The quickest one I saw was Stephen Murphy , just a few seconds for the whole lute ... I am certainly the slowest one ... I hate doing this but I have to ... Excellent demonstration, great thanks indeed !
Really-excellent topic and video! Thanks. Sixth-comma meantone… I’d have imagined that, for Renaissance times, quarter-comma would be more historically-accurate, but I’m not sure for lute in particular. Interesting!
There's a lot of evidence suggesting that unlike keyboards, lutes and viols were tuned in equal temperament, but there is other evidence about moving frets to get better tuning, and of course players would always have relied on their ears rather than any external reference. I love 1/4 comma on keyboards, but on the lute those very narrow fifths are less pleasant, hence the compromise of 1/6 comma.
@@luteshop, without a doubt, equal temperament became common sooner on fretted strings than on keyboards. Woodwinds somewhat ahead of keyboards too. A lot of people don’t realize that various well-temperament schemes remained pretty common on keyboards until the late-1800s. I’m not certain, but I suspect that Paul O’dette might tune his Renaissance Lute to something somewhat like QC Meantone; perhaps you know. A few months ago, I picked up a Lumatone keyboard (ruclips.net/video/cpYBnzaWZqU/видео.html) and have been mostly working with 31-tone-per-octave equal-temperament (“31TET”) on it. For any of you who aren’t familiar with it, 31TET is audibly identical with Quarter-Comma Meantone, which was very common in the Renaissance, but it avoids the modulation limitations. I can see why: it sounds really intriguing! I also picked up Pianoteq’s classical-guitar sound for it, which I find makes the 31TET/QC-Meantone 5-cent-flat perfect fifths sound less … clangy … than on piano. It still sounds 5 cents flat, but more intentionally so, whereas on piano, it sounds more like a mistake!
I make a sheet about 1.5mm thick of suitable wood (anything fine-grained and reasonably hard will do, I usually use lemonwood or holly) and plane the edge smooth. Then saw off a 1mm thick piece from the edge, and chamfer both sides of the sawn surface with a knife until the height is suitable. I chamfer the ends as well so there is nothing for a finger to catch on. I smear some hide glue on the flat side and let it dry, then add more hide glue and press it into place, using the strings to hold it down for 15 seconds or so. I do this with the lute strung up to pitch and in tune so I can check the tuning as I go - sometimes the uppermost frets will need to be slanted slightly, and for the 12th fret of course you can compare the harmonic with the fretted note. I hope that helps.
Great video, Martin! I am about to tie my first lute fret and am looking for a fret ruler like the one you used in the video. I haven't had any luck finding one. Can you recommend a place where I can purchase one? My 8-course Renaissance lute has a 59 cm length and I will be setting the frets for equal temperament tuning. I am in the U.S. Thank you!
Hi Peter, you just make your own fret ruler - if you email me (address on my website) I can just send you a copy of an article which explains how to calculate the fret distances. I should add it to the list of articles on the site, where you can also find a short discussion of the issues: luteshop.co.uk/articles/tuning-temperament/
It's even worse with European yew! My most successful source of Pacific yew so far is wood for bow staves, from Ravenbeak Natureworks in Canada - www.ravenbeak.com.
Aquila make a special kind of nylgut for frets, which they claim doesn't wear out and stays round in section. A round fret might be good if you use single frets, but I can see it might not work for double frets, because they need to get a bit squashed before they work properly. It seems double frets were almost universal historically and they have several advantages - once they're a bit squashed they provide a larger contact area with the string and probably give a better sound. I used them many years ago and now I'm thinking of going back to them, as I have with gut strings.
@@luteshop thank you, I'll look for the Aquila nylgut fret string and see how it goes, maybe I'll have to move to gut eventually if nylgut doesn't work :)
I suspect that the lute you have is actually an oud, which doesn't have frets. On the lute, you start with the first fret (the one nearest the nut) and use the thickest fret you can without getting a buzz (the strings can be surprisingly close to the fret without buzzing). Then you do the same with the second fret, using the thickest gut you can without getting buzzes when you stop strings on the first fret - and so on. If the lute has a nice low action you will probably have to use progressively thinner frets as you go up the fingerboard.
@@luteshop Nah, definitely a lute--thank you! It was in a closet for quite a few years and the previous owner never finished the job of re-stringing them. I'll try that with the gut I have. Cheers!
This is an old post now, so I hope you'll be able to answer. I need to replace a couple of frets on my saz. I know the knots are essentially the same, but I'm unsure of what gauge nylon to use to refret it with. It's a smaller instrument than a baglama (the fret nylon is also black), is there a straight forward way of finding out what I need? Thank you (anyone) in advance for the help.
I guess you still have some old frets, in which case you can try using the same size. If not, you just have to experiment a bit, using the biggest first fret your nut allows, then the biggest second fret you can get away with without buzzing, and so on.
If you do need to experiment and the final frets you want to use are a bit pricy (like is the case with nyl-gut), I would also recommend getting cheap nylon strings to find the sizes for the frets that feel good to play, then replace them with the higher quality frets once you know what to get.
I'm purchasing a lute that at the moment doesn't have the gut frets tied. I'm planning to tie them myself. Do you have any advice on how to accurately tie and place them since there's no prior reference of where the frets should be?
Most lutenists tune their lutes in equal temperament, but some use other systems of tuning. Lots of articles have been written on the subject. A short practical guide is in my article "The well-tempered lute" in Lute News 41 (March 1997, 8-10), which I will add to my website soon. An approximation to equal temperament is Galilei's 17/18 rule, which means that you divide the distance from the bridge to the nut into 18, then the first fret is 17/18 of that distance. You then divide the remaining distance into 18, and the second fret is 17/18 of that distance, and so on. This is not mathematically precise, but in practical terms it is close to being correct because the string length from bridge to nut is not quite the same as the actual sounding length of the string. In the end you have to use your ears as the best guide, because strings are not perfect and bass strings behave differently from thinner strings.
I'm thinking of buying a handmade lute, made to order. Would I offend a lute builder by suggesting nylgut frets instead of gut frets? I would think nylgut is more stable in varying temperatures and humidity. The nylgut frets on my Early Music Shop lute don't seem to do the strings any harm (after three years of playing daily)
Aquila have a formula for frets which is different from the one they use for strings, and many people seem to be happy with them. I have no experience with them, but if they work for you I see nothing to worry about. One downside I can predict is if you use double frets they won't wear in the same (useful) way as gut, where the strand on the nut side gets crushed more and then doesn't buzz.
I'm not sure I can expect a reply, given that this video is six years old, but I'll ask anyway. I've loved the sound of the lute ever since hearing one on an rock album back in the early Seventies. I'm thinking about building a dumbed down version of one (I've built a dozen or so stringed instruments). I wonder if you would consider the severely angled headstock essential in terms of playability, etc. And also, why have I seen "lute guitars" with round backs, guitar frets and only six strings, but no guitar lutes, if you will, with gut frets, doubled strings and a flat back? The round back is beyond the limits of my patience to attempt. The sound is what I'm interested in. I can't imagine that the instrument I propose wouldn't sound better and more lute-like than the usual lute guitars, which sound very little like a lute, but not very good as a guitar either.
You could make a vihuela with a flat back. Probably the most important factor is the double strings. These instruments are very light (a six-course lute or vihuela typically weighs less then 600g) and the string tensions are very low (about 25N per string), and these factors are important for the sound too.
Hello and sorry for interfering in the conversation! I am a lutenist/theorbist and have also made several of my own instruments. I think that the pegbox with a severe angle, even if emblematic of the lute, has no influence on the sound; moreover, archlutes and theorbos have a first pegbox without angle. The best explanation I found is that it reduces the effort to turn the pegs (effect of a pulley) therefore increasing precision, the lute being often played by women who accompanied themselves when singing. Has the round back with the ribs any influence on sound? I don't know, but what is sure to restore the sound of the lute is the shape of the soundboard, and especially what you don't see: the bracing (hope Google give me ad hoc translation : barrage en français). Between Italian lutes, French lutes, and German lutes, from 16th to 17th century, Between 7 or 8 courses (Dowland), 10/11 c. (Ballard), 13 c. baroque tuning (Weiss, Bach), and 14/15 c. archlutes and Theorbo (Kapsberger, Piccinini)... the position of the bars changes dramatically ; and even today, luthiers are still seeking to improve the brilliance of the chanterelle, the softness of the midrange or the depth of the bass by adjusting the bracing and eventually consider the result as their "secret de fabrique" !! Hope it helps ;-)
Gut swells up into a nice mushroom shape which prevents the end from pulling through. Burning nylon sounds messy, and in any case nylon is too slippery for frets.
No one knows. It makes the instrument shorter than it would otherwise be, it allows the lute to be safely placed on a table soundboard side up (but only for 6 course lutes where the pegbox is short and has a wide end), it increases the string pressure on the nut. I would be pleased to hear any convincing explanations!
@@luteshop With double courses the pulling force of the strings is greater than single course instruments and, I guess, the angle provides both a "friction stopper" and structural strength because of the angle.., is my guess.
See my reply to yoheff988 below. Wire-strung instruments like citterns and bandoras had metal frets, usually set in an unequal temperament. The gut frets of the lute give you a choice of temperament, and allow you to move frets to get better tuning depending on the key you're playing in.
@@luteshop I wasn't thinking of wire strung instruments, I was thinking of classical guitar as that is what i play, but yes I realised the answer shortly after i wrote the comment; that you can move the frets around to get different temperaments
Fixed frets would restrict the possible tunings to equal temperament, and would be problematic anyway because strings are not always true. The lute is not very efficient, modern or logical - the only reason for playing it or being interested in it is as a historical instrument - but if you love the music which was written for it, you won't want to compromise its nature by making modern "improvements". Lutes were played by great players for centuries, they would never have put up with something which didn't work for them, and it can work for us too.
One thing I like about having "loose" frets on the lute is that sometimes you are playing only a particular note or two on a fret and you can fine-tune their intonation to match the rest of the piece better. There are a few times I only hit, say g (fret 6) with a couple notes on courses where it is naturally a bit sharp (the central ones), and I can slightly adjust the fret to bring them more in tune for the piece I'm playing.
![Digital Circus Episode 4 [TRAILER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/abZtsmMUbJo/mqdefault.jpg)
The quickest one I saw was Stephen Murphy , just a few seconds for the whole lute ... I am certainly the slowest one ... I hate doing this but I have to ...
Excellent demonstration, great thanks indeed !
What a wonderful, helpful video. Thank you so much!
Really-excellent topic and video! Thanks.
Sixth-comma meantone… I’d have imagined that, for Renaissance times, quarter-comma would be more historically-accurate, but I’m not sure for lute in particular. Interesting!
There's a lot of evidence suggesting that unlike keyboards, lutes and viols were tuned in equal temperament, but there is other evidence about moving frets to get better tuning, and of course players would always have relied on their ears rather than any external reference. I love 1/4 comma on keyboards, but on the lute those very narrow fifths are less pleasant, hence the compromise of 1/6 comma.
@@luteshop, without a doubt, equal temperament became common sooner on fretted strings than on keyboards. Woodwinds somewhat ahead of keyboards too. A lot of people don’t realize that various well-temperament schemes remained pretty common on keyboards until the late-1800s. I’m not certain, but I suspect that Paul O’dette might tune his Renaissance Lute to something somewhat like QC Meantone; perhaps you know.
A few months ago, I picked up a Lumatone keyboard (ruclips.net/video/cpYBnzaWZqU/видео.html) and have been mostly working with 31-tone-per-octave equal-temperament (“31TET”) on it. For any of you who aren’t familiar with it, 31TET is audibly identical with Quarter-Comma Meantone, which was very common in the Renaissance, but it avoids the modulation limitations. I can see why: it sounds really intriguing!
I also picked up Pianoteq’s classical-guitar sound for it, which I find makes the 31TET/QC-Meantone 5-cent-flat perfect fifths sound less … clangy … than on piano. It still sounds 5 cents flat, but more intentionally so, whereas on piano, it sounds more like a mistake!
Great! A tutorial about making and gluing wooden frets on the sounboard would be much appreciated!
I make a sheet about 1.5mm thick of suitable wood (anything fine-grained and reasonably hard will do, I usually use lemonwood or holly) and plane the edge smooth. Then saw off a 1mm thick piece from the edge, and chamfer both sides of the sawn surface with a knife until the height is suitable. I chamfer the ends as well so there is nothing for a finger to catch on. I smear some hide glue on the flat side and let it dry, then add more hide glue and press it into place, using the strings to hold it down for 15 seconds or so. I do this with the lute strung up to pitch and in tune so I can check the tuning as I go - sometimes the uppermost frets will need to be slanted slightly, and for the 12th fret of course you can compare the harmonic with the fretted note. I hope that helps.
Thanks! Your video help me!!! I have a vihuela and my luthier is distant (800 km). Kleber de Florianópolis/Brasil.
Great video, Martin! I am about to tie my first lute fret and am looking for a fret ruler like the one you used in the video. I haven't had any luck finding one. Can you recommend a place where I can purchase one? My 8-course Renaissance lute has a 59 cm length and I will be setting the frets for equal temperament tuning. I am in the U.S. Thank you!
Hi Peter, you just make your own fret ruler - if you email me (address on my website) I can just send you a copy of an article which explains how to calculate the fret distances. I should add it to the list of articles on the site, where you can also find a short discussion of the issues: luteshop.co.uk/articles/tuning-temperament/
Martin,Where can I find Yew for ribs that is knot free? Here in California, Pacific Yew is full of knots. Thanks
It's even worse with European yew! My most successful source of Pacific yew so far is wood for bow staves, from Ravenbeak Natureworks in Canada - www.ravenbeak.com.
@@luteshop Thank you Sincerly appreciated
Just wondering... what kind of nylgut string would be adequate for tying frets on a lute?
Aquila make a special kind of nylgut for frets, which they claim doesn't wear out and stays round in section. A round fret might be good if you use single frets, but I can see it might not work for double frets, because they need to get a bit squashed before they work properly. It seems double frets were almost universal historically and they have several advantages - once they're a bit squashed they provide a larger contact area with the string and probably give a better sound. I used them many years ago and now I'm thinking of going back to them, as I have with gut strings.
@@luteshop thank you, I'll look for the Aquila nylgut fret string and see how it goes, maybe I'll have to move to gut eventually if nylgut doesn't work :)
How would you recommend choosing fret thickness if there are no frets to compare to? I purchased a used lute without frets.
I suspect that the lute you have is actually an oud, which doesn't have frets. On the lute, you start with the first fret (the one nearest the nut) and use the thickest fret you can without getting a buzz (the strings can be surprisingly close to the fret without buzzing). Then you do the same with the second fret, using the thickest gut you can without getting buzzes when you stop strings on the first fret - and so on. If the lute has a nice low action you will probably have to use progressively thinner frets as you go up the fingerboard.
@@luteshop Nah, definitely a lute--thank you! It was in a closet for quite a few years and the previous owner never finished the job of re-stringing them. I'll try that with the gut I have. Cheers!
This is an old post now, so I hope you'll be able to answer. I need to replace a couple of frets on my saz. I know the knots are essentially the same, but I'm unsure of what gauge nylon to use to refret it with. It's a smaller instrument than a baglama (the fret nylon is also black), is there a straight forward way of finding out what I need? Thank you (anyone) in advance for the help.
I guess you still have some old frets, in which case you can try using the same size. If not, you just have to experiment a bit, using the biggest first fret your nut allows, then the biggest second fret you can get away with without buzzing, and so on.
If you do need to experiment and the final frets you want to use are a bit pricy (like is the case with nyl-gut), I would also recommend getting cheap nylon strings to find the sizes for the frets that feel good to play, then replace them with the higher quality frets once you know what to get.
I'm purchasing a lute that at the moment doesn't have the gut frets tied. I'm planning to tie them myself. Do you have any advice on how to accurately tie and place them since there's no prior reference of where the frets should be?
Most lutenists tune their lutes in equal temperament, but some use other systems of tuning. Lots of articles have been written on the subject. A short practical guide is in my article "The well-tempered lute" in Lute News 41 (March 1997, 8-10), which I will add to my website soon. An approximation to equal temperament is Galilei's 17/18 rule, which means that you divide the distance from the bridge to the nut into 18, then the first fret is 17/18 of that distance. You then divide the remaining distance into 18, and the second fret is 17/18 of that distance, and so on. This is not mathematically precise, but in practical terms it is close to being correct because the string length from bridge to nut is not quite the same as the actual sounding length of the string. In the end you have to use your ears as the best guide, because strings are not perfect and bass strings behave differently from thinner strings.
Thank you very much for this video.
What a beasutiful lute!
I'm thinking of buying a handmade lute, made to order. Would I offend a lute builder by suggesting nylgut frets instead of gut frets?
I would think nylgut is more stable in varying temperatures and humidity.
The nylgut frets on my Early Music Shop lute don't seem to do the strings any harm (after three years of playing daily)
Aquila have a formula for frets which is different from the one they use for strings, and many people seem to be happy with them. I have no experience with them, but if they work for you I see nothing to worry about. One downside I can predict is if you use double frets they won't wear in the same (useful) way as gut, where the strand on the nut side gets crushed more and then doesn't buzz.
@@luteshop Thanks for this info. Double frets sounds interesting.
Very useful tips thank you for sharing !
I'm not sure I can expect a reply, given that this video is six years old, but I'll ask anyway. I've loved the sound of the lute ever since hearing one on an rock album back in the early Seventies. I'm thinking about building a dumbed down version of one (I've built a dozen or so stringed instruments). I wonder if you would consider the severely angled headstock essential in terms of playability, etc. And also, why have I seen "lute guitars" with round backs, guitar frets and only six strings, but no guitar lutes, if you will, with gut frets, doubled strings and a flat back? The round back is beyond the limits of my patience to attempt.
The sound is what I'm interested in. I can't imagine that the instrument I propose wouldn't sound better and more lute-like than the usual lute guitars, which sound very little like a lute, but not very good as a guitar either.
You could make a vihuela with a flat back. Probably the most important factor is the double strings. These instruments are very light (a six-course lute or vihuela typically weighs less then 600g) and the string tensions are very low (about 25N per string), and these factors are important for the sound too.
@@luteshop Yes, thank you.
Hello and sorry for interfering in the conversation! I am a lutenist/theorbist and have also made several of my own instruments. I think that the pegbox with a severe angle, even if emblematic of the lute, has no influence on the sound; moreover, archlutes and theorbos have a first pegbox without angle. The best explanation I found is that it reduces the effort to turn the pegs (effect of a pulley) therefore increasing precision, the lute being often played by women who accompanied themselves when singing. Has the round back with the ribs any influence on sound? I don't know, but what is sure to restore the sound of the lute is the shape of the soundboard, and especially what you don't see: the bracing (hope Google give me ad hoc translation : barrage en français). Between Italian lutes, French lutes, and German lutes, from 16th to 17th century, Between 7 or 8 courses (Dowland), 10/11 c. (Ballard), 13 c. baroque tuning (Weiss, Bach), and 14/15 c. archlutes and Theorbo (Kapsberger, Piccinini)... the position of the bars changes dramatically ; and even today, luthiers are still seeking to improve the brilliance of the chanterelle, the softness of the midrange or the depth of the bass by adjusting the bracing and eventually consider the result as their "secret de fabrique" !! Hope it helps ;-)
good idia for new start ,so good job thx
How does gut melt compared to modern nylon which is what I have.
Gut swells up into a nice mushroom shape which prevents the end from pulling through. Burning nylon sounds messy, and in any case nylon is too slippery for frets.
Why does a lute's tuning pages bend away from the neck?
No one knows. It makes the instrument shorter than it would otherwise be, it allows the lute to be safely placed on a table soundboard side up (but only for 6 course lutes where the pegbox is short and has a wide end), it increases the string pressure on the nut. I would be pleased to hear any convincing explanations!
@@luteshop With double courses the pulling force of the strings is greater than single course instruments and, I guess, the angle provides both a "friction stopper" and structural strength because of the angle.., is my guess.
The angle makes a very easy and strong connection with the neck possible.
I can understand them tying frets on with lute string 500 years ago but these days why don't they use fret wire as in guitars?
See my reply to yoheff988 below. Wire-strung instruments like citterns and bandoras had metal frets, usually set in an unequal temperament. The gut frets of the lute give you a choice of temperament, and allow you to move frets to get better tuning depending on the key you're playing in.
@@luteshop
I wasn't thinking of wire strung instruments, I was thinking of classical guitar as that is what i play, but yes I realised the answer shortly after i wrote the comment; that you can move the frets around to get different temperaments
Wouldn't it be more efficient/ Modern and logical to have permanent frets just like on a guitar?
It's 2019 for heaven's sake.
Fixed frets would restrict the possible tunings to equal temperament, and would be problematic anyway because strings are not always true. The lute is not very efficient, modern or logical - the only reason for playing it or being interested in it is as a historical instrument - but if you love the music which was written for it, you won't want to compromise its nature by making modern "improvements". Lutes were played by great players for centuries, they would never have put up with something which didn't work for them, and it can work for us too.
One thing I like about having "loose" frets on the lute is that sometimes you are playing only a particular note or two on a fret and you can fine-tune their intonation to match the rest of the piece better. There are a few times I only hit, say g (fret 6) with a couple notes on courses where it is naturally a bit sharp (the central ones), and I can slightly adjust the fret to bring them more in tune for the piece I'm playing.
We tried that in the mid-20th century. It did not end well.