[LUTE] A question; straps, standing
Here is a question out of pure curiosity... I've noticed over time that some Lute players have a strap, whether it be a guitar like strap or a thin nylon rope/string. The question I am wondering is, was the Lute ever actually played standing up? Josh + Joshua Edward Horn + -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: A question; straps, standing
I seem to remember that lutes were used in courtly manifestations (processions i.e. Entrée de luths) where a large number of lute players were walking and playing. In medieval and renaissance paintings lute players are often shown playing while standing up. Then there also are a number of pics where lutes are being played by courting men walking side by side with their loved ones. Cheers! Lex Op 7 okt 2012, om 09:56 heeft Joshua Horn het volgende geschreven: Here is a question out of pure curiosity... I've noticed over time that some Lute players have a strap, whether it be a guitar like strap or a thin nylon rope/string. The question I am wondering is, was the Lute ever actually played standing up? Josh + Joshua Edward Horn + -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: What is the point of synthetics?
Dear All, In fact, what I thought I normally found was that gut strings get settled in faster, but are more prone to movement than synthetics on a day to day basis, where synthetics can take weeks to settle down (gut minutes/hours), but once they do they can be settled for ages. I thought (and for nylon still do think) that all things considered one tunes around 10% more with gut strings than synthetics (considerable, but manageable). While I do find that the nylgut is pretty stable, as is nylon, I have had horrible experiences with carbon strings (when touring in NYC, Roman!) which kept on climbing in hot stage conditions (sometimes by nearly a semitone). This was on an excellent theorbo by Klaus Jacobsen. The gut and nylon strings on the same theorbo/conditions were vastly more stable. On the theorbo I am currently playing (which is admittedly a rubbish instrument by a certain French luthier who will remain anonymous) I find it is the overwound strings that are moving around the most. As I said, I brought the lute 'round to a good luthier, who reworked the pegs to minimise slippage, and this had helped enormously. That said, the three overwound strings continue to go wildly out of tune - much, much more than the nylgut, nylon, and much more than the GUT on the same instrument with the same pegs. In this case, it must be the metal windings that so contribute to the utter lack of stability. I have toured in the tropics (Ile de la Reunion, a French territory in the south Indian Ocean) with a 100% humidity index. It took several days for my theorbo, gut strings (and myself!) to adjust, but once this happened, the instrument was remarkably stable: at 100% humidity there was nowhere left for the strings/instrument to move! Funnily enough, the theorbo was noticeably heavier by several hundred grams due to the water weight. Sam: I get my plain gut from Nick Baldock. To be honest, I am not sure if it is varnished or not. Following historical sources, I tune my top string to just below breaking point, and the rest a tad lower. This means I use very high gauges (normally nothing thinner than .46, often much thicker, for chanterelles). These tops last weeks, if not months, with heavy playing. There is no problem in humid conditions, as anyone who heard my concert last year at the Marin Marais Festival in Paris can attest (aside from the normal 10% extra tuning that gut requires over nylon). So, I suppose what I am saying is that while nylon/nylgut are more stable than gut (once they settle in; gut is much more stable right away) I see no advantage with carbon or overwound strings with regards to gut when it comes to tuning. They are at least as difficult to tune as gut, with the added disadvantage of sounding (in my view) utterly rubbish. My 392 cents. Best, Benjamin Sent from my iPhone On 5 oct. 2012, at 10:18, Benjamin Narvey luthi...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Luters, I know that much has been made about tuning issues pertaining to gut strings, but it strikes me now how little has been said about the same difficulty with synthetics/modern strings. For the first time in ages I am playing on a modern-strung theorbo belonging to a student of mine for rehearsals of a Fairy Queen while I impatiently await the arrival of my new double luth in some weeks (more on this giraffe anon). I am simply aghast at how badly carbon strings go out of tune, even though they are not supposed to. (Nylon/nylgut fares better.) Indeed, the (ugh) overwound Savarez guitar bass strings are the worst offenders of all, going madly out of tune sometimes: not surprising they are so sensitive given how metal is such a superb conducting material. The tuning got so sticky I actually took the instrument to a lutemaker since I thought it had to be peg slippage, but no. And of course, with all these different modern materials, the different string types are going out if tune differently. Superb. I just can't believe I forgot about how difficult tuning synthetics can be. But more importantly, it leads me to question what the point of playing on synthetics is: after all, the reason why players use them is since they are supposed to bally well stay in tune... and I am really not so sure given my current experience that they do this better than gut. Thoughts? Benjamin Sent from my iPhone To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: A question; straps, standing
Hi, Josh. The question I am wondering is, was the Lute ever actually played standing up? Josh Sure. For example http://www.medici.co.uk/shop/items/three-musical-ladies As for strapping, that is a different question. Perhaps some of the historical inspectors of lutes might comment on the existence, or not, of end pins in the extant instruments? Their presence would be a sure give-away... -- mark. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: the point of synthetics - Rather the movement of the whole lute
Dear Howard There is also quite a lot of speculation in your answer, however I doubt very much if Mace could be so poetic and enigmatic in the book which was to simplify things. He was defending lute's position amongst instruments so he tried to make explanations as easy as possible. For us it's not easy because we didn't live at that time. IMO he talks about most common things (obviously except his dyphone, but in this case he wanted to show people his invention). I really doubt very much that he would be inclined to make generalization after examining just a one string and immediately wanting to share his discovery with the whole world. In this case the whole book would be of little value for anyone. But I don't thing this is the case. He clearly explained that many kinds of strings were commonly dyed. Then he proceeded to give his opinion on which ones were good, and which he found commonly faulty. This would be quite a normal thing to write in a handbook. As far as your objections concerning unusual colors are concerned please have a look at the 12c lute's bridge detail of Bilcius painting (2nd half of the 17th c). It shows string colors from bright yellow, orange, till various shades of blue. Obviously our arguments prove nothing (either way), we are just speculating, but I find it entertaining to dig in some details :-) Best wishes Jaroslaw Wiadomość napisana przez howard posner w dniu 7 paź 2012, o godz. 01:22: On Oct 6, 2012, at 12:45 PM, Jaros“aw Lipski jaroslawlip...@wp.pl wrote: Maybe, but then how will you explain a quote from Mace p.66: I have sometimes seen strings of a yellowish color very good; yet but seldom; for that color is a general sign of rottenness, or of the decay of the string. There are several sorts of colored strings, very good; but the best was always the clear blue; the red commonly rotten. As far as I understand red color is a most popular color of loaded string. If this is so, how then they could be commonly rotten? There's a lot of speculation in your question. Here's more. Mace may have been describing minor differences in color. He could have been describing a string as red or yellow for all sorts of reasons: inherent color of the intestine, impurities in the processing, some microbial or fungal contaminant, the color of Mace's spectacles or the kinds of candles he used, the string maker cutting his finger while he made the string and twisting his own blood into the string (I think I just created the Red Violin theory of string making), Mace examining the string while the sun was setting--who knows? Obviously, I'm not inclined to regard Mace as a scientific observer; more like the eccentric uncle who makes dubious sweeping pronouncements at family dinners. Maybe he got one reddish string once and didn't like it, and generalized in a way that most of us do in casual conversation. Most of the gut strings I've used could be described as yellow, and none have been rotten. And what's with clear blue? -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: What is the point of synthetics?
Dear Benjamin and all, I have enjoyed this discussion, with its many threads, on gut strings. I have used all-gut stringed lutes for going on 18 years now, and I am still not completely decided on the best manner in which to string a lute. I do have 2 instruments strung in synthetic strings as well. I especially like using them in the summer months, as the widely ranging temperature and humidity conditions make the instrument less stable during hot, humid summers. Another factor I have noticed during the summer is actually the sound of the gut strings. They sound less brilliant, more like a thud sound in humid conditions. I have never experienced rotting, of any gut string. Even when I put on an 'older' new gut string (purchased years ago) I find essentially no difference. I share your frustration with wound strings, as they provide a sound of long sustain and too bright, in my opinion. Because they are so much clearer in sound, they are much less forgiving in nature than a gut bass. In terms of gut stability, yes they (gut) tune much faster than synthetics. A new 5th course in nylgut will take about 5 months to totally stretch out!!! I have been performing in all-gut lutes for many years, and i have not had tuning problems with performance. There is a trick to it.Since the instrument _and_ strings need to settle into their environment, I need to get my instruments in the performance venue at least 2 1/2 hours prior to the concert. This is most convenient, but merely letting the lute and strings settle into their new home for 2.5 hours is a very effective way of equilibrating the instruments and strings. Then, the lute stays in excellent tune. In fact, this past winter, I had a concert with Tom Walker, in which we played a program of French baroque lute duets, in 2 identically purely gut-strung baroque lutes (no metal). Tuning was spot on, and we did not have to do_ any _tuning, with exception of changing the bass pitches on different tunings. On this discussion, we are focusing totally on strings, where the lute also plays a great role in tuning stability. A different room for performance will throw any lute (out of tune) a little, until it settles in to the new environment. Incidentally, both of these instruments are a new experiment, which is pure gut throughout, no metal (i.e., no gimped or loaded, etc). These lutes are in equal tension, using pure gut, as described by Mersenne. I really like the results this far. The 2 lowest courses, D and C, are certainly less brilliant than if one used metal in the string, but the instrument overall sounds more beautiful, in my opinion. The 11th course is huge... I think the size is 2.02. IThe result is a warm, even sound, where the entire instrument seems to be of a similar sound. At this point, I like the pure gut basses better than loaded, densified, gimped, or wound gut basses. My 415 cents worth. ed At 05:05 AM 10/7/2012, Benjamin Narvey wrote: Dear All, In fact, what I thought I normally found was that gut strings get settled in faster, but are more prone to movement than synthetics on a day to day basis, where synthetics can take weeks to settle down (gut minutes/hours), but once they do they can be settled for ages. I thought (and for nylon still do think) that all things considered one tunes around 10% more with gut strings than synthetics (considerable, but manageable). While I do find that the nylgut is pretty stable, as is nylon, I have had horrible experiences with carbon strings (when touring in NYC, Roman!) which kept on climbing in hot stage conditions (sometimes by nearly a semitone). This was on an excellent theorbo by Klaus Jacobsen. The gut and nylon strings on the same theorbo/conditions were vastly more stable. On the theorbo I am currently playing (which is admittedly a rubbish instrument by a certain French luthier who will remain anonymous) I find it is the overwound strings that are moving around the most. As I said, I brought the lute 'round to a good luthier, who reworked the pegs to minimise slippage, and this had helped enormously. That said, the three overwound strings continue to go wildly out of tune - much, much more than the nylgut, nylon, and much more than the GUT on the same instrument with the same pegs. In this case, it must be the metal windings that so contribute to the utter lack of stability. I have toured in the tropics (Ile de la Reunion, a French territory in the south Indian Ocean) with a 100% humidity index. It took several days for my theorbo, gut strings (and myself!) to adjust, but once this happened, the instrument was remarkably stable: at 100% humidity there was nowhere left for the strings/instrument to move! Funnily enough, the theorbo was noticeably heavier by several hundred grams due to the water weight. Sam: I get my plain gut from Nick Baldock. To be honest, I am not sure if it is varnished or
[LUTE] Re: the point of synthetics - Rather the movement of the whole lute
On Oct 7, 2012, at 4:23 AM, Jaros³aw Lipski jaroslawlip...@wp.pl wrote: There is also quite a lot of speculation in your answer, So I said at the beginning. however I doubt very much if Mace could be so poetic and enigmatic in the book which was to simplify things. He was defending lute's position amongst instruments so he tried to make explanations as easy as possible. For us it's not easy because we didn't live at that time. IMO he talks about most common things (obviously except his dyphone, but in this case he wanted to show people his invention). I really doubt very much that he would be inclined to make generalization after examining just a one string and immediately wanting to share his discovery with the whole world. In this case the whole book would be of little value for anyone. But I don't thing this is the case. He clearly explained that many kinds of strings were commonly dyed. Then he proceeded to give his opinion on which ones were good, and which he found commonly faulty. This would be quite a normal thing to write in a handbook. Obviously, I'm less inclined to take Mace seriously than you are. You're writing here about what you would mean if you wrote what Mace wrote. I'm writing about what an oddball who may have been an inaccurate observer or someone quick to jump to odd conclusions may have meant. And remember, when he wrote the book he was so deaf he had to put his teeth on a lute to hear any sound from it, so the details of strings' actual sounds may have been a different memory. If you're inclined to take everything Mace says as practical and workable, try building his dyphone, and then try playing it. As far as your objections concerning unusual colors are concerned please have a look at the 12c lute's bridge detail of Bilcius painting (2nd half of the 17th c). It shows string colors from bright yellow, orange, till various shades of blue. Where? -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: the point of synthetics - Rather the movement of the whole lute
About coloured/dyed strings - I spoke to a harpist yesterday who told me that coloured strings were sometimes used on renaissance harps to help with orientation (as modern players use them today). In fact, I was thinking about getting a few coloured basses for my theorbo... On 7 October 2012 18:25, howard posner [1]howardpos...@ca.rr.com wrote: On Oct 7, 2012, at 4:23 AM, JarosAA'aw Lipski [2]jaroslawlip...@wp.pl wrote: There is also quite a lot of speculation in your answer, So I said at the beginning. however I doubt very much if Mace could be so poetic and enigmatic in the book which was to simplify things. He was defending lute's position amongst instruments so he tried to make explanations as easy as possible. For us it's not easy because we didn't live at that time. IMO he talks about most common things (obviously except his dyphone, but in this case he wanted to show people his invention). I really doubt very much that he would be inclined to make generalization after examining just a one string and immediately wanting to share his discovery with the whole world. In this case the whole book would be of little value for anyone. But I don't thing this is the case. He clearly explained that many kinds of strings were commonly dyed. Then he proceeded to give his opinion on which ones were good, and which he found commonly faulty. This would be quite a normal thing to write in a handbook. Obviously, I'm less inclined to take Mace seriously than you are. A You're writing here about what you would mean if you wrote what Mace wrote. A I'm writing about what an oddball who may have been an inaccurate observer or someone quick to jump to odd conclusions may have meant. A And remember, when he wrote the book he was so deaf he had to put his teeth on a lute to hear any sound from it, so the details of strings' A actual sounds may have been a different memory. A If you're inclined to take everything Mace says as practical and workable, try building his dyphone, and then try playing it. As far as your objections concerning unusual colors are concerned please have a look at the 12c lute's bridge detail of Bilcius painting (2nd half of the 17th c). It shows string colors from bright yellow, orange, till various shades of blue. Where? -- To get on or off this list see list information at [3]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- Sam Chapman Oetlingerstrasse 65 4057 Basel (0041) 79 530 39 91 -- References 1. mailto:howardpos...@ca.rr.com 2. mailto:jaroslawlip...@wp.pl 3. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: the point of synthetics - Rather the movement of the whole lute
Wiadomość napisana przez howard posner w dniu 7 paź 2012, o godz. 20:52: On Oct 7, 2012, at 11:22 AM, Jarosław Lipski jaroslawlip...@wp.pl wrote: So you see Mace as an oddball, inaccurate observer, someone quick to jump to odd conclusions, old deaf man who had lost touch with reality, an idiot who constructed an instrument impossible to play etc What I said was: I'm not inclined to regard Mace as a scientific observer; more like the eccentric uncle who makes dubious sweeping pronouncements at family dinners. Well, I've quoted your own words, but maybe you had something else on mind, sorry……. I have read his book many times and found a lot of interesting details that do not sound like an utterance of a mentally ill person. Many musicologists quote Mace and as far as I know Musick's Monument is one of the most important sourcebooks for studying 17c performance practice. It doesn't mean that every word Mace wrote is true, Sure doesn't, and lots of important sources are full of misinformation. So you have the correct information. Mace is obviously wrong. How do you know about it? but we are talking about very basic matters like colors - he wasn't blind as far as I know and the fact that he had to put his teeth on a lute doesn't matter here as we are not talking about what he used to hear. In fact many paintings confirm what he wrote. Many types of strings in 17c were commonly dyed. Red was in fact most popular color. Red is still pretty popular, but the original question was whether it necessarily meant both loaded and rotten. Mace doesn't mention loading at all. Only dying. What I wrote initially was addressed to Anthony in fact. I was asking him how can it be possible that a loaded string is rotten. If a gut was treated with oxides of some metals like lead, iron, copper etc it wouldn't rot easily as far as I can understand some chemical processes. Therefore my assumption was that if Mace mentioned rotten RED strings (not reddish or something - he clearly writes about colored gut), they must had been dyed only and not loaded. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: the point of synthetics - Rather the movement of the whole lute
On Oct 7, 2012, at 12:14 PM, Jaros³aw Lipski jaroslawlip...@wp.pl wrote: So you see Mace as an oddball, inaccurate observer, someone quick to jump to odd conclusions, old deaf man who had lost touch with reality, an idiot who constructed an instrument impossible to play etc What I said was: I'm not inclined to regard Mace as a scientific observer; more like the eccentric uncle who makes dubious sweeping pronouncements at family dinners. Well, I've quoted your own words, but maybe you had something else on mind, sorry . No, *I* quoted my own words, which did not include idiot, old, lost touch with reality, or etc. I didn't opine about how quickly he reached his conclusions (he doesn't strike me as a man who did anything quickly). I also didn't say mentally ill. I certainly didn't say he actually had a dyphone built, notwithstanding what he wrote. I spend a lot of time professionally evaluating whether things witnesses tell me are credible; many are not, for all sorts of reasons, the most common being triumph of vantage point over all other considerations (just this morning I read through 18 character letters written to convince me that a person was honorable and honest; none of them mentioned his felony fraud conviction, leaving me to wonder if the writers even knew why they were writing). We all know the world is full of ostensibly normal and sane persons who reach positions of prominence and responsibility saying things that are not credible; in my country they tend to get nominated for public office a lot. Although we seem to have pivoted, as Mitt Romney might say, into a discussion of how reliable a witness Mace was, this thread began when Benjamin Narvey -- a person normally given to reasonable observations and conclusions -- said he'd had an experience from which he concluded (or re-concluded) that synthetic strings are harder to keep in tune than gut, and carbon fiber are particularly difficult. I think he's extrapolating too much from too small a sample, and his experience is atypical of most experiences with synthetics and gut; certainly it's different from mine. I think a musicologist of the 23rd century reading Musick's EMail Monument, a collection of Narvey messages on a hard drive that survived the Great Warming Catastrophe of 2089, would likely be misled on that particular point, even though Benjamin is not an old deaf man who had lost touch with reality, although he may be one if he's still around in 2089. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: the point of synthetics - Rather the movement of the whole lute
Howard, No offence I hope? I really wouldn't like to take part in an exchange of arguments that go far from the subjects most of the lute-listers are interested in. However I am forced to answer some of your arguments. Firstly, most of the expressions I used were exact quotations of your post. I only added some that were logical consequences of what you wrote, but I am sorry if you didn't mean it. Secondly, Mace had built the dyphone. Please read carefully on page 203: The only instrument in being of that kind; and but lately invented, by myself, and MADE WITH MY OWN HANDS, in the year 1672 Then he describes why he had built it and how it sounded etc. Thirdly, having an assumption that so many people lack credibility and therefore one can not seriously take into consideration books from the past written by a man who showed some signs of eccentricity is rather not practical IMO as musicology doesn't equal law. We can't call witness Mace. And finally, yes the whole discussion began from Benjamin and his observations on behavior of gut strings versus synthetics, but I think he explained recently that he was misunderstood, because he meant that synthetics are in fact more stable, however gut reaches certain, lets call it a state of equilibrium faster. I can confirm this opinion. I play both gut and synthetics. It takes more time for synthetics before they start to behave normally, but then, they do not react to changes of humidity, only temperature. The only thing that I would add to his post is that gut strings don't go out of tune because of high humidity, but because of the changes of humidity. So practically there may be a situation that you kept your lute 2 hours before the recital in the place where you are supposed to play, then you enter a stage and it happens that there came quite a lot of people to listen to you (obviously they all breath exhaling a lot of moisture), the hall is not very spacious, and! your very carefully prepared tuning goes to pieces. The assumption is though that you have a big audience, ha, ha :). Another thing that I would like to add is that wire wounds in fact go out of tune because they are made of 2 different materials which behave differently - a synthetic core and a wire. The good news is that its movement is very predictable, so once you get used to it, it takes only seconds to correct. Hope we safely came into some conclusions. Best JL Wiadomość napisana przez howard posner w dniu 7 paź 2012, o godz. 23:25: On Oct 7, 2012, at 12:14 PM, Jaros“aw Lipski jaroslawlip...@wp.pl wrote: So you see Mace as an oddball, inaccurate observer, someone quick to jump to odd conclusions, old deaf man who had lost touch with reality, an idiot who constructed an instrument impossible to play etc What I said was: I'm not inclined to regard Mace as a scientific observer; more like the eccentric uncle who makes dubious sweeping pronouncements at family dinners. Well, I've quoted your own words, but maybe you had something else on mind, sorry∑∑. No, *I* quoted my own words, which did not include idiot, old, lost touch with reality, or etc. I didn't opine about how quickly he reached his conclusions (he doesn't strike me as a man who did anything quickly). I also didn't say mentally ill. I certainly didn't say he actually had a dyphone built, notwithstanding what he wrote. I spend a lot of time professionally evaluating whether things witnesses tell me are credible; many are not, for all sorts of reasons, the most common being triumph of vantage point over all other considerations (just this morning I read through 18 character letters written to convince me that a person was honorable and honest; none of them mentioned his felony fraud conviction, leaving me to wonder if the writers even knew why they were writing). We all know the world is full of ostensibly normal and sane persons who reach positions of prominence and responsibility saying things that are not credible; in my country they tend to get nominated for public office a lot. Although we seem to have pivoted, as Mitt Romney might say, into a discussion of how reliable a witness Mace was, this thread began when Benjamin Narvey -- a person normally given to reasonable observations and conclusions -- said he'd had an experience from which he concluded (or re-concluded) that synthetic strings are harder to keep in tune than gut, and carbon fiber are particularly difficult. I think he's extrapolating too much from too small a sample, and his experience is atypical of most experiences with synthetics and gut; certainly it's different from mine. I think a musicologist of the 23rd century reading Musick's EMail Monument, a collection of Narvey messages on a hard drive that survived the Great Warming Catastrophe of 2089, would likely be misled on that particular point, even though Benjamin is not an old deaf man who had
[LUTE] Re: the point of synthetics - Rather the movement of the whole lute
On Oct 7, 2012, at 3:52 PM, JarosÅaw Lipski jaroslawlip...@wp.pl wrote: No offence I hope? I really wouldn't like to take part in an exchange of arguments that go far from the subjects most of the lute-listers are interested in. The listers should be interested in the problems of interpreting historical sources. They aren't all created equal. It's another question whether either of us are saying anything worth saying on the point. However I am forced to answer some of your arguments. Well, I hope the person holding a gun to your head leaves soon... Firstly, most of the expressions I used were exact quotations of your post. Obviously not, as my list showed. I only added some that were logical consequences of what you wrote, You're entitled to think so if you like, but don't try to convince me. I'm pretty precise with words, when I'm not spreading typos all over the page. Secondly, Mace had built the dyphone. Please read carefully on page 203: I read it just before I sent the message in which I said I didn't think he'd built it, which is why I used the expression notwithstanding what he wrote. I don't believe everything I read. Thirdly, having an assumption that so many people lack credibility and therefore one can not seriously take into consideration books from the past written by a man who showed some signs of eccentricity is rather not practical IMO I didn't say his book couldn't be taken seriously. I just don't think everything in it should be taken seriously. And finally, yes the whole discussion began from Benjamin and his observations on behavior of gut strings versus synthetics, but I think he explained recently that he was misunderstood, because he meant that synthetics are in fact more stable, however gut reaches certain, lets call it a state of equilibrium faster. I can confirm this opinion. I play both gut and synthetics. It takes more time for synthetics before they start to behave normally, but then, they do not react to changes of humidity, only temperature. His first message did not say that; indeed, there would have been no point, since most of us already know this from experience. This is what he said: I am playing on a modern-strung theorbo belonging to a student of mine for rehearsals of a Fairy Queen while I impatiently await the arrival of my new double luth in some weeks (more on this giraffe anon). I am simply aghast at how badly carbon strings go out of tune, even though they are not supposed to. (Nylon/nylgut fares better.) Indeed, the (ugh) overwound Savarez guitar bass strings are the worst offenders of all, going madly out of tune sometimes: not surprising they are so sensitive given how metal is such a superb conducting material. The tuning got so sticky I actually took the instrument to a lutemaker since I thought it had to be peg slippage, but no. And of course, with all these different modern materials, the different string types are going out if tune differently. Superb. I just can't believe I forgot about how difficult tuning synthetics can be. But more importantly, it leads me to question what the point of playing on synthetics is: after all, the reason why players use them is since they are supposed to bally well stay in tune... and I am really not so sure given my current experience that they do this better than gut. Someone who reads this message to say that synthetics go out of tune more than gut would be understanding exactly what Benjamin wrote. If he meant to say exactly that, it just shows that you have to read written sources critically. If he didn't mean to say exactly that, it just shows that you have to read written sources critically. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
