Mandolin and Cittern

[an uncalloused fingertip]

I recently purchased a Mel Bay book that contained Renaissance solos for the mandolin, which were adapted from late 16th Century English pieces for the cittern. The book says the mandolin and cittern were comparable in size and range.

Based on the description, it makes me wonder if the modern teardrop, flat-backed mandolins actually share more in common with the cittern than the historic mandolin (bowlback, gut strings, before wires). The cittern and these mandolins share a similar body style and metal strings.

When I found samples of what a cittern actually sounded like, it was not harsh (like I expected it to be).

Rook http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[btrott]

Rook,

While there are some tonal similarities, I think that the differences between the modern mandolins and the Renaissance cittern are pretty marked. I have been recently playing cittern with an early music ensemble here in Williamsburg, and think that the most striking difference is in the re-entrant tuning used on the cittern. I am playing a 4-course instrument tuned (bass side to treble side) b G d e. That is, the B-string that is the lowest physically on the instrument is tuned a 3rd above the next string (the G). Additionally, the G course has 3 strings, two unisions with an octave in the middle. This tuning is different enough from the mandolin that the voicings for the harmonies need to be changed in traslating the pieces from one instrument to the other. The cittern is also very lightly strung, and as a result has a pretty pleasant tone, but cannot be played hard. It requires a light touch. As you note, it is not harsh sounding. The cittern in consort music is mostly used as a chordal instrument, filling in the middle above the lute, and doing some single line parts as well. I agree that the tunes from the period do translate well from one instrument to the other, but having played them on both, I think that you get a very different feel with the cittern than with the mandolin (either a bowl-back or a more contemporary instrument). The tunes of this period are delightful, enjoy your new book.

Barry

[Jim Garber]

I just got both books today in the mail. They look absolutely wonderful. Great job, Sheri. I am looking fwd to spending a long time with these.

Jim

[Eugene]

Some would argue that flat and archtop mandolins aren't "true" mandolins at all, but are citterns. #I can't entirely agree with that notion. #If people are calling a thing "mandolin"--and that carries with it a whole suite of implications, traditions, techniques, standard tunings, and repertire--it's a mandolin.

At least in the US, I think it's a bit more coincidence than design that the mandolin concept came to be more cittern-like. #Orville Gibson took what he knew of the mandolin (the Neapolitan type), and tried to make it more violin-like by carving arched top and back plates, as far as I know, in relative isolation of of citterns. #American flat-backed mandolins appear to me to simply be an effort to arrive at a faster, cheaper way to generate product (no pesky bowls to assemble), again in isolation of influence from citterns. #In places where cittern types persisted, like Portugal and Germany, the conceptual connection between flat mandolins and citterns may be a little more direct.

There are some great consort recordings with renaissance citterns: the Julian Bream Consort, the Baltimore Consort, the Musicians of Swanne Alley, etc. #Check 'em out, Rook. #What kind of repertoire are you playing, Barry?

[Eugene]

Another point, the brass wire that was used on early wire-strung instruments was of a much finer gauge and has a lower tensile strength than the steel used now. #In spite of its higher density, the brass was tuned to a much lower tension at pitch than modern steel so thus feels and behaves very differently. #For example, I use brass a bit over 0.11 mm thick for the a' on early Neapolitan mandolin. #That's thinner than some popular steel e" strings.

[Graham McDonald]

The other thing to think about is that renaissance citterns often had a scale length of up to 20-21", effectively tenor banjo length, amd the later 18th century 'English guitars' had scale lengths of 16-18". Sort of comparable to a mandolin, but different...

cheers

graham

[btrott]

<What kind of repertoire are you playing, Barry?>

I am sititng in with a student ensemble, most of who are new to early music, so we are doing some of the basic repetoire to introduce them to the filed -- some of the Thomas Morley works for broken consort, and things like Fortune My Foe and Now is the Month of Maying. We have two gambas -- treble and bass, lute, flute and a harpsichord playing the bandurra parts with me on the cittern. It's a funn opportunity to come up wit interesting divisions, and we also will have singers for some of the pieces.

Barry

[onthefiddle]

I agree with most of what has been said, and particularly Eugene's points. I would just like to add that, as the first instrument to feature metal strings and metal frets, the Renaissance cittern is an ancestor of all three commonly found forms of modern mandolin - flatbacked, arched and Neapolitan. The former two obviously owe more to the Renaissance cittern, and strong similarities between Orville Gibson's design and the Renaissance cittern (prinicpally the outline) have caused me to wonder how aware he was of the Renaissance cittern. That's purely speculation of course, and the similarites may be due to similarites in function - though not in construction.

The construction used in most Renaissance citterns is quite unique - the first instrument that I ever made was a cittern modelled after a Gasparo da Salo in the Ashmolean museum, Oxford. It had me scratching my head for a little time (during which time I carved it's head http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif ) and the construction technique that I devised was a curious blend of violin and guitar makers methods, with a few important points that aren't found in either tradition. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

There was a smaller form of cittern used in England during the renaissance, which is illustrated in Praetorius' "Syntagma Musicum", he called this the Klein Englisch Zitterlein. His illustration is reproduced below. The tone of the Renaissance citterns was very different to that of modern mandolins though, largely due to their low tension brass and drawn iron strings.

Jon

http://www.cittern.theaterofmusic.com/woodcuts/pra4ceng.jpg

[Arto]

Maybe you all know this, but lots of interesting information here:

The Renaissance Cittern Page (http://www.cittern.theaterofmusic.com/)

Some modern stuff here:

Berkel Muziek (http://www.berkelmuziek.nl/)

Cittern-related site with nice sound clips:

Roland Ferrandi web page (http://www.roland-ferrandi.com/)

greetings, Arto

[Arto]

"Berkel Muziek" didn´t work where I intended, namely
here. (http://www.xs4all.nl/~cittern/index.htm)

[an uncalloused fingertip]

With the cittern being the first fretted instrument to use wire strings, I cannot help but wonder what the strings looked and felt like four hundred years ago. Were they consistent in gauge, or did they taper here and there?

The body shape of the cittern and the flat-top, Celtic style A mandolins seem nearly identical. If the Celtic mandolins owe their body design in part to the cittern, then it makes the instrument even more special to those who enjoy playing music from the British Isles on the teardrop flat-top.

Rook

[onthefiddle]

As far as I'm aware I haven't seen any original Renaissance strings for citterns, but modern reproductions are quite consistent. Consistency has always been a very important factor for musical instrument strings as it has a noticable effect on intonation. The strings used at this time were quite different to modern mandolin strings. Steel strings weren't developed until the nineteenth century, and wound strings were also developed later - towards the end of the seventeenth century. Drawn iron was used for the upper courses, along with plain and twisted (not wound) brass. Intonation was also very different at this point (before the adoption of equal temperament) so fret spacings also look unusual to modern eyes on instruments using an older meantone temperament.

I've attached a couple of photos of the Gasparo da Salo cittern that is in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. The neck may surprise you - this was possible because of the low tension on the strings, and a very sophisticated fret fitting system that also reinforced the neck. If you like this instrument then you should try to find some pictures of the cittern made by Girolamo da Virchi for the Archduke Ferdinand (it has been speculated that da Virchi was one of da Salos teachers).

Jon

[Eugene]

That wild "P" profile neck was sustained on cittern derivatives for a great long time. There is an awesome bell cittern by Tielke at NYC's Metropolitan Museum of Art with such a neck.


...the Renaissance cittern is an ancestor of all three commonly found forms of modern mandolin - flatbacked, arched and Neapolitan.
I suppose in some ways to some degree you could make this claim about any metal-strung necked chordophones of western traditions, but I've really been trying to shy away from the use of biological terms (like "ancestor") in describing instrument organology. I tend to think of modern mandolins as more similar to baroque-era, wire-strung guitars in construction than renaissance citterns, but I'm certain cittern construction must have exerted some influence on those guitars.

I think it's interesting that earlier renaissance citterns very commonly featured little ornamental lumps near the neck-body joint, almost a type of vestigial upper bout carried over from citole: (if you'll pardon a bit of biotic anology) the cittern's version of the appendix.

[Eugene]

...And for a bit of fingerstyle renaissance archcittern, check out local guy (well, local to me) Vince Conaway's Mischianza Cythara (http://www.vinceconaway.com/frames/disc/misccyth.html). For that of the baroque era (specifically English guittar), check out the work of Rob MacKillop and Doc Rossi via Music in Time (http://www.musicintime.co.uk/).

[Arto]

Jon,

does that da Salo cittern have a raised fretboard? If it does, is this a common feature?

Arto

[onthefiddle]

Jon,

does that da Salo cittern have a raised fretboard? If it does, is this a common feature?

Arto
Hi Arto,

Yes the fingerboard on the Gasparo da Salo is elevated, and I think that this is normal. The top surface of the fingerboard is not original - originally the fingerboard would have been completely made of maple, and fretted with a meantone tempered intonation.

Eugene - it's true that you cannot trace a direct evolution from the Renaissance cittern to modern metal strung and fretted chordophones - still they do owe a lot to the cittern. Cittern construction wasnt really directly carried over to any later instruments - though as an early example of an instrument that was changed from the earlier type of hollowed build to the (middle eastern) lute influenced construction (possibly by Virchi) it is near the root of modern western lutherie.

The cittern's own long development is very interesting. Have you read the article in Groves in which those vestigial bumps near the neck root are traced back to the arms of the ancient Greek kithara? Renaissance sources had always claimed that this was so, but had been discounted as hype. The hook on the back of the pegbox is also an interesting feature, when compared to the older citole. The picture below is of the only surviving citole (which has had its soundboard replaced at a later date). I have borrowed it from The Citole Project (http://www.crab.rutgers.edu/~pbutler/citole.html) which includes illustrations of kitharas and early citoles from the margins of the Utrecht Psalter. It does appear that the cittern may have unusually undergone an almost organic "evolution". http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Jon

http://www.crab.rutgers.edu/~pbutler/citole24.jpg

[Daymando]

Have you read the article in Groves in which those vestigial bumps near the neck root are traced back to the arms of the ancient Greek kithara?
That must appear in a later version, Jon; I don't see that interesting reference in the Second (1900) or Fifth (1954) editions. (Point of note re publishings: the 1954 entry is considerably abbreviated vs 1900, being 2/3 of one column [@8 pt] and 1-1/3 columns [@7 pt] with tuning examples, respectively.)

What catches my eye:


Descended [sic] from the medieval Citole, it was very popular in western Europe from the end of the 15th to the early 18th C. The English Guitar continued the cittern's general shape, though not its tuning, into the early 19th C. Its popularity was no doubt due to its cheapness, ease of playing and convenient size [my emphasis]. Tinctoris describes its characteristic re-entrant tuning and wire strings as early as 1480 or so. Its earliest surviving music, a handful of pieces in the Mulliner Virginal Book and some continental printed books, dates from 1550-1560. (5th Ed.)

And this, earlier:


The English citherns had usually four pairs of wire strings, but according to Carl Engel (Musical Instruments, etc, 1874) they were not limited to this number. He quotes a curious title-page: 'New Citharen Lessons with perfect Tunings of the same from four course of strings to four-teene course, etc.' adorned with an engraving of a Bijuga cither, the counterpart of a theorbo or two-necked lute, strung with seven pairs of strings over the finger-board, and seven single strings at the side. The date of this is 1609. [...] Praetorius (Synt. Mus. 1618) gives various cither tunings, including the common French [a g d' e'] and Italian [b g d' e'] four-course tunings. He speaks of the illiberale sutoribus et sartoribus usitatum instrumentum; he gives the old lute-tunings [f a d' g' and g b-flat d' g'], and says that the last is called in corda valle, and is used with small instruments an octave higher, and, as usual, with strings of brass or steel. Among other tunings there is an old Italian six-course [g a b c' d' e] and, in Prague, a twelve-course [B-flat e-flat c f d g e(natural?) a g b d' e'] with resonance, like a Clavicymbel or Symphony. [...] The cither, under the name of English Guitar, and tuned in the common chord [c' e' g'], was very popular in [Great Britain] during the 18th C. Many specimens are to be met with, bearing the name of Preston, a music-seller in the Strand. [...] The difference between a cither and a lute is in the shape of the body, flat-backed in the former, pear-shaped in the latter; the cither has wire strings and is played with a plectrum, while the lute has catgut strings to be touched with the fingers. (2nd Ed.)

-Allen.

[danb]

It would be interesting to know what Orville Gibson was influenced by- he's more or less responsible for the non-bowlback mandolin design. His patents describe a construction technique that is like a frying pan with a top- back and sides are carved, sides aren't bent as per the modern stuff. At Gibson, that evolved quickly into bent sides/blocks and a neck joint, all of which was probably a lot less labor-intensive to make.

Orville's original idea was to leave the grain in it's natural alignment. His believe was that the inherent resonance of the materials was to be enhanced through carving, but nothing should be bent or stressed. The early Orville label guitars are very bulbous, as are the mandolins. Orville's design found its way into mandolas, mandolcellos, guitars and harp guitars as well, they have similarities in shape with renaisance citterns. Beyond that? I don't know, it's speculation I suppose. The "A" shape goes back a long way...

Gibson factory-made mandolins likely start at serial 2500. The very first ones have bodies made from 3 pieces. The back (including 1/2 the neck heel), the sides (carved like a toilet seat, not bent, including most of the neck heel), the top (thick, arched like a mixing bowl). The neck has a hollow cavity in it.. see 2526 at the mandolin archive..

They progress interestingly from there with mixtrues of features in that first important couple of years at Gibson.. when 3263 was made, it included blocks at the neck, tailpiece, and points.. and bent sides. The back is thinner than it's predecessors.. the neck is joined in the block and is a separate piece from the back and sides. The Top has recurve rather than mixing-bowl arching, and the original "forward neck angle" is replaced with a more or less flat one. Curiously, the inlaid pickguard dissappears for a brief time in both 3263 & 3264 (an A model owned by a friend).

The records of early instruments in the Mandolin Archive that I have paint a very interesting picture, one of very fast design evolution. A jump of 10-20 serial numbers even is enough for fundamental changes to occur. In my opinion, the most fascinating series of instruments made by Gibson fall between 2500-4000. After that, the design is pretty stable aside from cosmetics. Contrary to popularly held opinion, these instruments are both structurally sound and quite nice sounding. They don't have the later Gibson tone, but what they do have is unique and evocative of another time.

So my take on it.. is that Orville's design was revolutionary. His F-model shapes and body construction was quite different from the way violins or citterns were made. The eventual format of the Gibson mandolin (that is still the primary design copied today) was likely based on practical changes made to the Orville design (which had several impracticalities for a production line keen on making instruments that were easy to produce in quantity).

I sure could use more images of early Gibson Mandolas & Mandocellos http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[onthefiddle]

That must appear in a later version, Jon; I don't see that interesting reference in the Second (1900) or Fifth (1954) editions. (Point of note re publishings: the 1954 entry is considerably abbreviated vs 1900, being 2/3 of one column [@8 pt] and 1-1/3 columns [@7 pt] with tuning examples, respectively.)
Yes, this was a more recent edition (I only have a personal photocopy to hand), the work referred to was published in 1967 (E. Winternitz - Musical Instruments and their Symbolism in Western Art).

Until fairly recently the claims that the cittern had developed from the ancient Greek kithara had been regarded as Renaissance hype. It was the realisation that the Utrecht Psalter is in fact a copy of an older book, and that this older book neatly filled the gap in the kithara/citole/cittern's history, that has caused these old claims to be considered seriously once again.

From Groves:

"HISTORY TO 1500. Winternitz (1967) traced the evolution of the cittern from the Greek and Roman antiquity to its classical form in the 16th century. The earliest known pictorial representation of a cittern is in a 6th century mosaic discovered in Libya... This instrument has certain features found in surviving citterns and in illustrations and descriptions from the 16th and 17th centuries. The most important are the two little projections from the body at the point where it meets the neck. Apparently without function, they appear on citterns of many different dates. A clue to their origin can be foiund in some of the many examples of the kithara depicted in the Utrecht Psalter (9th or 10th century, possibly after a model from 5th or 6th century Alexandria). The kithara, which was evidently still in use in Byzantine civilisation, was played by plucking the open strings or possibly by producing harmonics with the left-hand fingers. Typically it had no fingerboard, but the upper corners of its body were elongated in the form of 'wings' to support the upper 'yoke' that fastened the strings, the other end of the strings being attached to the base. Some of the Utrecht Psalter drawings are of a similar instrument but with a fingerboard... The addition of a fingerboard and neck would have made the wings redundant, as the neck could then support the head and tuning pegs; the gradual reduction of these structures, shown at their most extended in the Psalter, can be followed in carvings, paintings and intarsias from the 12th century to the 15th, and by the 16th century the only traces are the small scrolls or columns described above. The cittern is most often shown being played with a plectrum, another point of resemblance with the kithara. These details, which indicate a continuous line of descent from the kithara, are important in that they tend to disprove two other suggestions about the cittern's origin: that it was a plucked derivative of the bowed vielle of the Middle Ages; and that it was a conscious re-invention of an 'ancient' instrument brought about by the revival of classical learning in the Renaissance."

[Martin Jonas]

That wild "P" profile neck was sustained on cittern derivatives for a great long time. #There is an awesome bell cittern by Tielke at NYC's Metropolitan Museum of Art with such a neck.
That neck profile indeed survived into the 20th century and the age of high-tension steel strings: the maker Heym from the Thuringian town of Suhl made waldzithers with a very pronounced P-profile, at least two of which have come up on Ebay in the last year or so. #Heym's waldzithers had beetween 9 and 14 strings, and were tune with similar gauges and similar pitches to a modern octave mandolin, so one can build a neck that can withstand quite some tension with that profile. #Heym may well have put a truss rod of some sort into the bulge side of the neck, though. #Unfortunately, you can't see the neck profile on the only example I could find just now (below) of a 14-string Heym waldzither.

Waldzither construction in Thuringia and Saxony was the final evolutionary stage of a very strong local tradition of cittern construction, dating back to at least the 16th century, so the link to the cittern examples discussed by Eugene and Jon is fairly direct.

Incidentally, I understand from a German web site that the Heym'style of waldzither is being built again now in Suhl, P-profile neck and all.

Martin

[onthefiddle]

It would be interesting to know what Orville Gibson was influenced by- he's more or less responsible for the non-bowlback mandolin design. His patents describe a construction technique that is like a frying pan with a top- back and sides are carved, sides aren't bent as per the modern stuff. At Gibson, that evolved quickly into bent sides/blocks and a neck joint, all of which was probably a lot less labor-intensive to make.
Interesting....this is reverting to the older European methods of instrument construction, predating the adoption of more complex techniques as introduced by the lute. The Renaissance was a fascinating period for lutherie, with many experiments being made in instrument construction. A very late example of a cittern carved from the solid, with a seperate soundboard and fingerboard, is the "Urbino" cittern in the V&A in London. I've attached a couple of photos - you'll have to forgive me for the lighting and reflections - it's not an easy place to take pictures in.

Jon

[onthefiddle]

That neck profile indeed survived into the 20th century and the age of high-tension steel strings: the maker Heym from the Thuringian town of Suhl made waldzithers with a very pronounced P-profile, at least two of which have come up on Ebay in the last year or so. Heym's waldzithers had beetween 9 and 14 strings, and were tune with similar gauges and similar pitches to a modern octave mandolin, so one can build a neck that can withstand quite some tension with that profile. Heym may well have put a truss rod of some sort into the bulge side of the neck, though. Unfortunately, you can't see the neck profile on the only example I could find just now (below) of a 14-string Heym waldzither.

Waldzither construction in Thuringia and Saxony was the final evolutionary stage of a very strong local tradition of cittern construction, dating back to at least the 16th century, so the link to the cittern examples discussed by Eugene and Jon is fairly direct.

Incidentally, I understand from a German web site that the Heym'style of waldzither is being built again now in Suhl, P-profile neck and all.

Martin
I have overlooked the Thuringian Waldzither thus far - my apologies - it probably can trace a direct relationship to the Renaissance cittern, though I can also see some "English Guitar" like elements there.

I haven't inspected one of these these waldzithers personally so can't comment on their construction, but the Renaissance cittern derived nearly all its neck strength from the fingerboard. The neck is the small rounded section, half the width of the fingerboard - the rest is the back of the fingerboard. On Renaissance instruments the (bar) frets were held in place in small tapered dovetailed crossgrained channels using precisely fitted pieces of dense hardwood (boxwood and/or ebony). These had to be precisely fitted as overly tight or loose fitting dovetailed wedges would lead to a bowed neck (one way or the other) but if properly fitted gave the neck great resistance to bowing (all those pieces of precisely fitted dense hardwood would need to be compressed).

Do you know if this fretting method survived to the 20th century Martin? Also, did the waldzithers continue to use a construction where the ribs go around the back?

Jon

[Martin Jonas]

Jon --

I haven't handled a waldzither myself, so I can't say too much about construction. However, there are two very useful German web sites (here (http://www.waldzither.de/dat/bauform.html) and here (http://www.studia-instrumentorum.de/MUSEUM/zistern.htm)) with details on waldzithers and German citterns in general. The second site is much more academic and comprehensive, the online catalogue of the musical instruments collection of the University of Leipzig. What I gather from it is that most 20th century waldzithers are not in the direct continuation of the German cittern tradition, but rather are in construction basically large mandolins. The exception is the model I mentioned above, made by Heym and other makers in and around Suhl.

Martin

[danb]

(...)
in the V&A in London. I've attached a couple of photos - you'll have to forgive me for the lighting and reflections - it's not an easy place to take pictures in.
Interesting. Are they tripod-friendly there? I'm in London, and have an instrument-photography hobby http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[onthefiddle]

Interesting. Are they tripod-friendly there? I'm in London, and have an instrument-photography hobby

http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

Sorry - the answer is, unfortunately, no. Those pictures were actually taken with a 35mm SLR mounted on a tripod. However it wasn't long before I was escorted to an office by one of the security guards, who insisted that I needed permission to photograph using a tripod. I was later informed that such permission is never given (in fact there is no bureaucratic channel through which to request it).
The instrument department at the V&A is very dark, and all the instruments are in cases - perhaps you could try using a chest pod?

Good luck!

Jon

[onthefiddle]

P.S. Once again, poorly lit and difficult to photograph, but for this week only Paganini's violin - "Il Cannone" by Guiseppe Guarneri "del Gesu" is at the York Gate collection in the Royal Academy of Music. This is one of the two most famous and celebrated violins in the world - the other being "The Messiah" by Antonio Stradivari, which you can find at the Ashmolean Museum. "The Canon" can normally only be seen in Genoa (Paganini bequeathed it to the city on his death) so this is a rare opportunity to see it in the UK.

Jon

[Eugene]

Eugene - it's true that you cannot trace a direct evolution from the Renaissance cittern to modern metal strung and fretted chordophones - still they do owe a lot to the cittern. Cittern construction wasnt really directly carried over to any later instruments - though as an early example of an instrument that was changed from the earlier type of hollowed build to the (middle eastern) lute influenced construction (possibly by Virchi) it is near the root of modern western lutherie.
I've recently been really down on most efforts to apply concepts of evolution to any instrument type. It's been too often overapplied. Of course, there's nothing wrong with the analogy, but I've been trying to shift my personal thoughts as far from instrumental "evolution" and "families" as possible. It's much more a matter of inspiration than inheritance.

[onthefiddle]

I've recently been really down on most efforts to apply concepts of evolution to any instrument type. It's been too often overapplied. Of course, there's nothing wrong with the analogy, but I've been trying to shift my personal thoughts as far from instrumental "evolution" and "families" as possible. It's much more a matter of inspiration than inheritance.
You're right that these biological analogies don't really apply to musical instruments. I do think that there is more to the ways instruments change than purely inspiration though, at least within the changes that occur to any one particular type of instrument. Often these changes are driven by changes in demand on the instrument - for example in repertoire or performing environment. Very often this is combined with technological developments, particularly in string materials and construction. The ways that these factors have influenced the changes that occurred to the Neapolitan mandolin in the nineteenth century are fairly clear.
When looking at the longer term appearance of different types or models of instrument (in the broader sense) then inspiration may play a greater role, but a luthier may often be inspired by a great master of the past - and so influenced by an older instrument in his design for a new one. For pure inspiration we would perhaps have to look at instruments such as the theremin.

Jon

[etbarbaric]

Hi Jon,

I've seen the Messiah (the violin that is) at the Ashmolean... and I now understand a little better some of the "controversy" that surrounds it. It certainly seems like an odd fiddle. I mentioned seeing the instrument to a luthier friend and his response was "looks like a 1970's chinese fiddle, doesn't it?" Still, it was cool to see it in the flesh.

Now... as for the rest of the Ashomolean's collection... Wow! The "too long" Strad guitar... and some of the coolest gambas I've ever set eyes on... not to mention a decorated strad violin and other cool bits. The Hills collected the best of the best... The Messiah just bothers me somehow.

Eric

ps - Cittern content: I own a six-course Dan Larson cittern (after the da Salo instrument, I think) with a cool fluted and flamed maple back. It sits largely unplayed now... if anyone is dying for such a thing I *might* be convinced to sell it.

[onthefiddle]

"looks like a 1970's chinese fiddle, doesn't it?"
A little unfair maybe - French trade at least! http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

For those unfamiliar with the instrument and the controversy surrounding it: "The Messiah" is supposed to be Strad's favourite violin - the one that he couldn't bear to let go from his hands. The controversy arises over doubts about its origins. It was (eventually) revealed to the world by J.B. Vuillaume, who had been promising it for many years (why was it called "The Messiah" - because everyone was waiting for it!). Many people think that they can see Monsieur Vuillaume's hand in the violin, and he has subsequently been found to have faked other violins (e.g. all those of Gaspard Duiffoprugcar, who for a while was thought to have invented the violin - in fact he probably never made one).
HOWEVER there is some pretty authoritative opinion backing "The Messiah" as being genuine - including Mr Charles Beare , the world's current foremost expert on Antonio Stradivari , and of course the Hills were no slouches in this department either!


Now... as for the rest of the Ashomolean's collection... Wow! The "too long" Strad guitar... and some of the coolest gambas I've ever set eyes on... not to mention a decorated strad violin and other cool bits. The Hills collected the best of the best... The Messiah just bothers me somehow.

My favourite is the "Beaufort" viol by John Rose - one of my favourite luthiers - I'd love an excuse to make a copy, does anyone want to commission me? http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif I also have a special soft spot for the unusual 2 cornered viola by Gasparo da Salo. "The Alard" by Nicolo Amati is a very beautiful instrument.

For those who haven't been - the Ashmolean is well worth a visit if you're anywhere nearby. I'm always happy to spend a day there.

Jon

P.S. Some links, in case anyone would like to learn a little more:

http://www.forbes.com/2001/01/10/0110connguide.html (http://www.forbes.com/2001/01/10/0110connguide.html;$sessionid$5X5NAMIAABVEDQFIAGWC FFI)
http://www.soundpostonline.com/archive/fall2000/page17.html
http://www.soundpostonline.com/archive/fall2001/page10.htm
http://www.soundpostonline.com/archive/winter2001/page7.htm

[etbarbaric]

Jon,

I believe it was a "Rose" viol I was thinking of... smallish, and very rounded thing? Just inside the door to the right as you walk in? (at least it was a couple years ago).

I fell in love with its form instantly. I'd commission a copy in a heartbeat... but for the fact that I don't play viol... well... wait.... I *do* play the lute (sort of)... and the intervals are the same... and maybe I could sleep a few hours less each night to learn the necessary bits... You see how I ended up with a cool-looking but unplayed cittern? :-)

Eric

ps - I traveled all the way to the Ashmolean from the U.S. and on the one hour of the one day that I had time to visit , the museum decided that they didn't have enough security staff to open the Hill Collection. I found a guard (a talkative chap) and begged and pleaded to be let in. "Just for a minute" he said... but other people saw us go in... and soon the room was full... and since he couldn't answer any questions, he'd refer people to "that man over there who knows about these fiddles". I was soon giving little mini-lectures on what I knew of the instruments to ad-hoc groups of people gathered all around. A sureal moment to be sure.

[etbarbaric]

Hmm this topic seems to have been moved... to a "Vintage" category... disconcerting. Not that the original category was all that self-defining... but put me back! (please?)

[Eugene]

You're right that these biological analogies don't really apply to musical instruments. I do think that there is more to the ways instruments change than purely inspiration though, at least within the changes that occur to any one particular type of instrument. Often these changes are driven by changes in demand on the instrument - for example in repertoire or performing environment. Very often this is combined with technological developments, particularly in string materials and construction. The ways that these factors have influenced the changes that occurred to the Neapolitan mandolin in the nineteenth century are fairly clear.
When looking at the longer term appearance of different types or models of instrument (in the broader sense) then inspiration may play a greater role, but a luthier may often be inspired by a great master of the past - and so influenced by an older instrument in his design for a new one. For pure inspiration we would perhaps have to look at instruments such as the theremin.
Actually, I was referring to exactly the opposite of things like the theremin in applying "inspiration." All your other examples were exactly the kind of thing I had in mind. While an instrument type can borrow inspiration from older instrument types, no instrument type is an "ancestor" of another type in a literal sense.

[onthefiddle]

Jon,

I believe it was a "Rose" viol I was thinking of... smallish, and very rounded thing? Just inside the door to the right as you walk in? (at least it was a couple years ago).
Close, it's in the same cabinet. You're refering to the lyra viol by John Rose (which is a beautiful instrument I agree), I'm refering to the highly decorated bass viol with the festooned outline. The soundboard is decorated with painting and point d'aguille work and features flaming sword soundholes, the back and ribs are rosewood and decorated with intricate purfling inlay.


I fell in love with its form instantly. I'd commission a copy in a heartbeat... but for the fact that I don't play viol... well... wait.... I *do* play the lute (sort of)... and the intervals are the same... and maybe I could sleep a few hours less each night to learn the necessary bits... You see how I ended up with a cool-looking but unplayed cittern? :-)

Who needs sleep? http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif


Hmm this topic seems to have been moved... to a "Vintage" category... disconcerting. Not that the original category was all that self-defining... but put me back! (please?)

"Vintage" does seem to have acquired a nearly all embracing definition here. Nearly all the instruments discussed in this thread would be better described as "historical", or subdivided into "Renaissance", "Baroque" etc... That could get much too complicated though, perhaps "Classical, Medieval/Renaissance" is still most appropriate. http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif


Eugene@Mar. 03 2006, 23:02
Actually, I was referring to exactly the opposite of things like the theremin in applying "inspiration." All your other examples were exactly the kind of thing I had in mind. While an instrument type can borrow inspiration from older instrument types, no instrument type is an "ancestor" of another type in a literal sense.

From our previous discussion I was sure that we were probably in agreement on this, and thought that perhaps I was misunderstanding you. This has brought a rather surreal picture to my mind - of unemployed luthiers, and "studs" of fine instruments (as in horseracing studs) where fine young Strads and Amati's are raised. Perhaps you might buy a young 1/4 size and hope to see it grow to maturity as a soloist's instrument - too surreal! http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

Jon

[etbarbaric]

But to follow this analogy for a while, there is a sort of "selective breeding" that takes place over time (I like the idea of key example instruments as "studs" that beget wannabe copies). Players, collectors, and luthiers select those models that they think represent the best of breed (a Strad model in the violin world, for instance), and that becomes one of their main offerings. The more factory-oriented producers do the same, only in larger volume. Over time, the natural diversity of form that may have existed is driven out by sheer numbers. An early Milanese violin might eventually, by comparison, seem strange to the vast majority of people.... a relative outlier in its (seemingly) odd shape.

I agree with Eugene that this isn't classic evolution, but its certainly an interesting process. Every once in a while someone reaches back into the fossil (genetic?) record and pulls an interesting historic feature into a modern instrument. Someone might, for instance, decide that those cool John Rose flaming sound holes would look wicked on the new electric cello they're building. Recessive genetics?

:-)

Of course, its all subject to fancy and whim as much as accoustic functionality, I suppose.

Ramblin...

Eric