Talk:Lute
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Musical Instruments, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Musical Instruments articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] To do
- 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)
[edit] African variations
The page has Asian and other continents' variations.
The page needs variations found in Africa. Dogru144 14:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Merging Required
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)
[edit] Chitarrone vs Theorbo
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)
[edit] Profusion and Relative Merits of Links
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)
[edit] Picture on the article
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)
[edit] Infobox
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)
[edit] Inappropriate external links
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)
[edit] Etymology
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)
