[VIHUELA] Re: Private Musicke and Kozuna (was: Foscarini on Radio 3)
Dear Monica, I'm not sure I understood your message correctly. Do you mean that they might have hired Private Musicke without Kozena? --- En date de : Sam 28.8.10, Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk a A(c)crit : De: Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk Objet: [VIHUELA] Re: Private Musicke and Kozuna (was: Foscarini on Radio 3) A: wikla wi...@cs.helsinki.fi Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Samedi 28 aoAt 2010, 11h12 Interesting indeed! I though Odi Euterpe was one of the better things she sang - but I don't know it as well as some of the other songs. I listened to the whole broadcast last night. Perhaps it is simply that balence of the recording is all wrong. She is too prominent. But I though her interpretation of many of the songs was often too operatic and emotional. They did a slightly different programme in Edinburgh I guess it's the first time early music has much attention at the Edinburgh Festival too. But they might not have hired Private Musicke without Magdalena Kozuna. Who knows. Monica - Original Message - From: wikla [1]wi...@cs.helsinki.fi To: Vihuelalist [2]vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 10:03 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Private Musicke and Kozuna (was: Foscarini on Radio 3) Interesting! I just happened to hear the Private Musicke and Kozuna just before the talks here. They happened to have the opening concert here in the Helsinki Festival: Love Madrigals of the 17th century. Great! Clearly the first time early music gets that much attention in this festival. I happened to hear the beginning of the concert's direct broadcast on my car radio: on that time she was singing the Odi Euterpe by Caccini that I know well. Something was wrong there... Then to home with better audio. The program continued. Here is the list of all: Filippo Vitali: O bei lumi Sigismondo D'India: Cruda Amarilli Claudio Monteverdi: Si dolce A il tormento Giulio Caccini: Odi Euterpe Luis de Briceno: Caravanda Ciacona Tarquino Merula: Canzonetta Spirituale sopra alla nanna Gaspar Sanz: Canarios Sigismondo D'India: Ma che? Squallido e oscuro Biaggio Marini: Con le Stelle in Ciel Giovanni Girolamo Kapsberger: Felici gl'animi Giovanni de Macque: Capriccio stravagante Giovanni Girolamo Kapsberger: Aurilla mia Sigismondo D'India: Torna il sereno ZA(c)firo Giovanni Paolo Foscarini: Ciaccona Barbara Strozzi: L'Eraclito amoroso Ruiz de Ribayaz: Espanioletta Tarquino Merula: Folle A ben si crede I knew most of the pieces. And have accopanied nearly all of the songs many times. I really was happy that to me so dear repertoire got so important place in the festival, and I was as much unhappy that the performance was not good - well I heard only the 3/4 of the concert and on radio broadcast... But I got the feeling that the singer did not know the meaning of the words, and so she couldn't perhaps so much express the message of the text. And she did not always sound very pure and clean... And to me the band did not make a very good impression either: If Merula's sopra alla nanna is made to sound flamenco, I do not want to hear it. Not to speak of one of the greatest pieces by Barbara Strozzi, L'Eraclito amoroso. That was the biggest flop in their performance; just singing the notes and improvising kitchen flamenco around -- no idea of the story and text, even no idea of the sober(?) passagaglia in places. Rubbish in that piece, spoiled possibilities... But when that repertoire is taken to the wide public, perhaps there will be more gigs also to a tiny theorbist with a big theorbo... ;-) All the best, Arto On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 19:53:05 +0100, Monica Hall [3]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: I am also a fan of Private Musicke and have several of their CDs. Magdalena Kozuna is not one of their regular singers as far as I am aware. I suspect that she was co-opted for commercial considerations - in order to sell more tickets. She is well know whereas Raquel and Stephan van Dyck and Marco Beasley are not - at least over here. All them are very accomplished singers in this repertoire. So is Kozuna in the right repertoire - but the announcer did make the point that she is better know for doing other things. Monica - Original Message - From: [1]jean-michel Catherinot To: [2]Martyn Hodgson ; [3]Monica Hall Cc: [4]Vihuelalist Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 12:39 PM Subject: Re
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar stringing was Re: Bartolotti Videos performed by Lex Eisenhardt
Except le Roy 's information about neapolitan school (with no octaves), I'm not aware of an italian general habit of stringing without octaves on the lute! And most of lutenists today play high Renaissance lute music with plain octave stringing (6 to 4) as far as I know. On the vihuela, no octave stringing began with Emilio Pujol, based only on an ambiguous tuning chart in Pisador. So... --- En date de : Mar 31.8.10, Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk a ecrit : De: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Objet: [VIHUELA] Guitar stringing was Re: Bartolotti Videos performed by Lex Eisenhardt A: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu, Lute List l...@cs.dartmouth.edu, Martin Shepherd mar...@luteshop.co.uk Date: Mardi 31 aout 2010, 12h34 And, of course, in the heyday of the 5 course guitar, the lute was always strung in octaves outside Italy the 'baroque' lute (generally in Dm tuning); in Italy in the old tuning but still octaves on the basses. But, interestingly and with relevance, we know that some of the French 'Old Ones' removed the lower string from the lowest octave pair as being too intrusive (Burwell, c1670 'That eleventh string being alone .. The Lute-masters have taken away that great string because the sound of it is too big.). In short they sacrificied the lower rather than the upper octave of the pair - once again evidence that we need to be very careful about assuming that a 'complete' and, to some modern thinking, a more logical specification was always what they aimed for. As said before, much of the reason for introducing the added basses was not simply (or just) to 'improve' the bass register but was also to free the left hand for work higher up the fingerboard. Mace(1676) certainly makes a great deal of this in his essay on 'The LUTE made Easie' as making playing 'become Easie' (no need for such difficult left hand fingerings) and, of course, the technique became very widely used later and indeed was common practice by Weiss and other 18th century lutenists. MH --- On Tue, 31/8/10, Martin Shepherd [1]mar...@luteshop.co.uk wrote: From: Martin Shepherd [2]mar...@luteshop.co.uk Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Bartolotti Videos performed by Lex Eisenhardt To: Vihuelalist [3]vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu, Lute List [4]l...@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Tuesday, 31 August, 2010, 9:46 Hi All, Just to give a lutenist's perspective (and copying to the lute list as it might be of interest there): For much of the 16th century lutes were routinely strung with octaves on courses 4-6. Almost equally routinely, the upper octaves are ignored as far as the counterpoint is concerned - lutenists making intabulations (with a few notable exceptions) just intabulated the voice parts literally. The degree to which the upper octave can be heard depends on many things, but perhaps most of all the skill of the player - mostly, you want the octave to be audible but not too strong as it is really there to colour the sound, adding some upper partials to the sound of the gut basses. The re-entrant tuning of the guitar is another kettle of fish Just as an aside, Dowland's remarks on octaves in Varietie of Lute Lessons (1610) have been widely misunderstood, even though what he writes is perfectly clear. He says that octaves were used more in England than elsewhere, so there is some justification (and quite a bit of evidence from the music itself) for using octaves even up to the 4th course in the music of Cutting, John Johnson, Holborne, and anyone else active in the 1580s and 90s (except possibly Ferrabosco, since he probably brought his Italian habits with him!). Oh and of course Barley's book of 1597 specifies octaves on courses 4-6, and although he borrowed much of his material from Le Roy (1568) he obviously thought it was still common practice. Best wishes, Martin Monica Hall wrote: Yes - that is certainly the case. However with baroque guitar music the octaves are intermittent rather than continuous. The other point is that because of the way that the guitar is strung one tends to hear the upper notes rather than the lower ones and because the instrument has a small compass the upper notes on the lower courses overlap with the notes on the upper courses. You get the same effect with octave stringing on the third course. It is not that one voice in the counterpoint is being duplicated. This is rather different from playing passages in octaves on the piano or harpsichord - where
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitar stringing was Re: Bartolotti Videos performed by Lex Eisenhardt
--- En date de : Mar 31.8.10, Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk a ecrit : De: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Objet: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar stringing was Re: Bartolotti Videos performed by Lex Eisenhardt A: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu, Lute List l...@cs.dartmouth.edu, Martin Shepherd mar...@luteshop.co.uk, jean-michel Catherinot jeanmichel.catheri...@yahoo.com Date: Mardi 31 aout 2010, 14h51 Dear Jean-michel, Put a colon after 'octaves' as '...strung in octaves: outside Italy' - I think you'll see what I meant I didn't think the meaning wasn't obvious but I'm sorry if you were momentarily misled. As you'll see I do, of course, allow the earlier Italian lute in octave tuning. But, interestingly and to extend this thread a little, for the later 16th century Italian repertoire do we really know how the lute was expected to be strung? I'm not sure that octaves on 4th and 5th as well as the 6th (and lower) courses were still general by, say the 1570s. Do you? Certainly the 17th century lute doesn't generally seem to have had octaves on the 4th and 5th Which sources or which evidences say that? In my opinion, Laurencini, reported by Besard, would have had at least octaves on 6 and 5. That's a very good question to make clear: I tried some time ago Molinaro with octave stringing, and was not very much convinced, but who knows? Gabrieli says he is against octave stringing...so octave stringing exists. In fact, I've the feeling that stringing depends on string length, but with no historical proof. The most problematic is indeed period between 1570 and 1620. (people like Piccinnini, Melli and Santino Garsi), so when did the change take place? [Martin, have you done anything on this?] MH --- On Tue, 31/8/10, jean-michel Catherinot [1]jeanmichel.catheri...@yahoo.com wrote: From: jean-michel Catherinot [2]jeanmichel.catheri...@yahoo.com Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitar stringing was Re: Bartolotti Videos performed by Lex Eisenhardt To: Vihuelalist [3]vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu, Lute List [4]l...@cs.dartmouth.edu, Martin Shepherd [5]mar...@luteshop.co.uk, Martyn Hodgson [6]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Date: Tuesday, 31 August, 2010, 15:03 Except le Roy 's information about neapolitan school (with no octaves), I'm not aware of an italian general habit of stringing without octaves on the lute! And most of lutenists today play high Renaissance lute music with plain octave stringing (6 to 4) as far as I know. On the vihuela, no octave stringing began with Emilio Pujol, based only on an ambiguous tuning chart in Pisador. So... --- En date de : Mar 31.8.10, Martyn Hodgson [1][7]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk a ecrit : De: Martyn Hodgson [2][8]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk Objet: [VIHUELA] Guitar stringing was Re: Bartolotti Videos performed by Lex Eisenhardt A: Vihuelalist [3][9]vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu, Lute List [4][10]l...@cs.dartmouth.edu, Martin Shepherd [5][11]mar...@luteshop.co.uk Date: Mardi 31 aout 2010, 12h34 And, of course, in the heyday of the 5 course guitar, the lute was always strung in octaves outside Italy the 'baroque' lute (generally in Dm tuning); in Italy in the old tuning but still octaves on the basses. But, interestingly and with relevance, we know that some of the French 'Old Ones' removed the lower string from the lowest octave pair as being too intrusive (Burwell, c1670 'That eleventh string being alone .. The Lute-masters have taken away that great string because the sound of it is too big.). In short they sacrificied the lower rather than the upper octave of the pair - once again evidence that we need to be very careful about assuming that a 'complete' and, to some modern thinking, a more logical specification was always what they aimed for. As said before, much of the reason for introducing the added basses was not simply (or just) to 'improve' the bass register but was also to free the left hand for work higher up the fingerboard. Mace(1676) certainly makes a great deal of this in his essay on 'The LUTE made Easie' as making playing 'become Easie' (no need for such difficult left hand fingerings) and, of course, the technique became very widely used later
[VIHUELA] Re: Any b-guitar repertoire in all re-entrant accepted by all?
1/ Is 69 cm an usual diapason for early (around 1650) guitar: Koch is 61 cm or so, first generation of Voboam rather 65, Tessler is short too. Longer diapason is more common on later guitars or guitar `a la capucine, with a deeper body (lower tuning?) 2/ the Carbonchi Ms H72 in Perugia clearly says that the common guitar has his 3rd string tuned on the 6th course of the lute (g?) and the 5th key of the harpsichord (from C eg G). His guitar is tuned in D instead of E, almost surely at a=415 hz, pitch then in use in these regions. Plus the 4th course octave (F) on the lutes is more or less the same problem (what would you say about Frei and Maler instruments, with around 65cm diapason or more, at Venice pitch ?) So... But I agree there is no convincing evidence in the texts in favour of an octave on the G. It just sounds very well on my instrument, all in gut (Koch copy), with complete reetrant tuning. And surely it doesn't work for de Visee, nor the guitar! But even Corbetta before the guitare royale and Bartolotti sounds quite well like that, with convincing campanellas and not much gaps as 7th or 9th (specially with the g octave, but it's not my main reason to like this tuning). I only would like to have 3 guitars , with their own stringing, to play more music! __ De : Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk A : Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com Cc : Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Envoye le : Mar 23 novembre 2010, 11h 15min 03s Objet : [VIHUELA] Re: Any b-guitar repertoire in all re-entrant accepted by all? Whatever the case is for an octave on the third course (and to me it seems so very slim as to be negligible compared with all the evidence - other than our modern expectations of course) bear in mind the tensile strength of gut. An instrument with a string length of 69cm, say, would struggle to get up to g' at a tone under modern pitch. Whatever the 'historical' pitch it also seems clear that guitars were generally not tuned so near to breaking stress as lutes so a safety margin of a further tone is appropriate. In short, you'd need to tune a major third below modern to reasonably employ an octave third. This is, of course, one of the principal cases against an octave on the third course. M --- On Mon, 22/11/10, Chris Despopoulos [1]despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Chris Despopoulos [2]despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Any b-guitar repertoire in all re-entrant accepted by all? To: Monica Hall [3]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk Cc: Vihuelalist [4]vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Monday, 22 November, 2010, 23:25 Thanks for the blessing of sorts... discretion being in the eye of the beholder and all that. Well then, I think it's either put a bordon on the D string, or sneak the upper octave G into my fingering for those passages. It's not a technical problem to accomplish either. What strikes me as so odd is that this is the only Sanz piece I found so far that causes any serious problems. I did play for a real Baroque guitarist (as opposed to myself -- an amateur) who suggested I try the French stringing, and who echoed your statement that Sanz is not writing anything in stone about stringing the instrument. But in general I like having the G as the lowest note for this music. cud __ From: Monica Hall [1][5]mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk To: Chris Despopoulos [2][6]despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com Cc: Vihuelalist [3][7]vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Mon, November 22, 2010 2:22:36 PM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Any b-guitar repertoire in all re-entrant accepted by all? That is why some people do argue that octave stringing on the 3rd course is intended. Gordon Ferries plays it on his CD with the re-entrant tuning. It works after a fashion but it is not the best track. I think the point is that Sanz doesn't explicitly say that all his music is intended to be played with the re-entrant tuning. All he really doing is generally saying which tuning he thinks works best for which type of music. I think you can exercise a bit of discretion in these matters. Monica - Original Message - From: [1]Chris Despopoulos To: [2]Monica Hall Cc: [3]Vihuelalist Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 5:18 PM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Any b-guitar repertoire in all re-entrant accepted by all?
[VIHUELA] Re: Any b-guitar repertoire in all re-entrant accepted by all?
Carbonchi's instruction are for ensemble music (guitar in D). And about pitches, specificaly in XVIIth century in Italy, many papers of high scholarship had been written for years (inc. hauts et bas instruments): no use to have a debate here I think. But I agree ensemble pitches and solo pitches are not necesseraly coherent. So why do you use a 440 pitch to tune your guitar? With lower pitch, which is at least likely, other stringings are possible (personally for me 415 is a good one for Roman and middle Italy music). And again I have no problem with a high g gut string. (0;38 mm) Anyway, your choice is quite understandable: I'm just not quite happy for the moment with g in unison on my guitar (which is a very good one) with no bourdon on the 4th: this tuning is also very enjoyable. __ De : Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk A : Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com; jean-michel Catherinot jeanmichel.catheri...@yahoo.com Cc : Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Envoye le : Mar 23 novembre 2010, 15h 22min 53s Objet : Re: Re : [VIHUELA] Re: Any b-guitar repertoire in all re-entrant accepted by all? You write that 'almost surely at a=415 hz, pitch then in use in these regions'. However, I am far less confident that we can say much about what absolute pitch standard these instruments were tuned to (which is why I tried to avoid it). But certainly a smaller instrument would have allowed a generally higher nominal pitch which would have made up for the deficiences in the bass register resulting from the shorter string length. But then you still end up with the problem of the third course exceeding the breaking stress - but just now at a generally higher pitch! MH --- On Tue, 23/11/10, jean-michel Catherinot jeanmichel.catheri...@yahoo.com wrote: From: jean-michel Catherinot jeanmichel.catheri...@yahoo.com Subject: Re : [VIHUELA] Re: Any b-guitar repertoire in all re-entrant accepted by all? To: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk, Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Tuesday, 23 November, 2010, 14:04 1/ Is 69 cm an usual diapason for early (around 1650) guitar: Koch is 61 cm or so, first generation of Voboam rather 65, Tessler is short too. Longer diapason is more common on later guitars or guitar `a la capucine, with a deeper body (lower tuning?) 2/ the Carbonchi Ms H72 in Perugia clearly says that the common guitar has his 3rd string tuned on the 6th course of the lute (g?) and the 5th key of the harpsichord (from C eg G). His guitar is tuned in D instead of E, almost surely at a=415 hz, pitch then in use in these regions. Plus the 4th course octave (F) on the lutes is more or less the same problem (what would you say about Frei and Maler instruments, with around 65cm diapason or more, at Venice pitch ?) So... But I agree there is no convincing evidence in the texts in favour of an octave on the G. It just sounds very well on my instrument, all in gut (Koch copy), with complete reetrant tuning. And surely it doesn't work for de Visee, nor the guitar! But even Corbetta before the guitare royale and Bartolotti sounds quite well like that, with convincing campanellas and not much gaps as 7th or 9th (specially with the g octave, but it's not my main reason to like this tuning). I only would like to have 3 guitars , with their own stringing, to play more music! __ De : Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk A : Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com Cc : Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Envoye le : Mar 23 novembre 2010, 11h 15min 03s Objet : [VIHUELA] Re: Any b-guitar repertoire in all re-entrant accepted by all? Whatever the case is for an octave on the third course (and to me it seems so very slim as to be negligible compared with all the evidence - other than our modern expectations of course) bear in mind the tensile strength of gut. An instrument with a string length of 69cm, say, would struggle to get up to g' at a tone under modern pitch. Whatever the 'historical' pitch it also seems clear that guitars were generally not tuned so near to breaking stress as lutes so a safety margin of a further tone is appropriate. In short, you'd need to tune a major third below modern to reasonably employ an octave third. This is, of course, one of the principal cases against an octave on the third course. M --- On Mon, 22/11/10, Chris Despopoulos [1]despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Chris Despopoulos [2]despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Any b-guitar
[VIHUELA] Re: Any b-guitar repertoire in all re-entrant accepted by all?
I only says that a minor third below 440 is the tuning indicated by Carbonchi (GCFAD), at a pitch of a=415. On instruments with a diapason of 69 cm (as Sellas...), it equals my stringing which is a tone higher (ADGHE) with a 63 cm SL.There is no impossibilty to use a g octave,(or f octave on a greater instrument), it works quite well on mine. But I also quite understand Monica's general point of view: perhaps it sounds good for my today's ears, but what about 1650 ears? And allways no real evidence of the use of g octave in the texts, as she already pointed out. __ De : Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk A : Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com; jean-michel Catherinot jeanmichel.catheri...@yahoo.com Cc : Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Envoye le : Mer 24 novembre 2010, 10h 04min 05s Objet : Re: [VIHUELA] Re: Any b-guitar repertoire in all re-entrant accepted by all? Who says I tune my guitar(s) at A440? I used this pitch in my analysis simply as a convenient reference point. But I don't think anybody would argue that a major third below A440 is an ideal historical pitch for guitars. MH --- On Tue, 23/11/10, jean-michel Catherinot jeanmichel.catheri...@yahoo.com wrote: From: jean-michel Catherinot jeanmichel.catheri...@yahoo.com Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Any b-guitar repertoire in all re-entrant accepted by all? To: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk, Chris Despopoulos despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Tuesday, 23 November, 2010, 14:50 Carbonchi's instruction are for ensemble music (guitar in D). And about pitches, specificaly in XVIIth century in Italy, many papers of high scholarship had been written for years (inc. hauts et bas instruments): no use to have a debate here I think. But I agree ensemble pitches and solo pitches are not necesseraly coherent. So why do you use a 440 pitch to tune your guitar? With lower pitch, which is at least likely, other stringings are possible (personally for me 415 is a good one for Roman and middle Italy music). And again I have no problem with a high g gut string. (0;38 mm) Anyway, your choice is quite understandable: I'm just not quite happy for the moment with g in unison on my guitar (which is a very good one) with no bourdon on the 4th: this tuning is also very enjoyable. __ De : Martyn Hodgson [1]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk A : Chris Despopoulos [2]despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com; jean-michel Catherinot [3]jeanmichel.catheri...@yahoo.com Cc : Vihuelalist [4]vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu Envoye le : Mar 23 novembre 2010, 15h 22min 53s Objet : Re: Re : [VIHUELA] Re: Any b-guitar repertoire in all re-entrant accepted by all? You write that 'almost surely at a=415 hz, pitch then in use in these regions'. However, I am far less confident that we can say much about what absolute pitch standard these instruments were tuned to (which is why I tried to avoid it). But certainly a smaller instrument would have allowed a generally higher nominal pitch which would have made up for the deficiences in the bass register resulting from the shorter string length. But then you still end up with the problem of the third course exceeding the breaking stress - but just now at a generally higher pitch! MH --- On Tue, 23/11/10, jean-michel Catherinot [5]jeanmichel.catheri...@yahoo.com wrote: From: jean-michel Catherinot [6]jeanmichel.catheri...@yahoo.com Subject: Re : [VIHUELA] Re: Any b-guitar repertoire in all re-entrant accepted by all? To: Martyn Hodgson [7]hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk, Chris Despopoulos [8]despopoulos_chr...@yahoo.com Cc: Vihuelalist [9]vihu...@cs.dartmouth.edu Date: Tuesday, 23 November, 2010, 14:04 1/ Is 69 cm an usual diapason for early (around 1650) guitar: Koch is 61 cm or so, first generation of Voboam rather 65, Tessler is short too. Longer diapason is more common on later guitars or guitar `a la capucine, with a deeper body (lower tuning?) 2/ the Carbonchi Ms H72 in Perugia clearly says that the common guitar has his 3rd string tuned on the 6th course of the lute (g?) and the 5th key of the harpsichord (from C eg G). His guitar is tuned in D instead of E, almost surely at a=415 hz, pitch then in use in these regions. Plus the 4th course octave (F) on the lutes is more or less the same problem (what would you say about Frei and Maler instruments, with around 65cm diapason or more, at Venice
[VIHUELA] Re: Frets
I have had in my hands a Mast guitar 'around 1780, with frets of bone, but I can't be certain that they were original, even it seemed to be so. Le Mercredi 6 novembre 2013 14h39, WALSH STUART s.wa...@ntlworld.com a ecrit : On 06/11/2013 11:28, Monica Hall wrote: Dear Collective Wisdom,, When did fixed, rather than tied on frets become the norm on the guitar? Monica Obviously, some time in the 18th century. The middle? The photo of James Tyler's late eighteenth-century guitar: signed 'John Preston' in The Early Guitar clearly shows tied on frets- which is surprising -- To get on or off this list see list information at [1]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. [2]http://www.avast.com -- References 1. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html 2. http://www.avast.com/
