bill kilpatrick wrote: >re: the viola like instrument illustrated here: > >http://www.anselmus.ch/images/icon_dai_libri.jpg > >strummers 'n pluckers ... stringfellows all ... isn't >it also called a puertorican cuatro? > >it would seem that the line separating vihuela from >guitar becomes more indistinct with each quoted, >historical source. tunings are adaptable to both; the >repertoire is easily shared; number of courses during >its development are variable; decorative motif is >incidental - dimensions as well ... > >given the basic figure "8" shape, fingerboard and >tuning apparatus, couldn't the distinction be thought >of as purely subjective? ... as much today as it ever >was? ... a potato vs potato discourse? > > Well, not exactly. The one thing you still have yet to get past is: The Charango , with its 5 courses, cannot play the repertoire written in the early to mid 16th century for a 6 course Vihuela de mano without omitting one of the strings. So, as far as the "Charango is Vihuela de mano" argument goes: 5 is jive.
But don't despair! Besides pummeling the baroque guitar supporters on this list with your Charango, you can probably attempt to convince the good folks on BANJO-L that the Charango is closely related to the 5 string banjo. Earl Scruggs will be most pleased, I'm sure. >:) To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
