Praetorius, Mace to name but two.
--- On Wed, 18/2/09, howard posner howardpos...@ca.rr.com wrote:
From: howard posner howardpos...@ca.rr.com
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Theorbo Nicki don't lose that number
To: lutelist Net lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
Date: Wednesday
What about the Castaldi duets? What tuning for the smaller instrument? R
-Original Message-
From: Martyn Hodgson [mailto:hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk]
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 2:58 AM
To: lutelist Net; howard posner
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Theorbo Nicki don't lose that number
On Feb 19, 2009, at 6:12 AM, Roland Hayes wrote:
What about the Castaldi duets? What tuning for the smaller
instrument? R
Just like the big one, an octave higher
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Apparently by way of associating a specific historic instrument with
a specific tuning, Martyn Hodgson wrote:
Praetorius, Mace to name but two.
What surviving instrument does Mace describe? What specific
measurements associated with what specific tuning does Mace give us?
On Feb 19, 2009, at 9:39 AM, Roland Hayes wrote:
So much for no double reentrant tuning on small theorbos. R.
On Feb 19, 2009, at 6:12 AM, Roland Hayes wrote:
What about the Castaldi duets? What tuning for the smaller
instrument?
R
Just like the big one, an octave higher
Well, if
On Feb 18, 2009, at 3:26 AM, Martyn Hodgson wrote:
However without troubling yourself to trawl these, you will also see
from my recent postings that there's absolutely nothing 'wrong'
with
small theorboes but just that the use of large theorbo tuning (ie
double reentrant in A or G)
