Talk:Lute

Add topic
Active discussions
WikiProject Classical music  
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
 
WikiProject Musical Instruments (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Musical Instruments, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of musical instruments on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 


TuningEdit

It says "Much renaissance lute music can be played on a guitar by tuning the guitar's third string down by a half tone".

In the diagram, each string appears to be tuned two notes above its guitar counterpart, except the third string which is one note higher. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.225.201.113 (talk) 03:36, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

If you retune a guitar as described, you can play much lute music that might be difficult or I possible on a guitar in standard tuning. You will be nominally a minor third lower than the key the original was in. However, considering the lack of an pitch standard comparable to our modern A=440, this is probably a minor nitpick. You can always capo at the third fret, if so inclined. Wschart (talk) 13:52, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

To doEdit

  • Divide composers by period and add more.
    • Add names of sample pieces?
  • I guess in the older lutes the frets were spaced for rational intonation but perhaps later they were in equal temperament. Perhaps somebody could tell us?
The frets are moveable, and usually set for some sort of meantone temperament - the player adjusts them for the piece he is playing. InfernoXV 11:26, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • add measurements to description. 205.166.218.7 15:35, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
  • (semantics problem) soundboard, back, belly, neck, etc. are well described in isolation, but no clue is given as to their location in the instrument —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.44.136.117 (talk) 13:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Elizabeth Kenny added to list of players, but existing Elizabeth Kenny page refers to the Australian nurse. Also suggest adding and creating page for Paula Chateauneuf. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.29.211 (talk) 18:45, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

African variationsEdit

The page has Asian and other continents' variations.

The page needs variations found in Africa. Dogru144 14:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Merging RequiredEdit

The Oud is the same thing as the Lute, but that's just its Arabic tranliteration in English. I'd suggest it should somehow merge with this article asap.

Not a good idea. At least in part because they are 2 different things.Galassi 19:18, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

No merging. Even if once it was the same instrument, a diverging history has accumulated a great number of differences. A merged article would be either a mess or a tedious alternance.al 21:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

They are closely related. But they are distinct instruments. Keep separate.Dogru144 14:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Chitarrone vs TheorboEdit

Robert Spencer's article authoritatively defines the Chitarrone as an earlier name for the Theorbo, and hence is derived from the Renaissance Lute, not the Quitra. InfernoXV 11:25, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

See Renato Meucci's article apropos (in Italian....).Galassi 20:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Putting this here from the article in case someone wants to use/save it. It is an orphan that doesn't fit and is unsourced.

The quitra did not become extinct, however, but continued its evolution. Besides the still surviving kuitra of Algiers and Morocco, its descendants include the chitarra Italiana, chitarrone and colascione.Jacqke (talk) 00:40, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Profusion and Relative Merits of LinksEdit

I agree in principle that wikipedia articles should not become 'link farms' as one recent editor termed it, and that the Lute article is one which still has a substantial number of external links.

Nevertheless I do feel that it is simply not appropriate for editors to just add and take away references (particularly internal wiki ones) for their favourite/ least favourite musicians without reference to real importance in the context of the article. I think this goes for a lot of music-related articles, but this one is a good example of the issue.

Thus, I dare to suggest that Lynda Sayce who for 20 years has been learning, teaching, playing and writing about the lute and associated instruments, is more significant for the lute than is Sting, whatever his undoubted merits! Yet reference to her has been struck out (not sure which editor did this, as there have been many changes in the last month or so).

In other words, it seems to me that the fact that Sting is undoubtedly better known to the world in general, is an inadequate reason for his name to appear, while Lynda's does not: since the article is about the lute, not about popular culture. --Ndaisley 14:33, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

We all know and love Lynda, a consummate professional. Sting, however, is a great musician, and his Dowland affair is extremely important, because it raised the awareness of lute hundredfold.Galassi 15:07, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Picture on the articleEdit

I don't know if this is the place to say this, but it seems to me that the picture with the caption "A baroque- or classical-era lute" at the begining of the article is actually a small english theorbo. Just a thought, I'm probably wrong (not an expert in lutes and relatives). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.154.219.97 (talk) 14:11, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

It is not. It is a 13course, Jauch model.Galassi (talk) 01:10, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

InfoboxEdit

Discussion of the infobox that just showed up is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musical Instruments. __Just plain Bill (talk) 23:08, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Inappropriate external linksEdit

I have removed no less than eighteen inappropriate external links from this article, only to have the removal reverted and an abbreviation used which stated that my edits were vandalism. If any of these persons are notable, then articles should be created about them, at which point links to said articles would be appropriate. If they are not notable, then there shouldn't be an external link in this article. If you don't know enough about them to write articles yourself, then request that they be written, following the procedure explained at WP:REQUEST. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:31, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Apologies, no offence intended. It is a bit common in the lute community to see red at the appearance of the abbreviation SCA.... [;-)}Galassi (talk) 15:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Don't fret about it; some medievalists are the same way (I'm a sometime history grad student). I'm just glad that we could reach a middle ground. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:07, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

EtymologyEdit

This passage about alleged etymological derivations was added more than a year ago and has stood unsourced ever since [1]:

There are also possibilities of derivations from Greek haleut meaning "fishing boat", Frankish lleut and Slavonic ладья, both meaning "a ship"

This is highly dubious. All dictionaries I've seen give the Arabic derivation as uncontested; there is, to my knowledge, no double ll sound in "Frankish" (which Frankish, by the way?); neither is there a Greek word haleut (there is a Greek verb ἁλιεύω (h)alieúo, with a possible derived adjective ἁλιευτικός, pronounced alieftikos at the relevant time, meaning 'related to fishing'). All the alleged candidates have no other relation to Lute than that they all happen to have an "l" and a "t" or "d" somewhere.

I'll take this sentence out if it isn't sourced in 24h. Fut.Perf. 05:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

This article is actually taken care of by a group of lute experts who are making sure ther is no BS.Galassi (talk) 05:59, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Uhm, what do you mean? That your status as a lute expert is proof enough that this particular claim is not "BS"? Well, uhm, no. Have you got sourcing for it or haven't you? Fut.Perf. 06:11, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:JudenkunigTotapulchraes.oggEdit

The image Image:JudenkunigTotapulchraes.ogg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --02:56, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

List of composersEdit

I thought I was improving the article, but apparently Lute88 disagrees, so lets hear some more opinions. I removed the short list of composers from "lute repertoire" and linked to List of composers for lute instead: its bigger, its not selective in any way, it makes this article smaller and leaves more opportunities for expanding "lute repertoire", etc. However, Lute88 removed my link entirely (! - was this really required? Hey, why not delete that list altogether if you're not going to link to it anyway?) and replaced it with another short list... he didn't even bother checking whether the links actually work or are formatted consistently (for instance, we do have an article on Dalza).

Anyway, the problem with all short lists is that they're always selective, and should not be used when a larger list is available. For instance, the current list... why no mention of Molinaro? Or Lorenzino? Or French Renaissance composers? Etc.. The "lute repertoire" section shouldn't be a list; it should be a big text about genres, countries, schools, etc., with some - only some - famous names to get the reader started. This is the policy New Grove follows, for example, and I believe that it is better than just dropping a small list and adding a few paragraphs to that.

Of course, if someone feels that the article should be bloated with a huge list of composers (and, consequently, that the talk page should be drenched in discussions about who should be included in the short list and who shouldn't be)... --Jashiin (talk) 09:42, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

If you are knowledgeable on the subj.- expand that section with discussions of styles and their practitioners.Lute88 (talk) 00:16, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Style guideline for tuningsEdit

There's a proposed guideline at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Stringed instrument tunings) that affects the Tuning conventions section of this article.

The effect is minor, the article is very nearly compliant with the proposal already. We would need to add a wikilink to Helmholtz notation, and change the format of the pitch descriptions, for example from "[(G'G) (Cc) (FF) (AA) (dd) (g)]" as currently to "GIG-Cc-FF-AA-dd-g" as described in the proposal. I think that's all.

That's assuming that this is the tuning intended, at present it appears to be a sort of modified Helmholtz notation just using prime rather than sub-prime for lower octaves. If that's what is intended I actually like it in some ways, it's a lot easier to type and quite explicit... but it's also nonstandard AFAIK, and as I'm having to guess what is meant, we need to do something. If there is a standard that is being followed, we need to describe and/or link to it somehow.

Apart from that there's nothing wrong with the format currently used here, in fact it also has some advantages so far as clarity is concerned and is consistent with the general philosophy of the proposed guideline. So I'd be very interested in any views that it should be kept as is. In that case perhaps it's the proposed guideline that should change, not this article. There would be two main possibilities:

  • We could make the format for coursed instruments optional, and just recommend consistency within any one article. This is already proposed with respect to several other issues within the guideline.
  • We could recommend this slightly longer but arguably clearer format for string listing for coursed instruments instead. The problem here is that the standard for uncoursed instruments, for example "E-A-d-g-b-e'" as a description for standard guitar tuning, is fairly widespread, and the guideline for coursed and uncoursed instruments should be consistent IMO, particularly for occasions when one article mentions both.

And within these two main options there are several other options, for example add the dashes to the current format but keep the parentheses around the courses, or even keep the non-standard octave notation.

My feeling is that it would be best to change the format here to that currently in the proposed guideline, for consistency with other articles. But as I say above, I'm very interested in other views on this.

And also of course interested in any other comments on the proposed guideline, either here or at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Stringed instrument tunings). Andrewa (talk) 18:31, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Unequal Temperaments book and websiteEdit

Dear friends,

The Unequal Temperaments book of 1978 was described-in writing-as the definitive reference on the matter by authorities such as John Barnes, Hubert Bédard, Kenneth Gilbert, Igor Kipnis, Rudolf Rasch and others.

In the 1990's I also developed the first professional-grade temperament spreadsheets.

Eventually I setup the "Unequal Temperaments" website, where I uploaded the spreadsheets which, kept permanently updated, are available for FREE. I also uploaded years ago a provisional "Update" to the book of 1978.

The website lately gives information on the recently released new version of Unequal Temperaments 2008, which includes a detailed chapter about FRETTING LUTES in Unequal Temperaments. (The website does NOT sell the book)


I would find it useful to Wikipedia readers if my website was included among "Articles and Resources"

Kind regards

Claudio

Dr. Claudio Di Veroli

86.42.128.58 (talk) 17:15, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

LUTH an Ancient instrumentEdit

Dear friends,

I think that LUTH has a very important role in instrumental music in 16th-17th AC. The name (LUTH) is descended from filiation direct of one "PERSIAN instrument", Even before ARIAN's IMMIGRATION to IRAN and then EU. After maney great wars before Islamic period, this instrument was found in arabia. in arabian "Al-'ud" took from "LAUD"( AL + L + AUD = AL-'UD) and after that in spanish and in ancient french language its configurated to "LUT".

We can Understand that this instrument had a DIRECTION from northeast of Iran to west lands, by Aryens (IRANIANs ancestor) Immigration to Arabia and Europe. LUTH is an ETHNIC IRANIAN word. For example, in KERMAN province in South-eastern part of Iran, "Kavir-e Lut" or "LUT DESERT", Was discovered an ancient LUT. I present three Kind of LUTH, The ancient instrument in Iran was "ARCHILUTH", "THEORBE", "CHITARRONE", that had beautiful Modales intonation. LUTH was renamed to BARBATH in the name of its great lutherist, BARBOD, In SASANIAN epoch.

I just made additions to lute history that partially addresses this. I find not address the linguistic origins, but what is said about Barbat matches what I have read.Jacqke (talk) 10:52, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Another image: Lorenzo Costa - Un concerto (National Gallery, London).jpgEdit

 
A trio accompanied on a lute played by one of the singers. Das Konzert [The Concert] (c. 1490, Lorenzo Costa).

Image:Lorenzo Costa - Un concerto (National Gallery, London).jpg may be added where appropriate. Hyacinth (talk) 03:50, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

arab wordEdit

Like many words in many languages, Arabic being no exception, 'a-oud' (desperate attempt to reproduce the sound), means 'stick, branch, lute, physique, strength' and so on. Pamour (talk) 17:44, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Boat LuteEdit

Req: Entry "Kutiyapi" says it's a "a Philippine two-stringed, fretted boat-lute", and mentions «This feature, which is also common to other related Southeast Asian "boat lutes"». In the entry "Lute", there's no mention of any such thing as a "boat lute". Can someone add a description/definition/note about boat lutes, maybe also linking to kudyapi as an example? —sburke@cpan.org (talk) 02:03, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Potential changes; seeking opinionsEdit

Recent additions I made came from research for the mandolin article. Looking at the lute article I am at an impasse; this seems to be an article about the short-necked European lute, but I want to write about the lute family and incorporate all of the members including the long-necked lutes, the African lutes that resemble lutes from 3000 years ago, and the Asian lutes. I have 2 questions: Should I incorporate all the lutes here or create a second Lute family article? AND Does the level 4 vital article designation at the top of this page apply to an article about the European lute or to the lute family of instruments?Jacqke (talk) 11:09, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

You should create a separate article, to match the existing category.--Phso2 (talk) 14:19, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

HeadstockEdit

The wikipedia article for Headstock could use some broadening, any volunteers? It is rather narrowly focussed on US electric guitars.----Design (talk) 07:28, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modifiedEdit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lute. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:14, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)Edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lute. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:43, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

SmithEdit

I am writing about the following which I have changed:

Smith and others argue that the long-necked variety should not be called lute at all, since it existed for at least a millenium before the appearance of the short-necked instrument that eventually evolved into what is now known as the lute, nor was it ever called a lute before the 20th century.

That line originally came from an anonymous writer, who gave no more information. <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lute&diff=155096119&oldid=155094091>.

I believe that the reference this came from was <Smith, Douglas Alton (2002). A History of the Lute from Antiquity to the Renaissance. Lute Society of America (LSA). ISBN 0-9714071-0-X.>, as it is the only source I have seen that makes sense. I don't have access to the book however to verify.

I have rewritten the sentence into something that should be easy to verify as true or false for someone with access to the book:

Douglas Alton Smith argues the long-necked variety should not be called lute at all because it existed for at least a millennium before the appearance of the short-necked instrument that eventually evolved into what is now known the lute.

Jacqke (talk) 17:41, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Douglas Alton Smith quoteEdit

I am moving this from the article to here because it's controversial and I want to see it in the ref before allowing it to remain in the article.

Douglas Alton Smith argues the long-necked variety should not be called lute at all because it existed for at least a millennium before the appearance of the short-necked instrument that eventually evolved into what is now known the lute.[1]

Jacqke (talk) 14:41, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Smith, Douglas Alton (2002). A History of the Lute from Antiquity to the Renaissance. Lute Society of America (LSA). ISBN 0-9714071-0-X.

Misspelling of 'tablature'Edit

'Tablature' isn't spelled 'tabulature', so I corrected it yesterday, but now someone has changed it back.

Why is that? Why would you want your article to contain spelling errors?

If anybody's in doubt how it's spelled, please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablature . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:C4CE:8A59:1ED:233:CA9E:B081 (talk)

Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, with individual editors often pulling in different directions. I have no idea why it was changed back, and for the moment it's fixed. Thanks for helping! Just plain Bill (talk) 13:12, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Bill!  :)

Lute88 has restored the misspelling of 'tablature' again. What's wrong with this person, why does he or she insist on that misspelling remaining in the article???

Commentary on the apocalypseEdit

TinglyRadiance. Hello, in this edit, I notice that you added a reference for the following paragraph:

In about the year 1500 many Iberian lutenists adopted vihuela de mano, a viol-shaped instrument tuned like the lute, but both instruments continued in coexistence. This instrument also found its way to parts of Italy that were under Spanish domination (especially Sicily and the papal states under the Borgia pope Alexander VI who brought many Catalan musicians to Italy), where it was known as the viola da mano.
 
The lute-related image from this manuscript

The ref, (link to the ref), is one of the manuscripts for the Commentary on the Apocalypse. Now, some versions of the Commentary do show pictures of what are probably early violas/vihuelas, but they aren't talked about in the text. Could you explain how the circa 950 a.d. Commentary works as a reference for the above paragraph about the instrument in 1500? Inquiring minds are curious., Best wishes, Jacqke (talk) 10:02, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

I came across the missing reference via citationhunt.toolforge.org and did a little bit of digging. This is not my area of expertise, hence the confusion over centuries, but I thought I could help.

I chose that reference after finding it in the Vihuela Wikipedia article: "The vihuela, as it was known in Spanish, was called the viola de mà in Catalan, viola da mano in Italian and viola de mão in Portuguese" and so took the reference as one that supports the vihuela de mano also being called the viola de mano. TinglyRadiance (talk) 10:44, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

TinglyRadianceI appreciate your quick response. It looks like the source for the artwork got applied elsewhere in the Vihuela article. It needed removed from that sentence. Thank you for letting me know. I'm going to put the source needed tag back in the lute article for now. If you do find a source linking the instruments, it would be a great addition. Thank you again, Jacqke (talk) 11:03, 30 June 2021 (UTC)