern players using modern strings.
   We have a lot of iconographic evidence (plus the evidence from
   measuring
   bridge holes) that bass strings were rather thin - so the conclusion
   that they were more dense than a plain gut string seems pretty well
   inescapable.
   Having said that, the tensions which modern players expect may be too
   high, for several reasons.  One is that we are accustomed to wound
   strings, which are very flexible and don't work at all well if they are
   at too low a tension.  A related problem is that modern players tend to
   play much further from the bridge than their historical counterparts.
   Another issue is that we have tended to assume roughly equal tension
   across all the strings, so we have not experimented much with a
   tapering
   of tension as we go down into the bass.  One interesting aspect of the
   iconography is that strings get progressively thicker as they go down
   into the bass, but not as much as one would expect if the tensions were
   equal.  To make this concrete, for a descent of an octave (maintaining
   equal tension) the string should double in diameter, so the 6th course
   on a 6c lute should be nearly twice the diameter of the 4th.
   On the subject of string diameters, Mimmo estimates the thinnest string
   which could have been made in the past as .42-.44mm. Single top strings
   will need to be a higher tension than the individual strings of a
   course, but even so it is more or less inevitable that the tension must
   be tapered to some degree, otherwise bass strings (and tension) would
   be
   enormous.  Mimmo has recently written that equal tension is different
   from equal "feel", and I agree with his suggestion that (in order to
   maintain equal feel) thinner strings should therefore be at a higher
   tension than thicker ones.  I have done this as a matter of instinct
   for
   many years - using a higher tension on the second course than on the
   third, for example.  As an asi

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Martyn Hodgson]

   Dear Mimmo,
   Thank you for your continuing efforts in manufacturing these strings.
   I agree with much of what has been said: - especially with Martin
   Shepherd about the unfortunate influence rose pluckers have had on
   stringing often leading to high tensions of overwound strings in the
   bass to avoid rattles. Much of this is caused by the large amplitude of
   oscillation at the middle of a string when set in motion nearer the mid
   point than close to the bridge. So playing close to the bridge not only
   follows the practice of the post-sixteenth century 'Old Ones'  but also
   leads to real advantages. This manner of playing is, of course, also
   linked to the still widespread 'thumb under' school promoted from the
   1970s onwards as the 'proper true' way to pluck the lute!
   I also very much agree with your earlier observation that equal feel
   does not mean equal tension - the early writers would surely not have
   been reporting the outcome of scientific instrument measurements but of
   how it felt under the fingers when plucking. In short the stiffness of
   thicker strings of the same material can make them harder to set in
   motion and thus mislead into thinking more force is being applied.
   Incidentally, there can sometimes be confusion between elasticity and
   stiffness: elasticity is basically the ability of a material to resume
   its normal shape after being deformed (in this case stretched - a good
   thing in this context); whereas stiffness is the force required to
   deform (stretch ie displace) the string by an amount. Thus stiffness is
   related to what happens before a string is released whereas elasticity
   is what happens after. In this context elasticity is probably a good
   thing; stiffness not so.
   However my real purpose in writing is to ask precisely what you mean by
   a 'darker' sound. Is it one with a more predominant fundemental note or
   what?
   regards and, please, keep up the good work
   Martyn
 __

   From: Mimmo Peruffo <mperu...@aquilacorde.com>
   To: Matthew Daillie <dail...@club-internet.fr>; Martin Shepherd
   <mar...@luteshop.co.uk>
   Cc: baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   Sent: Thursday, 2 February 2017, 10:01
   Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
   Mimmo again;
   the Gualtier tbel hs a diffrent interpretation that those relate to
   gauges
   or gut ribbons.
   I will do a article in matter in the next future.
   I am going to believe that maybe is better to switch to another
   elastomer
   whose elasticity is less. I have have already done some tests and I
   must
   admit that I was in figth with me which put in the market. Tony Bailes
   topld
   me: pout the stiffer one because the osund is darker and they are  far
   less
   stretchly. Equal feel versus equal tension: well said dear Martin.
   there are
   other few things to consider; however the lute setup must be  done
   scaled.
   Ciao
   mimmo
   -Messaggio originale-
   From: Martin Shepherd
   Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 10:26 AM
   To: Mimmo ; Matthew Daillie
   Cc: [1]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
   Dear All,
   If we're really interested in how lutes might have been strung
   historically, I think it's important to take the historical evidence
   (very little of it, I know) as a starting point, rather than the habits
   of modern players using modern strings.
   We have a lot of iconographic evidence (plus the evidence from
   measuring
   bridge holes) that bass strings were rather thin - so the conclusion
   that they were more dense than a plain gut string seems pretty well
   inescapable.
   Having said that, the tensions which modern players expect may be too
   high, for several reasons.  One is that we are accustomed to wound
   strings, which are very flexible and don't work at all well if they are
   at too low a tension.  A related problem is that modern players tend to
   play much further from the bridge than their historical counterparts.
   Another issue is that we have tended to assume roughly equal tension
   across all the strings, so we have not experimented much with a
   tapering
   of tension as we go down into the bass.  One interesting aspect of the
   iconography is that strings get progressively thicker as they go down
   into the bass, but not as much as one would expect if the tensions were
   equal.  To make this concrete, for a descent of an octave (maintaining
   equal tension) the string should double in diameter, so the 6th course
   on a 6c lute should be nearly twice the diameter of the 4th.
   On the subject of string diameters, Mimmo estimates the thinnest string
   which could have been made in the past as .42-.44mm. Single top strings
   will need to be a higher tension than the individual strings of a
   course, but even so it is more or less inevitabl

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Jarosław Lipski]

No problem at all, they could be darker (even better!). Anyway it’s quite a 
good idea IMHO. If some like overwounds they can always use just…ocerwounds;) I 
really can’t see any point in imitating overwounds.
Please let us know if you make a new stiffer batch.

JL


> On 02 Feb 2017, at 10:53, Mimmo Peruffo <mperu...@aquilacorde.com> wrote:
> 
> Well, Tony Bailes mailed me that:
> 
> Writing in 1629 Francis Bacon stresses that low strings should produce a bass 
> sound: “for we see, that in one of the lower strings of a lute, there 
> soundeth not the sound of the treble, nor any mixt sound , but onely the 
> sound of the base.”
> 
> Mimmo
> 
> ps: I can made them less stretchly using a different elastomer. the problem 
> is that they became a bit darker in the sound. Any suggestion? I am ready to 
> start with the big batch. I am a bit worry about those that like that they 
> are in some way still close to the wound strings
> 
> 
> -Messaggio originale- From: Martin Shepherd
> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 10:26 AM
> To: Mimmo ; Matthew Daillie
> Cc: baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
> Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> If we're really interested in how lutes might have been strung
> historically, I think it's important to take the historical evidence
> (very little of it, I know) as a starting point, rather than the habits
> of modern players using modern strings.
> 
> We have a lot of iconographic evidence (plus the evidence from measuring
> bridge holes) that bass strings were rather thin - so the conclusion
> that they were more dense than a plain gut string seems pretty well
> inescapable.
> 
> Having said that, the tensions which modern players expect may be too
> high, for several reasons.  One is that we are accustomed to wound
> strings, which are very flexible and don't work at all well if they are
> at too low a tension.  A related problem is that modern players tend to
> play much further from the bridge than their historical counterparts.
> 
> Another issue is that we have tended to assume roughly equal tension
> across all the strings, so we have not experimented much with a tapering
> of tension as we go down into the bass.  One interesting aspect of the
> iconography is that strings get progressively thicker as they go down
> into the bass, but not as much as one would expect if the tensions were
> equal.  To make this concrete, for a descent of an octave (maintaining
> equal tension) the string should double in diameter, so the 6th course
> on a 6c lute should be nearly twice the diameter of the 4th.
> 
> On the subject of string diameters, Mimmo estimates the thinnest string
> which could have been made in the past as .42-.44mm. Single top strings
> will need to be a higher tension than the individual strings of a
> course, but even so it is more or less inevitable that the tension must
> be tapered to some degree, otherwise bass strings (and tension) would be
> enormous.  Mimmo has recently written that equal tension is different
> from equal "feel", and I agree with his suggestion that (in order to
> maintain equal feel) thinner strings should therefore be at a higher
> tension than thicker ones.  I have done this as a matter of instinct for
> many years - using a higher tension on the second course than on the
> third, for example.  As an aside, I note that most of us have tended to
> use octaves at a lower tension than the fundamentals, but the string
> table in the Gaultier book (discovered by Andreas Schlegel), and my more
> recent experiments, suggest perhaps a more equal tension.
> 
> As far as the characteristics of the strings is concerned, there are
> some apparent contradictions in the historical evidence.  Many paintings
> give the impression that the strings were very floppy (compared to
> modern gut strings), with lengths of spare string dangling from the
> pegbox.  On the other hand, one of the tests for a good string
> recommended by Dowland is "stiffness to the finger" (assessed before
> putting the string on the lute by pressing the end of the string to see
> how bendy it is).  In terms of elasticity, Mace talks about a string
> stretching "an inch or two" in the winding up - suggesting a string much
> more elastic than almost any modern string.
> 
> Then we come to another apparent contradiction on the area of modern
> experiments.  I have found the Savarez KF strings (made from PVDF, much
> more dense then gut, so perhaps more like a "loaded" gut string as far
> as density is concerned) work very well, in spite of being very stiff
> and not very elastic.  They also work well at lower tensions than other
> types of strin

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Mimmo Peruffo]

Mimmo again;
the Gualtier tbel hs a diffrent interpretation that those relate to gauges 
or gut ribbons.

I will do a article in matter in the next future.
I am going to believe that maybe is better to switch to another elastomer 
whose elasticity is less. I have have already done some tests and I must 
admit that I was in figth with me which put in the market. Tony Bailes topld 
me: pout the stiffer one because the osund is darker and they are  far less 
stretchly. Equal feel versus equal tension: well said dear Martin. there are 
other few things to consider; however the lute setup must be  done scaled.

Ciao
mimmo

-Messaggio originale- 
From: Martin Shepherd

Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 10:26 AM
To: Mimmo ; Matthew Daillie
Cc: baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

Dear All,

If we're really interested in how lutes might have been strung
historically, I think it's important to take the historical evidence
(very little of it, I know) as a starting point, rather than the habits
of modern players using modern strings.

We have a lot of iconographic evidence (plus the evidence from measuring
bridge holes) that bass strings were rather thin - so the conclusion
that they were more dense than a plain gut string seems pretty well
inescapable.

Having said that, the tensions which modern players expect may be too
high, for several reasons.  One is that we are accustomed to wound
strings, which are very flexible and don't work at all well if they are
at too low a tension.  A related problem is that modern players tend to
play much further from the bridge than their historical counterparts.

Another issue is that we have tended to assume roughly equal tension
across all the strings, so we have not experimented much with a tapering
of tension as we go down into the bass.  One interesting aspect of the
iconography is that strings get progressively thicker as they go down
into the bass, but not as much as one would expect if the tensions were
equal.  To make this concrete, for a descent of an octave (maintaining
equal tension) the string should double in diameter, so the 6th course
on a 6c lute should be nearly twice the diameter of the 4th.

On the subject of string diameters, Mimmo estimates the thinnest string
which could have been made in the past as .42-.44mm. Single top strings
will need to be a higher tension than the individual strings of a
course, but even so it is more or less inevitable that the tension must
be tapered to some degree, otherwise bass strings (and tension) would be
enormous.  Mimmo has recently written that equal tension is different
from equal "feel", and I agree with his suggestion that (in order to
maintain equal feel) thinner strings should therefore be at a higher
tension than thicker ones.  I have done this as a matter of instinct for
many years - using a higher tension on the second course than on the
third, for example.  As an aside, I note that most of us have tended to
use octaves at a lower tension than the fundamentals, but the string
table in the Gaultier book (discovered by Andreas Schlegel), and my more
recent experiments, suggest perhaps a more equal tension.

As far as the characteristics of the strings is concerned, there are
some apparent contradictions in the historical evidence.  Many paintings
give the impression that the strings were very floppy (compared to
modern gut strings), with lengths of spare string dangling from the
pegbox.  On the other hand, one of the tests for a good string
recommended by Dowland is "stiffness to the finger" (assessed before
putting the string on the lute by pressing the end of the string to see
how bendy it is).  In terms of elasticity, Mace talks about a string
stretching "an inch or two" in the winding up - suggesting a string much
more elastic than almost any modern string.

Then we come to another apparent contradiction on the area of modern
experiments.  I have found the Savarez KF strings (made from PVDF, much
more dense then gut, so perhaps more like a "loaded" gut string as far
as density is concerned) work very well, in spite of being very stiff
and not very elastic.  They also work well at lower tensions than other
types of string.  They are usually pretty true, and that helps.  The
implication seems to be that a string which is sufficiently dense (and
can therefore be thin) doesn't need to be very elastic in order to
work.  I don't know how to reconcile this with the historical evidence,
but it occurs to me that there is a difference between elasticity
(stretchiness) and "sideways flexibility" or "floppy flexibility" (which
it seems the old strings may have had).  Think of the difference between
an rubber band and a piece of household string - the cotton string is
very floppy but has very little elasticity.  All things considered I
would definitely be interested to see Mimmo make a string with lower
elasticity

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Mimmo Peruffo]

Well, Tony Bailes mailed me that:

Writing in 1629 Francis Bacon stresses that low strings should produce a 
bass sound: “for we see, that in one of the lower strings of a lute, there 
soundeth not the sound of the treble, nor any mixt sound , but onely the 
sound of the base.”


Mimmo

ps: I can made them less stretchly using a different elastomer. the problem 
is that they became a bit darker in the sound. Any suggestion? I am ready to 
start with the big batch. I am a bit worry about those that like that they 
are in some way still close to the wound strings



-Messaggio originale- 
From: Martin Shepherd

Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 10:26 AM
To: Mimmo ; Matthew Daillie
Cc: baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

Dear All,

If we're really interested in how lutes might have been strung
historically, I think it's important to take the historical evidence
(very little of it, I know) as a starting point, rather than the habits
of modern players using modern strings.

We have a lot of iconographic evidence (plus the evidence from measuring
bridge holes) that bass strings were rather thin - so the conclusion
that they were more dense than a plain gut string seems pretty well
inescapable.

Having said that, the tensions which modern players expect may be too
high, for several reasons.  One is that we are accustomed to wound
strings, which are very flexible and don't work at all well if they are
at too low a tension.  A related problem is that modern players tend to
play much further from the bridge than their historical counterparts.

Another issue is that we have tended to assume roughly equal tension
across all the strings, so we have not experimented much with a tapering
of tension as we go down into the bass.  One interesting aspect of the
iconography is that strings get progressively thicker as they go down
into the bass, but not as much as one would expect if the tensions were
equal.  To make this concrete, for a descent of an octave (maintaining
equal tension) the string should double in diameter, so the 6th course
on a 6c lute should be nearly twice the diameter of the 4th.

On the subject of string diameters, Mimmo estimates the thinnest string
which could have been made in the past as .42-.44mm. Single top strings
will need to be a higher tension than the individual strings of a
course, but even so it is more or less inevitable that the tension must
be tapered to some degree, otherwise bass strings (and tension) would be
enormous.  Mimmo has recently written that equal tension is different
from equal "feel", and I agree with his suggestion that (in order to
maintain equal feel) thinner strings should therefore be at a higher
tension than thicker ones.  I have done this as a matter of instinct for
many years - using a higher tension on the second course than on the
third, for example.  As an aside, I note that most of us have tended to
use octaves at a lower tension than the fundamentals, but the string
table in the Gaultier book (discovered by Andreas Schlegel), and my more
recent experiments, suggest perhaps a more equal tension.

As far as the characteristics of the strings is concerned, there are
some apparent contradictions in the historical evidence.  Many paintings
give the impression that the strings were very floppy (compared to
modern gut strings), with lengths of spare string dangling from the
pegbox.  On the other hand, one of the tests for a good string
recommended by Dowland is "stiffness to the finger" (assessed before
putting the string on the lute by pressing the end of the string to see
how bendy it is).  In terms of elasticity, Mace talks about a string
stretching "an inch or two" in the winding up - suggesting a string much
more elastic than almost any modern string.

Then we come to another apparent contradiction on the area of modern
experiments.  I have found the Savarez KF strings (made from PVDF, much
more dense then gut, so perhaps more like a "loaded" gut string as far
as density is concerned) work very well, in spite of being very stiff
and not very elastic.  They also work well at lower tensions than other
types of string.  They are usually pretty true, and that helps.  The
implication seems to be that a string which is sufficiently dense (and
can therefore be thin) doesn't need to be very elastic in order to
work.  I don't know how to reconcile this with the historical evidence,
but it occurs to me that there is a difference between elasticity
(stretchiness) and "sideways flexibility" or "floppy flexibility" (which
it seems the old strings may have had).  Think of the difference between
an rubber band and a piece of household string - the cotton string is
very floppy but has very little elasticity.  All things considered I
would definitely be interested to see Mimmo make a string with lower
elasticity. Trueness is paramount - if a string is even slightly 

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Jarosław Lipski]

Dear Mimmo,

Firstly I’d like to congratulate you for inventing a new type of bass strings, 
as those of us who would like to use plastic equivalent of gut had very little 
choice until now. Your CD strings sound nice with quite solid fundamental. The 
only problem that I found disturbing is their elasticity. I choose gauges using 
your advice, but they still tend to buzz against adjacent strings. I tried them 
on several lutes and only on those that have wide spacing I was able to play 
cleanly. In this case maybe your idea of using a stiffer plastic blend could be 
a good one. I can’t speak for everyone, but for me some loss of brightness 
wouldn’t matter at all.
Just my two cents ;)
Good luck and all the best!

Jaroslaw


> On 02 Feb 2017, at 07:20, Mimmo  wrote:
> Yes, there is no problem to switch to a more stiffer plastic blend. The 
> problem is that we lost a bit of brightness. Is it a good idea ? I do not 
> know, people has  the wound strings sound in comparation.
> Take care 
> Mimmo Peruffo 
> 
>> Il giorno 01 feb 2017, alle ore 23:34, Matthew Daillie 
>>  ha scritto:
>> 
>> Of the main copper-wound strings available, the fullest sounding and 
>> brightest are the Kürschner followed by the Savarez, then the Aquila Ds and 
>> lastly the Aquila DEs, which are pretty dull (and are no longer being made 
>> although several retailers still have quite large stocks available).
>> 
>> As far as I am concerned the jury is still out on the Aquila loaded nylgut. 
>> Many of us have high hopes but there are production problems (there has only 
>> been one batch so far and many diameters are unavailable) and some strings 
>> can have considerably sideways amplitude when plucked (even causing them to 
>> catch neighbouring strings!) as well as intonation issues (but that is also 
>> true of a lot of wound strings).
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Matthew
>> 
>>> On 01/02/2017 22:25, David Rastall wrote:
>>> It seems I am back playing Baroque lute once again, after rather a long 
>>> hiatus.  It’s been long enough that I have forgotten some of the points of 
>>> conventional wisdom concerning stringing.  I’m playing an 11c lute 
>>> currently strung with silver-wound basses and Pyramid nylon mids and 
>>> trebles.  I’m not so much bothered by the sustain of the nylon strings, but 
>>> if you folks can refresh my memory:  what is the best choice of basses to 
>>> get a sustain which is not downright thunky or chunky, but has shorter 
>>> sustain than the silver-wounds?
>>> 
>>> David R
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> To get on or off this list see list information at
>> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
> 
> 

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Martin Shepherd]

Dear All,

If we're really interested in how lutes might have been strung 
historically, I think it's important to take the historical evidence 
(very little of it, I know) as a starting point, rather than the habits 
of modern players using modern strings.


We have a lot of iconographic evidence (plus the evidence from measuring 
bridge holes) that bass strings were rather thin - so the conclusion 
that they were more dense than a plain gut string seems pretty well 
inescapable.


Having said that, the tensions which modern players expect may be too 
high, for several reasons.  One is that we are accustomed to wound 
strings, which are very flexible and don't work at all well if they are 
at too low a tension.  A related problem is that modern players tend to 
play much further from the bridge than their historical counterparts.


Another issue is that we have tended to assume roughly equal tension 
across all the strings, so we have not experimented much with a tapering 
of tension as we go down into the bass.  One interesting aspect of the 
iconography is that strings get progressively thicker as they go down 
into the bass, but not as much as one would expect if the tensions were 
equal.  To make this concrete, for a descent of an octave (maintaining 
equal tension) the string should double in diameter, so the 6th course 
on a 6c lute should be nearly twice the diameter of the 4th.


On the subject of string diameters, Mimmo estimates the thinnest string 
which could have been made in the past as .42-.44mm. Single top strings 
will need to be a higher tension than the individual strings of a 
course, but even so it is more or less inevitable that the tension must 
be tapered to some degree, otherwise bass strings (and tension) would be 
enormous.  Mimmo has recently written that equal tension is different 
from equal "feel", and I agree with his suggestion that (in order to 
maintain equal feel) thinner strings should therefore be at a higher 
tension than thicker ones.  I have done this as a matter of instinct for 
many years - using a higher tension on the second course than on the 
third, for example.  As an aside, I note that most of us have tended to 
use octaves at a lower tension than the fundamentals, but the string 
table in the Gaultier book (discovered by Andreas Schlegel), and my more 
recent experiments, suggest perhaps a more equal tension.


As far as the characteristics of the strings is concerned, there are 
some apparent contradictions in the historical evidence.  Many paintings 
give the impression that the strings were very floppy (compared to 
modern gut strings), with lengths of spare string dangling from the 
pegbox.  On the other hand, one of the tests for a good string 
recommended by Dowland is "stiffness to the finger" (assessed before 
putting the string on the lute by pressing the end of the string to see 
how bendy it is).  In terms of elasticity, Mace talks about a string 
stretching "an inch or two" in the winding up - suggesting a string much 
more elastic than almost any modern string.


Then we come to another apparent contradiction on the area of modern 
experiments.  I have found the Savarez KF strings (made from PVDF, much 
more dense then gut, so perhaps more like a "loaded" gut string as far 
as density is concerned) work very well, in spite of being very stiff 
and not very elastic.  They also work well at lower tensions than other 
types of string.  They are usually pretty true, and that helps.  The 
implication seems to be that a string which is sufficiently dense (and 
can therefore be thin) doesn't need to be very elastic in order to 
work.  I don't know how to reconcile this with the historical evidence, 
but it occurs to me that there is a difference between elasticity 
(stretchiness) and "sideways flexibility" or "floppy flexibility" (which 
it seems the old strings may have had).  Think of the difference between 
an rubber band and a piece of household string - the cotton string is 
very floppy but has very little elasticity.  All things considered I 
would definitely be interested to see Mimmo make a string with lower 
elasticity. Trueness is paramount - if a string is even slightly false 
the irregular pattern of vibration will make it rattle against the frets 
and it will never sound well even as an open string.


Just a few thoughts for you to chew on

Martin

On 02/02/2017 07:20, Mimmo wrote:

Well, I can add a few informations
There are no production problems it shelf. I had an extruder broken so I was 
obliged to wait the time to fix it. After that I finished the raw material. I 
received it a week ago.
They has more amplitude in the vibration whose problem is mostly because one 
should compensate the lack of tension when the strings are under tension. In 
practice they became thinner that any wound strings. In short, if the 
equivalent gut by calculation is 145 I raccomand  to install a 150 instead. So 
under tension the final gauge will 

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Matthew Daillie]

Dear Mimmo,
Thank you for this information. I'm glad all the gauges of the new loaded 
nylgut strings will be available again soon.
Your suggestion to compensate for the extra amplitude by using higher tension 
makes sense but will you be making gauges above 2.2 for the 13th course of a 
baroque lute for example?
Could you explain why the thicker gauges look as though they are all of the 
same diameter? There is no difference in colour either which one would expect 
if there was more copper powder to make them denser.
Are you planning to make longer strings at some point for theorbos?
Best,
Matthew



> On Feb 2, 2017, at 7:20, Mimmo  wrote:
> 
> Well, I can add a few informations 
> There are no production problems it shelf. I had an extruder broken so I was 
> obliged to wait the time to fix it. After that I finished the raw material. I 
> received it a week ago. 
> They has more amplitude in the vibration whose problem is mostly because one 
> should compensate the lack of tension when the strings are under tension. In 
> practice they became thinner that any wound strings. In short, if the 
> equivalent gut by calculation is 145 I raccomand  to install a 150 instead. 
> So under tension the final gauge will be the suitable one.
> Yes, there is no problem to switch to a more stiffer plastic blend. The 
> problem is that we lost a bit of brightness. Is it a good idea ? I do not 
> know, people has  the wound strings sound in comparation.
> Take care 
> Mimmo Peruffo 
> 
>> Il giorno 01 feb 2017, alle ore 23:34, Matthew Daillie 
>>  ha scritto:
>> 
>> Of the main copper-wound strings available, the fullest sounding and 
>> brightest are the Kürschner followed by the Savarez, then the Aquila Ds and 
>> lastly the Aquila DEs, which are pretty dull (and are no longer being made 
>> although several retailers still have quite large stocks available).
>> 
>> As far as I am concerned the jury is still out on the Aquila loaded nylgut. 
>> Many of us have high hopes but there are production problems (there has only 
>> been one batch so far and many diameters are unavailable) and some strings 
>> can have considerably sideways amplitude when plucked (even causing them to 
>> catch neighbouring strings!) as well as intonation issues (but that is also 
>> true of a lot of wound strings).
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Matthew
>> 
>>> On 01/02/2017 22:25, David Rastall wrote:
>>> It seems I am back playing Baroque lute once again, after rather a long 
>>> hiatus.  It’s been long enough that I have forgotten some of the points of 
>>> conventional wisdom concerning stringing.  I’m playing an 11c lute 
>>> currently strung with silver-wound basses and Pyramid nylon mids and 
>>> trebles.  I’m not so much bothered by the sustain of the nylon strings, but 
>>> if you folks can refresh my memory:  what is the best choice of basses to 
>>> get a sustain which is not downright thunky or chunky, but has shorter 
>>> sustain than the silver-wounds?
>>> 
>>> David R
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> To get on or off this list see list information at
>> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
> 

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Mimmo]

Well, I can add a few informations 
There are no production problems it shelf. I had an extruder broken so I was 
obliged to wait the time to fix it. After that I finished the raw material. I 
received it a week ago. 
They has more amplitude in the vibration whose problem is mostly because one 
should compensate the lack of tension when the strings are under tension. In 
practice they became thinner that any wound strings. In short, if the 
equivalent gut by calculation is 145 I raccomand  to install a 150 instead. So 
under tension the final gauge will be the suitable one.
Yes, there is no problem to switch to a more stiffer plastic blend. The problem 
is that we lost a bit of brightness. Is it a good idea ? I do not know, people 
has  the wound strings sound in comparation.
Take care 
Mimmo Peruffo 

> Il giorno 01 feb 2017, alle ore 23:34, Matthew Daillie 
>  ha scritto:
> 
> Of the main copper-wound strings available, the fullest sounding and 
> brightest are the Kürschner followed by the Savarez, then the Aquila Ds and 
> lastly the Aquila DEs, which are pretty dull (and are no longer being made 
> although several retailers still have quite large stocks available).
> 
> As far as I am concerned the jury is still out on the Aquila loaded nylgut. 
> Many of us have high hopes but there are production problems (there has only 
> been one batch so far and many diameters are unavailable) and some strings 
> can have considerably sideways amplitude when plucked (even causing them to 
> catch neighbouring strings!) as well as intonation issues (but that is also 
> true of a lot of wound strings).
> 
> Best,
> 
> Matthew
> 
>> On 01/02/2017 22:25, David Rastall wrote:
>> It seems I am back playing Baroque lute once again, after rather a long 
>> hiatus.  It’s been long enough that I have forgotten some of the points of 
>> conventional wisdom concerning stringing.  I’m playing an 11c lute currently 
>> strung with silver-wound basses and Pyramid nylon mids and trebles.  I’m not 
>> so much bothered by the sustain of the nylon strings, but if you folks can 
>> refresh my memory:  what is the best choice of basses to get a sustain which 
>> is not downright thunky or chunky, but has shorter sustain than the 
>> silver-wounds?
>> 
>> David R
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> To get on or off this list see list information at
> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Arto Wikla]

Hi

My first impressions of the Aquila loaded nylgut strings are very good 
(archlute cc, G and F; 2x5th, 6th and 7th).


My 1st check:
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7boXtpffL0=youtu.be

And 3 recorded real pieces:
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nV7q2jxMK3Q=youtu.be
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yspjfd8HIlc=youtu.be
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43ekVyr2BHI=youtu.be

And much more use in continuo...

I recommend!

Arto

On 01/02/17 23:33, Rob MacKillop wrote:

Hi David,

I'm hugely impressed with the new Aquila Loaded Nylgut - see their website for 
details. After three days they settled quickly into tuning, and I rarely have 
to tweak them. Good sound too.

Rob MacKillop


On 1 Feb 2017, at 21:25, David Rastall  wrote:

It seems I am back playing Baroque lute once again, after rather a long hiatus. 
 It’s been long enough that I have forgotten some of the points of conventional 
wisdom concerning stringing.  I’m playing an 11c lute currently strung with 
silver-wound basses and Pyramid nylon mids and trebles.  I’m not so much 
bothered by the sustain of the nylon strings, but if you folks can refresh my 
memory:  what is the best choice of basses to get a sustain which is not 
downright thunky or chunky, but has shorter sustain than the silver-wounds?

David R



To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Matthew Daillie]

Of the main copper-wound strings available, the fullest sounding and 
brightest are the Kürschner followed by the Savarez, then the Aquila Ds 
and lastly the Aquila DEs, which are pretty dull (and are no longer 
being made although several retailers still have quite large stocks 
available).


As far as I am concerned the jury is still out on the Aquila loaded 
nylgut. Many of us have high hopes but there are production problems 
(there has only been one batch so far and many diameters are 
unavailable) and some strings can have considerably sideways amplitude 
when plucked (even causing them to catch neighbouring strings!) as well 
as intonation issues (but that is also true of a lot of wound strings).


Best,

Matthew

On 01/02/2017 22:25, David Rastall wrote:

It seems I am back playing Baroque lute once again, after rather a long hiatus. 
 It’s been long enough that I have forgotten some of the points of conventional 
wisdom concerning stringing.  I’m playing an 11c lute currently strung with 
silver-wound basses and Pyramid nylon mids and trebles.  I’m not so much 
bothered by the sustain of the nylon strings, but if you folks can refresh my 
memory:  what is the best choice of basses to get a sustain which is not 
downright thunky or chunky, but has shorter sustain than the silver-wounds?

David R





To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Baroque Lute Stringing

[Rob MacKillop]

Hi David,

I'm hugely impressed with the new Aquila Loaded Nylgut - see their website for 
details. After three days they settled quickly into tuning, and I rarely have 
to tweak them. Good sound too. 

Rob MacKillop

> On 1 Feb 2017, at 21:25, David Rastall  wrote:
> 
> It seems I am back playing Baroque lute once again, after rather a long 
> hiatus.  It’s been long enough that I have forgotten some of the points of 
> conventional wisdom concerning stringing.  I’m playing an 11c lute currently 
> strung with silver-wound basses and Pyramid nylon mids and trebles.  I’m not 
> so much bothered by the sustain of the nylon strings, but if you folks can 
> refresh my memory:  what is the best choice of basses to get a sustain which 
> is not downright thunky or chunky, but has shorter sustain than the 
> silver-wounds?
> 
> David R
> 
> 
> 
> To get on or off this list see list information at
> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Baroque Lute Stringing

[David Rastall]

It seems I am back playing Baroque lute once again, after rather a long hiatus. 
 It’s been long enough that I have forgotten some of the points of conventional 
wisdom concerning stringing.  I’m playing an 11c lute currently strung with 
silver-wound basses and Pyramid nylon mids and trebles.  I’m not so much 
bothered by the sustain of the nylon strings, but if you folks can refresh my 
memory:  what is the best choice of basses to get a sustain which is not 
downright thunky or chunky, but has shorter sustain than the silver-wounds?

David R



To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

[BAROQUE-LUTE] Stringing in relation to lute size [WasRe: Ne Anthony Bailes CD

[Martyn Hodgson]

   Dear Bill,

   But on the smaller instrument you'll employ lower tensions - not the
   same tension as on a larger.

   To my knowledge, Dowland in the 'Varietie' gives the clearest advice
   about this  ('Of setting the right sizes of Strings upon the Lute').
   .. Wherefore first have consideration to the greatnesse or
   smallnesse of the Instrument, and thereby proportionably size your
   strings, appointing the bigger Lute the greater strings, and for the
   lesser Lute the smaller strings
   Mace says the same (page 65 speaking of the Stringing of the Lute) he
   writes 'And as to the Size, if it be a Large Lute, it must have the
   Rounder Strings; and a Small Lute, the Smaller'

   This is also, of course,  sensible advice since, if we want the same
   'feel' under the fingers (see earlier communications on this), we'll
   need to have lower tensions on smaller lutes and vice versa.

   Regarding 'feeI', I recall somebody amusingly (see archives) mentioning
   the feel of playing 'with iron bars' if we tried to pluck a small
   descant lute strung with, say, the strings used on a large bass lute
   and brought being both up to their relative pitches

   rgds

   M
   --- On Sun, 18/3/12, William Samson willsam...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

 From: William Samson willsam...@yahoo.co.uk
 Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Ne Anthony Bailes CD
 To: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk,
 baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
 Date: Sunday, 18 March, 2012, 10:03

  Hi again Martyn,
  Yes indeed - The smaller lute will need thinner strings than the
   larger
  one but if you go by the highest string almost breaking, that will
   lead
  to a lower tension as the thickness of the chanterelle doesn't seem
   to
  be related to the pitch at which it breaks.
  What I'm getting around to asking is, how do the tensions of the
   basses
  in a small lute compare to the equivalents in a large lute?  If the
  small lute has half the string length of the large, and is tuned an
  octave higher, the same tension will require the same string
  thickness.  So if you use thinner basses the tension would need to
   be
  somewhat less.
  Most string calculators I've come across ask the user for the
   tension
  they want to use, but don't give much in the way of guidance to what
   a
  reasonable tension should be.  Do you know if this has been
  investigated and written up anywhere?  All the advice I can find is
   for
  medium-sized lutes and suggests tensions around 3kg per string.
   That
  would presumably be less for a much smaller lute.
  Bill
  From: Martyn Hodgson [1]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk
  To: [2]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   [3]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu;
  William Samson [4]willsam...@yahoo.co.uk
  Sent: Sunday, 18 March 2012, 9:33
  Subject: Re: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Ne Anthony Bailes CD
  Dear Bill,
  Ah - but since we generally follow early advice and tune the highest
  string as high as it can stand, the pitching of the smaller lute
   will
  be higher than the larger (eg a whole tone between an instrument of
   76
  and one of 68cm). Also a smaller lute requires thinner strings than
   a
  larger one thus the stress (ie force pu area) and stiffness will be
  much the same.
  Comparing small pianos with larger is not the same comparison
  since they will both be tuned to the same pitch thus requiring, as
   you
  point out, thicker overwound strings for the smaller instrument.
  rgds
  Martyn --- On Sun, 18/3/12, William Samson
   [5]willsam...@yahoo.co.uk
  wrote:
From: William Samson [6]willsam...@yahoo.co.uk
Subject: Re: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Re: Ne Anthony Bailes CD
To: Martyn Hodgson [7]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk,
[8]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   [9]baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Date: Sunday, 18 March, 2012, 9:22
  Hi Martyn,
  I think some underlying assumptions need to be brought out here.
  The main difficulty with gut basses is the thickness of the string
   in
  comparison with its length.  The thicker the string, other things
   being
  equal, the stiffer it will be and so less able to produce the higher
  harmonics - or at least to have them sounding in tune with the
  fundamental.  This is why a small piano sounds so poor in the bass
  register compared to a concert grand - short thick basses.  It's
  possible to make gut strings more flexible (high-twist, catlines and
   so
  on) and reduce this effect.
  The other thing is that thicker strings (again, other things being
  equal) have more internal friction and so lack sustain.
  This doesn't matter so much for a long thick string as for a short
   one
  of the same thickness.
  One way to try and get around this is to reduce 

[BAROQUE-LUTE] stringing

[Roland Hayes]

Is it possible to have the first course at g (440) with a string length of 
67cm?  ( what material?) Roland Hayes



From: Richard Stone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri 9/7/2007 8:17 PM
To: baroque-lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Subject: [BAROQUE-LUTE] Theorboed 13-c baroque lute - to buy



Dear Baroque Lute Netters,

I am looking to buy a theorboed 13-course baroque lute, new or used. If
you have one to sell or know of somebody who has one for sale, please
contact me, Richard Stone, groberts ampersand sas dot upenn dot edu. I
only get the weekly baroque lute digest, so do please contact me
directly rather than via this list.

Thank you.

Richard Stone



To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html



--