[LUTE] Lundberg, sustain and "the scoop" (was Plucking Room)
Howard, Both quotes originally came from Lundberg's articles in American Lutherie, as re-hashed content from his annual Erlangen Lautenbaukurs which first started in the late 1970's. I'd be surprised if the content didn't evolve over the years, both in and out of Lundberg's hands. While neither of the two quotes on sustain changed from the version first presented in AL (late 1980's), I think this is a case where context is as important as content, especially since Lundberg is relating generic changes in lute design in the theoretical section of the Erlangen lectures. Context is also important in the quote you referenced...if you read back to the beginning of the "Transition" section the quote is sourced from, Lundberg is effectively saying that shifts in the focus of lutemaking occurred after 1600. After 1600, (based on extant instruments), the trend moves more toward rebuilt/altered older instruments, instead of wholly new construction...except in the case of theorbos. He also says in that section, that after 1600, the few new lutes being built before 1680, both didn't follow the previous design principles from before 1600, and that the new instruments were poorer in quality and design aesthetics. To me that makes sense from a luthier's economic viewpoint. While rebuilding an old instrument is still time consuming, you can save some construction time and materials cost by repurposing lute shells/bowls, etc. To make a new instrument as profitable as a rebuilt "old" one, probably meant that some corners were cut in the process. Lundberg's written content is consistent regarding the scoop from the AL articles onward. A bigger question would be when he started using it (both in the Lautenbaukurs and in his own instruments), and if he always used it after that point. Ron Banks Fort Worth, Texas -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu On Behalf Of howard posner Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2019 9:06 PM To: lutelist Net Subject: [LUTE] Re: Plucking Room We need to be wary of statements in Lundberg’s book, inasmuch as he died without finishing it and the publisher(s) chose to present it as is, although there are some things in it that he could not possibly have meant, such as “The one lute-family instrument being built during this period is the theorbo.” (p. 12) He seems to have been referring to the 1600-1680, but there was never a time for which that statement would be true. I don’t know he was trying to say. > On Jun 30, 2019, at 2:07 PM, ron.ba...@rwbanks.com wrote: > > While I'm a big fan of Lundberg's body of work, we'll need to agree to > disagree which camp the belly/soundboard it fits into. For what it's > worth, violin makers commonly refer to their tops as bellies as > well...taxonomy among luthiers can be very generic. > > Let's also not forget that Lundberg made the comment on the banjo and > the importance of sustain, when discussing the early development of the lute. > He also said the following on page 30 of Historical Lute Construction: > "However, the need to sustain some notes, thereby adding a new > dimension to changes in rhythm and phrasing, became more and more > important; so much so that the main direction of tonal development through > the Renaissance periods > and into the Baroque period was towards increasing sustain." (Lundberg, > Robert. Historical Lute Construction. Tacoma Washington: Guild of > American Luthiers, 2002) > > Sustain with lutes is at best a relative term. I've played some lutes > that were as efficient as a Quaker Oats box, and some that would > easily sustain for 3-4 seconds. What I was driving at was that unlike > membrane tops, a conscious effort was made to match the energy driven > into the soundboard > (belly) with a system that provided a proper match to keep that energy > from dissipating too quickly. Plate tuning, bar shape, bar location, > and possibly even belly scooping contribute to final outcome...which might be > a > much more complex set of subsystems than a tensioned membrane. > > Let's also consider that like guitars, and unlike banjo's, > Renaissance and later lute bellies are structural and act both in tension and > compression. > Membrane tops on the other hand, require a self-supporting structure, > and function using tension. Unless turned into cuir bouilli, > membranes really can't act in compression. > > I'll not hazard a guess regarding the violin comments, as YMMV. The > violin community does that instrument enough damage seeking > pseudoscience answers to shortcut time and good craftsmanship. > > Seriously though, I appreciate your comments, and am glad to be a > part of this community. I certainly don't hold the source of all > truth regarding the lute, so I'll gladly call myself out when my ideas > go into attic Strad territory. > > Ron Banks > Fort Worth, TX To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.c
[LUTE] Re: Plucking Room
Geez, speaking of not editing and not knowing what someone is trying to say… Here’s my last post corrected so as not to be gibberish, or at least not obviously gibberish: We need to be wary of statements in Lundberg’s book, inasmuch as he died without finishing it and the publisher(s) chose to present it as is, although there are some things in it that he could not possibly have meant, such as “The one lute-family instrument being built during this period is the theorbo.” (p. 12) He seems to have been referring to the period from 1600-1680, but there was never a time for which that statement would be true. I don’t know what he was trying to say. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Plucking Room
My 1980 Lundberg archlute is pretty much scoopless. I find the lack of scoop a minor inconvenience; we get used to the instruments we play. But when Paul O’Dette borrowed it to play a concerto years ago, his fingers hit the top a good deal, it got a bit percussive at times. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Tailpieces (was Plucking Room)
> John Mardinly wrote: > The big question that I have never had answered is why do plucked string > instruments have the string tension carried by the soundboard itself, instead > of having the string tension carried by the body of the instrument via a > tailpiece the way violins, violas, cellos and string basses do? Because lots of players and listeners like the sound produced by instruments built that way. It’s really as simple as that. You change the construction, you have a different instrument. Luthiers knew how violins were built: many of them built violins, which is why violin makers are known to this day as luthiers. They could have made lutes with tailpieces. They didn’t want to. > And also: > The point is that bracing, whether ladder or fan, that gives > strength to the top so that it does not come apart due to string > tension, suppresses vibration and thus volume and sustain. So the > bracing could be minimized if the bridge/top did not need to cary the > tension of the strings. Or if you used a cello-type tailpiece to to anchor the strings, you might be able to use far more massive strings, as the cello does. Your question about why this isn’t done makes sense only if you assume that maximizing volume is what’s important. More sound isn’t always better, and the lute became a dominant art instrument in an era that prized soft sounds, classed instruments into “high” (loud) and “low” (soft) and tended not to mix them. (At an LSA seminar ears ago we had an ad hoc band in which Bob Clair played shawm and Gus Denhard played tuba with a group of lutes, but nobody suggested we take that act on the road.) A lute as loud and penetrating as a banjo would change the nature of lute songs, with singers needing to sing louder, losing subtlety, range of expression, and a low note or two. You might ask why clarinet makers build the instrument with a cylindrical bore, when a conical bore would be a more efficient way to produce sound. The answer would be that if it’s built with a conical bore, it’s a saxophone. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Plucking Room
We need to be wary of statements in Lundberg’s book, inasmuch as he died without finishing it and the publisher(s) chose to present it as is, although there are some things in it that he could not possibly have meant, such as “The one lute-family instrument being built during this period is the theorbo.” (p. 12) He seems to have been referring to the 1600-1680, but there was never a time for which that statement would be true. I don’t know he was trying to say. > On Jun 30, 2019, at 2:07 PM, ron.ba...@rwbanks.com wrote: > > While I'm a big fan of Lundberg's body of work, we'll need to agree to > disagree which camp the belly/soundboard it fits into. For what it's worth, > violin makers commonly refer to their tops as bellies as well...taxonomy > among luthiers can be very generic. > > Let's also not forget that Lundberg made the comment on the banjo and the > importance of sustain, when discussing the early development of the lute. > He also said the following on page 30 of Historical Lute Construction: > "However, the need to sustain some notes, thereby adding a new dimension to > changes in rhythm and phrasing, became more and more important; so much so > that the main direction of tonal development through the Renaissance periods > and into the Baroque period was towards increasing sustain." (Lundberg, > Robert. Historical Lute Construction. Tacoma Washington: Guild of American > Luthiers, 2002) > > Sustain with lutes is at best a relative term. I've played some lutes that > were as efficient as a Quaker Oats box, and some that would easily sustain > for 3-4 seconds. What I was driving at was that unlike membrane tops, a > conscious effort was made to match the energy driven into the soundboard > (belly) with a system that provided a proper match to keep that energy from > dissipating too quickly. Plate tuning, bar shape, bar location, and > possibly even belly scooping contribute to final outcome...which might be a > much more complex set of subsystems than a tensioned membrane. > > Let's also consider that like guitars, and unlike banjo's, Renaissance and > later lute bellies are structural and act both in tension and compression. > Membrane tops on the other hand, require a self-supporting structure, and > function using tension. Unless turned into cuir bouilli, membranes really > can't act in compression. > > I'll not hazard a guess regarding the violin comments, as YMMV. The violin > community does that instrument enough damage seeking pseudoscience answers > to shortcut time and good craftsmanship. > > Seriously though, I appreciate your comments, and am glad to be a part of > this community. I certainly don't hold the source of all truth regarding > the lute, so I'll gladly call myself out when my ideas go into attic Strad > territory. > > Ron Banks > Fort Worth, TX To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Plucking Room
One word: e-bow. > On Jun 30, 2019, at 4:26 PM, Sean Smith wrote: > > There's: > Szz [not worthy of the word] > Sstain [not quite enough] > Sustain [just right] > Sustaaayayayayannn [too much] > Sustain-Z [electric guitar]. > My understanding is that it's a spectrum and we're a picky, fickle > bunch. > > On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 1:57 PM Roman Turovsky > <[1]r.turov...@gmail.com> wrote: > > aren't lutenists switching to gut out of sustainophobia? > RT >> On 6/30/2019 3:46 PM, Matthew Daillie wrote: >> I find that sustain is a major factor in the choice of a lute. > Obviously we are not talking grand piano sustain, but an instrument > with good sustain makes all the difference, especially for playing > polyphonic music. >> Clearly appropriate acoustics can make or break a lute, (however > good the instrument and the player) but in the right environment the > sound can also carry astonishingly well. >> >> There might actually be a correlation between sustain and the > amount of dishing. A well respected lutenist, with vast experience > of teaching internationally, observed that lutes with inordinate > dishing (a practice which is apparently common in some parts), and > so with the strings at a significant height above the soundboard, > frequently lacked sustain. >> >> Best, >> Matthew >> >> >> >>> On Jun 30, 2019, at 19:51, Ron Andrico <[2]praelu...@hotmail.com> > wrote: >>> Sustain does not and probably never did factor into the plucked > string sound of the lute. The sound is immediate and rich in > overtones, but ephemeral and does not travel well. >>>RA >>> > __ >> >> >> 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:r.turov...@gmail.com > 2. mailto:praelu...@hotmail.com > 3. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >
[LUTE] Re: Plucking Room
There's: Szz [not worthy of the word] Sstain [not quite enough] Sustain [just right] Sustaaayayayayannn [too much] Sustain-Z [electric guitar]. My understanding is that it's a spectrum and we're a picky, fickle bunch. On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 1:57 PM Roman Turovsky <[1]r.turov...@gmail.com> wrote: aren't lutenists switching to gut out of sustainophobia? RT On 6/30/2019 3:46 PM, Matthew Daillie wrote: > I find that sustain is a major factor in the choice of a lute. Obviously we are not talking grand piano sustain, but an instrument with good sustain makes all the difference, especially for playing polyphonic music. > Clearly appropriate acoustics can make or break a lute, (however good the instrument and the player) but in the right environment the sound can also carry astonishingly well. > > There might actually be a correlation between sustain and the amount of dishing. A well respected lutenist, with vast experience of teaching internationally, observed that lutes with inordinate dishing (a practice which is apparently common in some parts), and so with the strings at a significant height above the soundboard, frequently lacked sustain. > > Best, > Matthew > > > >> On Jun 30, 2019, at 19:51, Ron Andrico <[2]praelu...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> Sustain does not and probably never did factor into the plucked string sound of the lute. The sound is immediate and rich in overtones, but ephemeral and does not travel well. >> RA >> __ > > > 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:r.turov...@gmail.com 2. mailto:praelu...@hotmail.com 3. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Plucking Room
I certainly neglected to mention banjos, which have no soundboard bracing, and are LOUD, and the 8 string guitar of Paul Galbraith, made by David Rubio, which has a tailpiece to hold the strings (I have no idea what the internal bracing of that guitar is, but Paul Galbraith states very clearly that increasing volume was a high priority in the project). The point is that bracing, whether ladder or fan, that gives strength to the top so that it does not come apart due to string tension, suppresses vibration and thus volume and sustain. So the bracing could be minimized if the bridge/top did not need to cary the tension of the strings. A. John Mardinly, Ph.D., P.E. On Jun 30, 2019, at 8:09 AM, ido7 <[1]ishdai...@gmail.com> wrote: I don't think the main reason is the lack of frets. Fretless acoustic guitars, nylon strings or not, are both fretless and plucked and their sound is decent, both with regards to tone and sustain. On Sun, 30 Jun 2019, 16:59 Miles Dempster, <[1][2]miles.demps...@gmail.com> wrote: Violins, violas etc. don't have frets. When plucked (rather than bowed) the string vibration is dampened by the soft fingertip at the stopped end. I don't think that the sustain depends significantly on how the bridge connects to the soundboard. Miles On Jun 30, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Edward Mast <[2][3]nedma...@new-old-mail.cs.dartmouth.edu> wrote: A good question, Dr. Mardinly. What one notices, though, is that when violins, violas, cellos and string basses have their strings plucked rather than bowed, the sustain of the note is short (string basses doing by far the best, and violins doing the worst with pizzicato - plucked notes). It thus seems to me that the method of having the strings stretched over a non-fixed bridge as they are for the bowed instruments, works very well for transmitting the vibrations of the strings to the instrument when they are bowed, and not so well at all when they're plucked. The fixed bridges with strings attached as on guitars, lutes, etc. seems to be the best way of transmitting the vibrations to the instrument when the strings are plucked, rather than bowed. A luthier's explanation of this would be welcome. Ned On Jun 29, 2019, at 3:50 PM, John Mardinly <[3][4]john.mardi...@asu.edu> wrote: Spot on explanation of what physics does to sound boards. The big question that I have never had answered is why do plucked string instruments have the string tension carried by the soundboard itself, instead of having the string tension carried by the body of the instrument via a tailpiece the way violins, violas, cellos and string basses do? A. John Mardinly, Ph.D., P.E. To get on or off this list see list information at [4][5]https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cs.dar tmouth.edu_-7Ewbc_lute-2Dadmin_index.html&d=DwIBAg&c=l45AxH-kUV29SRQ usp9vYR0n1GycN4_2jInuKy6zbqQ&r=VLPJ8OE-c_C6joGeE1ftlvxMmQPq9N6mpKZON BRt90E&m=eqcReZc_h0V-oNUhDyGAxeTGNr5XaMO2xL6rAqw4bBk&s=E4t5dhShK6Htw vMulobNgvr1D1t4_18SiOUonYqrSUE&e= -- References 1. [6]mailto:miles.demps...@gmail.com 2. [7]mailto:nedma...@new-old-mail.cs.dartmouth.edu 3. [8]mailto:john.mardi...@asu.edu 4. [9]https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cs.dartmouth .edu_-7Ewbc_lute-2Dadmin_index.html&d=DwIBAg&c=l45AxH-kUV29SRQusp9vYR0n 1GycN4_2jInuKy6zbqQ&r=VLPJ8OE-c_C6joGeE1ftlvxMmQPq9N6mpKZONBRt90E&m=eqc ReZc_h0V-oNUhDyGAxeTGNr5XaMO2xL6rAqw4bBk&s=E4t5dhShK6HtwvMulobNgvr1D1t4 _18SiOUonYqrSUE&e= -- References 1. mailto:ishdai...@gmail.com 2. mailto:miles.demps...@gmail.com 3. mailto:nedma...@new-old-mail.cs.dartmouth.edu 4. mailto:john.mardi...@asu.edu 5. https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cs.dartmouth.edu_-7Ewbc_lute-2Dadmin_index.html&d=DwIBAg&c=l45AxH-kUV29SRQusp9vYR0n1GycN4_2jInuKy6zbqQ&r=VLPJ8OE-c_C6joGeE1ftlvxMmQPq9N6mpKZONBRt90E&m=eqcReZc_h0V-oNUhDyGAxeTGNr5XaMO2xL6rAqw4bBk&s=E4t5dhShK6HtwvMulobNgvr1D1t4_18SiOUonYqrSUE&e= 6. mailto:miles.demps...@gmail.com 7. mailto:nedma...@new-old-mail.cs.dartmouth.edu 8. mailto:john.mardi...@asu.edu 9. https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cs.dartmouth.edu_-7Ewbc_lute-2Dadmin_index.html&d=DwIBAg&c=l45AxH-kUV29SRQusp9vYR0n1GycN4_2jInuKy6zbqQ&r=VLPJ8OE-c_C6joGeE1ftlvxMmQPq9N6mpKZONBRt90E&m=eqcReZc_h0V-oNUhDyGAxeTGNr5XaMO2xL6rAqw4bBk&s=E4t5dhShK6HtwvMulobNgvr1D1t4_18SiOUonYqrSUE&e=
[LUTE] Re: Plucking Room
While I'm a big fan of Lundberg's body of work, we'll need to agree to disagree which camp the belly/soundboard it fits into. For what it's worth, violin makers commonly refer to their tops as bellies as well...taxonomy among luthiers can be very generic. Let's also not forget that Lundberg made the comment on the banjo and the importance of sustain, when discussing the early development of the lute. He also said the following on page 30 of Historical Lute Construction: "However, the need to sustain some notes, thereby adding a new dimension to changes in rhythm and phrasing, became more and more important; so much so that the main direction of tonal development through the Renaissance periods and into the Baroque period was towards increasing sustain." (Lundberg, Robert. Historical Lute Construction. Tacoma Washington: Guild of American Luthiers, 2002) Sustain with lutes is at best a relative term. I've played some lutes that were as efficient as a Quaker Oats box, and some that would easily sustain for 3-4 seconds. What I was driving at was that unlike membrane tops, a conscious effort was made to match the energy driven into the soundboard (belly) with a system that provided a proper match to keep that energy from dissipating too quickly. Plate tuning, bar shape, bar location, and possibly even belly scooping contribute to final outcome...which might be a much more complex set of subsystems than a tensioned membrane. Let's also consider that like guitars, and unlike banjo's, Renaissance and later lute bellies are structural and act both in tension and compression. Membrane tops on the other hand, require a self-supporting structure, and function using tension. Unless turned into cuir bouilli, membranes really can't act in compression. I'll not hazard a guess regarding the violin comments, as YMMV. The violin community does that instrument enough damage seeking pseudoscience answers to shortcut time and good craftsmanship. Seriously though, I appreciate your comments, and am glad to be a part of this community. I certainly don't hold the source of all truth regarding the lute, so I'll gladly call myself out when my ideas go into attic Strad territory. Ron Banks Fort Worth, TX -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu On Behalf Of Ron Andrico Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2019 12:52 PM To: 'lutelist Net' Subject: [LUTE] Re: Plucking Room Bob Lundberg likened the top (he called it belly) of the lute had more in common with a banjo than with the soundboard of a guitar, for instance. Sustain does not and probably never did factor into the plucked string sound of the lute. The sound is immediate and rich in overtones, but ephemeral and does not travel well. The carved top of a violin or other bowed instrument is structural and, as has already been stated, is ideal for scraping the string with an intermediary object. But the top of the lute, acting as a membrane, maximizes its colorful but intimate sound through the transverse barring. In short, the sound of the lute would no longer be the sound of the lute if the top was subjected to the harsh indignities of the horsehair bow or otherwise pressed into service to act as a soundboard. RA __ From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu on behalf of ron.ba...@rwbanks.com Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2019 4:23 PM To: 'ido7'; 'lutelist Net' Subject: [LUTE] Re: Plucking Room Apologies to all, I mis-stated sharp attack/fast decay in citterns there, as a good cittern can have a sustain as long as a harpsichord. Ron Banks -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu On Behalf Of ron.ba...@rwbanks.com Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2019 11:05 AM To: 'ido7' ; 'lutelist Net' Subject: [LUTE] Re: Plucking Room Just a few thoughts that have been rattling around in my head this morning On instruments with tailpieces/combs/hitchpins and a floating bridge, you have to deal with some design trade-offs, such as: breakover angle; string after-length; neck angle; and downward pressure on the soundboard system...as well as the usual bridge movements due to plucking/bowing. The downward pressure problem in those instruments is often countered through strengthening the soundboard by: cambering (citterns); arching (violins/gambas); cranking (as in Neapolitan mandolins); or by using a tensioned flexible membrane instead of a soundboard (banjos). Glued bridges and floating bridges also don't work exactly the same...without altering the shape of the instrument to accommodate the downward push of the strings and the additional up/down motion of the bridge (when using afterlength/tailpieces/combs, etc.), a floating bridge doesn't work very well. While I'm obviously not a physicist, I've been around luthiery,
[LUTE] Re: Plucking Room
aren't lutenists switching to gut out of sustainophobia? RT On 6/30/2019 3:46 PM, Matthew Daillie wrote: I find that sustain is a major factor in the choice of a lute. Obviously we are not talking grand piano sustain, but an instrument with good sustain makes all the difference, especially for playing polyphonic music. Clearly appropriate acoustics can make or break a lute, (however good the instrument and the player) but in the right environment the sound can also carry astonishingly well. There might actually be a correlation between sustain and the amount of dishing. A well respected lutenist, with vast experience of teaching internationally, observed that lutes with inordinate dishing (a practice which is apparently common in some parts), and so with the strings at a significant height above the soundboard, frequently lacked sustain. Best, Matthew On Jun 30, 2019, at 19:51, Ron Andrico wrote: Sustain does not and probably never did factor into the plucked string sound of the lute. The sound is immediate and rich in overtones, but ephemeral and does not travel well. RA __ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Plucking Room
I find that sustain is a major factor in the choice of a lute. Obviously we are not talking grand piano sustain, but an instrument with good sustain makes all the difference, especially for playing polyphonic music. Clearly appropriate acoustics can make or break a lute, (however good the instrument and the player) but in the right environment the sound can also carry astonishingly well. There might actually be a correlation between sustain and the amount of dishing. A well respected lutenist, with vast experience of teaching internationally, observed that lutes with inordinate dishing (a practice which is apparently common in some parts), and so with the strings at a significant height above the soundboard, frequently lacked sustain. Best, Matthew > On Jun 30, 2019, at 19:51, Ron Andrico wrote: > Sustain does not and probably never did factor into the plucked string sound > of the lute. The sound is immediate and rich in overtones, but ephemeral and > does not travel well. > RA > __ To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Plucking Room
Bob Lundberg likened the top (he called it belly) of the lute had more in common with a banjo than with the soundboard of a guitar, for instance. Sustain does not and probably never did factor into the plucked string sound of the lute. The sound is immediate and rich in overtones, but ephemeral and does not travel well. The carved top of a violin or other bowed instrument is structural and, as has already been stated, is ideal for scraping the string with an intermediary object. But the top of the lute, acting as a membrane, maximizes its colorful but intimate sound through the transverse barring. In short, the sound of the lute would no longer be the sound of the lute if the top was subjected to the harsh indignities of the horsehair bow or otherwise pressed into service to act as a soundboard. RA __ From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu on behalf of ron.ba...@rwbanks.com Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2019 4:23 PM To: 'ido7'; 'lutelist Net' Subject: [LUTE] Re: Plucking Room Apologies to all, I mis-stated sharp attack/fast decay in citterns there, as a good cittern can have a sustain as long as a harpsichord. Ron Banks -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu On Behalf Of ron.ba...@rwbanks.com Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2019 11:05 AM To: 'ido7' ; 'lutelist Net' Subject: [LUTE] Re: Plucking Room Just a few thoughts that have been rattling around in my head this morning On instruments with tailpieces/combs/hitchpins and a floating bridge, you have to deal with some design trade-offs, such as: breakover angle; string after-length; neck angle; and downward pressure on the soundboard system...as well as the usual bridge movements due to plucking/bowing. The downward pressure problem in those instruments is often countered through strengthening the soundboard by: cambering (citterns); arching (violins/gambas); cranking (as in Neapolitan mandolins); or by using a tensioned flexible membrane instead of a soundboard (banjos). Glued bridges and floating bridges also don't work exactly the same...without altering the shape of the instrument to accommodate the downward push of the strings and the additional up/down motion of the bridge (when using afterlength/tailpieces/combs, etc.), a floating bridge doesn't work very well. While I'm obviously not a physicist, I've been around luthiery, traditional woodworking, and bowyery for a few years now. I suspect the lute's lack of string afterlength/tailpieces has partly to do with the efficiency of all the coupled systems in the lute. Floating bridges, tailpieces, extra string length, etc., add mass to a system that might not tolerate the additional mass very well. If you look at many instruments with tailpieces/ string afterlength, they often either require constant input from a bow or wheel to keep the string vibrating (gambas, violins, etc.), or are plectrum instruments that were adapted to have a sharp attack and fast decay (citterns, banjos, etc.). Also, string afterlength and tailpieces have additional resonant frequencies that can either kill sustain or deaden notes on the instrument through sympathetic vibration. Altering the shape of the soundboard by slightly scooping along its length may also slightly change how the string energy is transmitted through the soundboard (or at least how the soundboard reacts to that energy). When a soundboard is flat, some of the energy from the strings has to fight against wood in compression. Adding the scoop may change how much of the vibrating energy is fighting against compression, by forcing some of the wood to be in tension...changing how torque from the string/bridge and soundboard affect each other. Another consideration might be just how the soundboard responds to the bridge/string in a scooped top. Does the scooped top rebound from longitudinal torque/flexing faster, slower (or the same) as the flat one? Ron Banks Fort Worth, Texas -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu On Behalf Of ido7 Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2019 10:09 AM To: lutelist Net Subject: [LUTE] Re: Plucking Room I don't think the main reason is the lack of frets. Fretless acoustic guitars, nylon strings or not, are both fretless and plucked and their sound is decent, both with regards to tone and sustain. On Sun, 30 Jun 2019, 16:59 Miles Dempster, <[1]miles.demps...@gmail.com> wrote: Violins, violas etc. don't have frets. When plucked (rather than bowed) the string vibration is dampened by the soft fingertip at the stopped end. I don't think that the sustain depends signi
[LUTE] Re: Plucking Room
Apologies to all, I mis-stated sharp attack/fast decay in citterns there, as a good cittern can have a sustain as long as a harpsichord. Ron Banks -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu On Behalf Of ron.ba...@rwbanks.com Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2019 11:05 AM To: 'ido7' ; 'lutelist Net' Subject: [LUTE] Re: Plucking Room Just a few thoughts that have been rattling around in my head this morning On instruments with tailpieces/combs/hitchpins and a floating bridge, you have to deal with some design trade-offs, such as: breakover angle; string after-length; neck angle; and downward pressure on the soundboard system...as well as the usual bridge movements due to plucking/bowing. The downward pressure problem in those instruments is often countered through strengthening the soundboard by: cambering (citterns); arching (violins/gambas); cranking (as in Neapolitan mandolins); or by using a tensioned flexible membrane instead of a soundboard (banjos). Glued bridges and floating bridges also don't work exactly the same...without altering the shape of the instrument to accommodate the downward push of the strings and the additional up/down motion of the bridge (when using afterlength/tailpieces/combs, etc.), a floating bridge doesn't work very well. While I'm obviously not a physicist, I've been around luthiery, traditional woodworking, and bowyery for a few years now. I suspect the lute's lack of string afterlength/tailpieces has partly to do with the efficiency of all the coupled systems in the lute. Floating bridges, tailpieces, extra string length, etc., add mass to a system that might not tolerate the additional mass very well. If you look at many instruments with tailpieces/ string afterlength, they often either require constant input from a bow or wheel to keep the string vibrating (gambas, violins, etc.), or are plectrum instruments that were adapted to have a sharp attack and fast decay (citterns, banjos, etc.). Also, string afterlength and tailpieces have additional resonant frequencies that can either kill sustain or deaden notes on the instrument through sympathetic vibration. Altering the shape of the soundboard by slightly scooping along its length may also slightly change how the string energy is transmitted through the soundboard (or at least how the soundboard reacts to that energy). When a soundboard is flat, some of the energy from the strings has to fight against wood in compression. Adding the scoop may change how much of the vibrating energy is fighting against compression, by forcing some of the wood to be in tension...changing how torque from the string/bridge and soundboard affect each other. Another consideration might be just how the soundboard responds to the bridge/string in a scooped top. Does the scooped top rebound from longitudinal torque/flexing faster, slower (or the same) as the flat one? Ron Banks Fort Worth, Texas -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu On Behalf Of ido7 Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2019 10:09 AM To: lutelist Net Subject: [LUTE] Re: Plucking Room I don't think the main reason is the lack of frets. Fretless acoustic guitars, nylon strings or not, are both fretless and plucked and their sound is decent, both with regards to tone and sustain. On Sun, 30 Jun 2019, 16:59 Miles Dempster, <[1]miles.demps...@gmail.com> wrote: Violins, violas etc. don't have frets. When plucked (rather than bowed) the string vibration is dampened by the soft fingertip at the stopped end. I don't think that the sustain depends significantly on how the bridge connects to the soundboard. Miles > On Jun 30, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Edward Mast <[2]nedma...@new-old-mail.cs.dartmouth.edu> wrote: > > A good question, Dr. Mardinly. What one notices, though, is that when violins, violas, cellos and string basses have their strings plucked rather than bowed, the sustain of the note is short (string basses doing by far the best, and violins doing the worst with pizzicato - plucked notes). It thus seems to me that the method of having the strings stretched over a non-fixed bridge as they are for the bowed instruments, works very well for transmitting the vibrations of the strings to the instrument when they are bowed, and not so well at all when they're plucked. The fixed bridges with strings attached as on guitars, lutes, etc. seems to be the best way of transmitting the vibrations to the instrument when the strings are plucked, rather than bowed. > A luthier's explanation of this would be welcome. > Ned > >> On Jun 29, 2019, at 3:50 PM, John Mardinly <[3]john.mardi...@asu.edu> wrote: >> >> Spot on explanation of what physics does to sound boards. The big question that I have never had answered is why do plucked string instruments have the string tension carried by
[LUTE] Re: Plucking Room
Just a few thoughts that have been rattling around in my head this morning On instruments with tailpieces/combs/hitchpins and a floating bridge, you have to deal with some design trade-offs, such as: breakover angle; string after-length; neck angle; and downward pressure on the soundboard system...as well as the usual bridge movements due to plucking/bowing. The downward pressure problem in those instruments is often countered through strengthening the soundboard by: cambering (citterns); arching (violins/gambas); cranking (as in Neapolitan mandolins); or by using a tensioned flexible membrane instead of a soundboard (banjos). Glued bridges and floating bridges also don't work exactly the same...without altering the shape of the instrument to accommodate the downward push of the strings and the additional up/down motion of the bridge (when using afterlength/tailpieces/combs, etc.), a floating bridge doesn't work very well. While I'm obviously not a physicist, I've been around luthiery, traditional woodworking, and bowyery for a few years now. I suspect the lute's lack of string afterlength/tailpieces has partly to do with the efficiency of all the coupled systems in the lute. Floating bridges, tailpieces, extra string length, etc., add mass to a system that might not tolerate the additional mass very well. If you look at many instruments with tailpieces/ string afterlength, they often either require constant input from a bow or wheel to keep the string vibrating (gambas, violins, etc.), or are plectrum instruments that were adapted to have a sharp attack and fast decay (citterns, banjos, etc.). Also, string afterlength and tailpieces have additional resonant frequencies that can either kill sustain or deaden notes on the instrument through sympathetic vibration. Altering the shape of the soundboard by slightly scooping along its length may also slightly change how the string energy is transmitted through the soundboard (or at least how the soundboard reacts to that energy). When a soundboard is flat, some of the energy from the strings has to fight against wood in compression. Adding the scoop may change how much of the vibrating energy is fighting against compression, by forcing some of the wood to be in tension...changing how torque from the string/bridge and soundboard affect each other. Another consideration might be just how the soundboard responds to the bridge/string in a scooped top. Does the scooped top rebound from longitudinal torque/flexing faster, slower (or the same) as the flat one? Ron Banks Fort Worth, Texas -Original Message- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu On Behalf Of ido7 Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2019 10:09 AM To: lutelist Net Subject: [LUTE] Re: Plucking Room I don't think the main reason is the lack of frets. Fretless acoustic guitars, nylon strings or not, are both fretless and plucked and their sound is decent, both with regards to tone and sustain. On Sun, 30 Jun 2019, 16:59 Miles Dempster, <[1]miles.demps...@gmail.com> wrote: Violins, violas etc. don't have frets. When plucked (rather than bowed) the string vibration is dampened by the soft fingertip at the stopped end. I don't think that the sustain depends significantly on how the bridge connects to the soundboard. Miles > On Jun 30, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Edward Mast <[2]nedma...@new-old-mail.cs.dartmouth.edu> wrote: > > A good question, Dr. Mardinly. What one notices, though, is that when violins, violas, cellos and string basses have their strings plucked rather than bowed, the sustain of the note is short (string basses doing by far the best, and violins doing the worst with pizzicato - plucked notes). It thus seems to me that the method of having the strings stretched over a non-fixed bridge as they are for the bowed instruments, works very well for transmitting the vibrations of the strings to the instrument when they are bowed, and not so well at all when they're plucked. The fixed bridges with strings attached as on guitars, lutes, etc. seems to be the best way of transmitting the vibrations to the instrument when the strings are plucked, rather than bowed. > A luthier's explanation of this would be welcome. > Ned > >> On Jun 29, 2019, at 3:50 PM, John Mardinly <[3]john.mardi...@asu.edu> wrote: >> >> Spot on explanation of what physics does to sound boards. The big question that I have never had answered is why do plucked string instruments have the string tension carried by the soundboard itself, instead of having the string tension carried by the body of the instrument via a tailpiece the way violins, violas, cellos and string basses do? >> >> A. John Mardinly, Ph.D., P.E. >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > To get on or off this list see list informatio
[LUTE] Re: Plucking Room
I don't think the main reason is the lack of frets. Fretless acoustic guitars, nylon strings or not, are both fretless and plucked and their sound is decent, both with regards to tone and sustain. On Sun, 30 Jun 2019, 16:59 Miles Dempster, <[1]miles.demps...@gmail.com> wrote: Violins, violas etc. don't have frets. When plucked (rather than bowed) the string vibration is dampened by the soft fingertip at the stopped end. I don't think that the sustain depends significantly on how the bridge connects to the soundboard. Miles > On Jun 30, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Edward Mast <[2]nedma...@new-old-mail.cs.dartmouth.edu> wrote: > > A good question, Dr. Mardinly. What one notices, though, is that when violins, violas, cellos and string basses have their strings plucked rather than bowed, the sustain of the note is short (string basses doing by far the best, and violins doing the worst with pizzicato - plucked notes). It thus seems to me that the method of having the strings stretched over a non-fixed bridge as they are for the bowed instruments, works very well for transmitting the vibrations of the strings to the instrument when they are bowed, and not so well at all when they're plucked. The fixed bridges with strings attached as on guitars, lutes, etc. seems to be the best way of transmitting the vibrations to the instrument when the strings are plucked, rather than bowed. > A luthier's explanation of this would be welcome. > Ned > >> On Jun 29, 2019, at 3:50 PM, John Mardinly <[3]john.mardi...@asu.edu> wrote: >> >> Spot on explanation of what physics does to sound boards. The big question that I have never had answered is why do plucked string instruments have the string tension carried by the soundboard itself, instead of having the string tension carried by the body of the instrument via a tailpiece the way violins, violas, cellos and string basses do? >> >> A. John Mardinly, Ph.D., P.E. >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > [4]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html -- References 1. mailto:miles.demps...@gmail.com 2. mailto:nedma...@new-old-mail.cs.dartmouth.edu 3. mailto:john.mardi...@asu.edu 4. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Folger 1v
Dear lute netters, on folio 1v of the so-called Folger-Dowland MS there are fragments of a piece (the first one) looking like a treble of a treble and ground. I seem to remember that a long time ago the task for "lutes win prizes" was to identify this piece and somebody really did it. Does anybody know? Rainer To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Plucking Room
Violins, violas etc. don’t have frets. When plucked (rather than bowed) the string vibration is dampened by the soft fingertip at the stopped end. I don’t think that the sustain depends significantly on how the bridge connects to the soundboard. Miles > On Jun 30, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Edward Mast > wrote: > > A good question, Dr. Mardinly. What one notices, though, is that when > violins, violas, cellos and string basses have their strings plucked rather > than bowed, the sustain of the note is short (string basses doing by far the > best, and violins doing the worst with pizzicato - plucked notes). It thus > seems to me that the method of having the strings stretched over a non-fixed > bridge as they are for the bowed instruments, works very well for > transmitting the vibrations of the strings to the instrument when they are > bowed, and not so well at all when they’re plucked. The fixed bridges with > strings attached as on guitars, lutes, etc. seems to be the best way of > transmitting the vibrations to the instrument when the strings are plucked, > rather than bowed. > A luthier’s explanation of this would be welcome. > Ned > >> On Jun 29, 2019, at 3:50 PM, John Mardinly wrote: >> >> Spot on explanation of what physics does to sound boards. The big question >> that I have never had answered is why do plucked string instruments have the >> string tension carried by the soundboard itself, instead of having the >> string tension carried by the body of the instrument via a tailpiece the way >> violins, violas, cellos and string basses do? >> >> A. John Mardinly, Ph.D., P.E. >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: Plucking Room
A good question, Dr. Mardinly. What one notices, though, is that when violins, violas, cellos and string basses have their strings plucked rather than bowed, the sustain of the note is short (string basses doing by far the best, and violins doing the worst with pizzicato - plucked notes). It thus seems to me that the method of having the strings stretched over a non-fixed bridge as they are for the bowed instruments, works very well for transmitting the vibrations of the strings to the instrument when they are bowed, and not so well at all when they’re plucked. The fixed bridges with strings attached as on guitars, lutes, etc. seems to be the best way of transmitting the vibrations to the instrument when the strings are plucked, rather than bowed. A luthier’s explanation of this would be welcome. Ned > On Jun 29, 2019, at 3:50 PM, John Mardinly wrote: > > Spot on explanation of what physics does to sound boards. The big question > that I have never had answered is why do plucked string instruments have the > string tension carried by the soundboard itself, instead of having the string > tension carried by the body of the instrument via a tailpiece the way > violins, violas, cellos and string basses do? > > A. John Mardinly, Ph.D., P.E. > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[LUTE] Re: David Gilmore [guitar] Collection being sold
Let's not open that discussion, but... for charity, this is probably the dumbest good cause ever, especially if you are rich. If everyone who is hysterically flying around the planet, peddling the "we are all doomed" climate panic just stopped breathing, CO2 would decrease drastically. (scnr) On 30.06.19 08:06, Andrew White wrote: The proceeds are going to ClientEarth to combat climate change. https://www.clientearth.org/ On 30/06/2019 14:54, Alain Veylit wrote: I have read somewhere (Facebook...) Gilmour is giving the proceeds to the cause of immigrants. What's a guitar when you can save a life. Alain On 6/29/19 3:02 PM, Roman Turovsky wrote: Are there any lutes there? If not - I wouldn't bother looking.)) RT On 6/29/2019 3:12 PM, Peter Martin wrote: $21 million total sale value! [1]https://www.christies.com/the-david-gilmour-guitar-28021.aspx?saleti tle= P On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 15:59, Arthur Ness <[2]arthurjn...@cs.dartmouth.edu> wrote: Here's the link to the instruments (127 in total). Some amazing estimated sales prices. [3]https://www.christies.com/salelanding/index.aspx?intsaleid(021&li d=1&sa letitle=&pg=all&action=paging&sid12e1b0-fcac-46b8-9318-a4220cb992ec AJN -- 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://www.christies.com/the-david-gilmour-guitar-28021.aspx?saletitle= 2. mailto:arthurjn...@cs.dartmouth.edu 3. https://www.christies.com/salelanding/index.aspx?intsaleid(021&lid=1&sa 4. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
