Dear Rob and Martyn, Yes, I agree. This vihuela list has not been argumentative, but in the past there has been some heated discussion of appropriate instrumentation for vihuelas.
One could compare this to lutes..... I have heard some fantastic lutes, that were not exact replicas of an original instrument, and to me, it does not really matter all that much. What matters is if the instrument plays and sounds well. I have heard your instrument, Rob, on your web site, and I must say, it sounds fabulous. I have a vaulted back vihuela that also sounds wonderful, and I could care less if it is an authentic reproduction. By any accounts, it is a successful instrument. So, for the Dias, I do not think it is critical whether or not if it had been a guitar or vihuela. If it is successful, that is what counts. ed At 11:36 AM 6/8/2005 +0100, Martyn Hodgson wrote: >Rob, > >Thank you for this. I do, however, think you misunderstand the debate: it >is not about criticism or attempting to impose any uniformity; it is >merely scholarly questioning and suggesting other possibilities which may, >or may not, have some validity. Much less is it about being 'angry and >argumentative' - where do you get this from? If serious debate is >quashed by fear of seeming 'argumentative' we'll never get anywhere. > >Finally, I'm pleased you like Alexander's very fine instruments but what >precise relevance is this to the particular debate? > >regards, > >Martyn > > > > Rob MacKillop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I am not a maker or an organologist, so... > >It appears to be a unsatisfactory situation for all concerned. There are >quite a number of images of what we assume are vihuelas - and no two of them >are the same in all relevant details. We also have a few surviving >instruments which we assume are vihuelas (not everyone agrees). Not only do >none of these surviving instruments look like any of the others, but they >also look unlike the iconographic images. What conclusions can we draw from >this state of affairs? > >It seems to me obvious that there were as many interpretations then about >what a vihuela was as there are now over the modern acoustic guitar. Each >maker did 'his own thing', adapting, experimenting, etc. I find this a >wholly positive thing! Why some people get angry and argumentative over all >this, seems to me crazy. There is no one vihuela which we must all copy and >play. > >The bottom line is that any roughly guitar or viola-shaped instrument with >six courses, tuned like a lute (pitch varies) is suitable for the printed >repertoire. Some people in the 16th century played this stuff on a >lute...The Dias is a perfectly good base model. > >For what it's worth: I play one of Alexander's vihuelas for one good reason: >it is a great musical instrument, suitable for the repertoire. > >Rob > > > > >To get on or off this list see list information at >http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html > > >--------------------------------- >Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PCcalling worldwide with voicemail >-- Edward Martin 2817 East 2nd Street Duluth, Minnesota 55812 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice: (218) 728-1202
