jdowning - 12-16-2007 at 06:34 AM
Looking at the images of the eyecatching, decorative masterpiece ouds posted by Ronny Andersson on the thread "Jamil Gergis ouds", I am curious about
how the bowls of these instruments were constructed - not having examined one at first hand. I assume that the bowl is first made from fairly thick
ribs, of one type of dark wood (how thick?), in the usual manner and the exterior shaped to a smooth profile. The decoration - made from veneer tiles,
sliced from a composite "log" - then seems to be glued into rebates ( in the shape of each tile) cut into the surface of the bowl and then sanded or
scraped flush with the bowl surface? I assume also that the flexibility of the larger tiles - having been made from a multitude of small pieces -
allows them to readily conform to the curvature of the bowl. For smaller tiles of triangular geometry, conforming to the bowl curvature would be much
less of a problem.
The inlays appear, from the images posted, to have been applied fairly irregularly - presumably quickly executed freehand in the interests of saving
time (the overall visual effect of the design being what matters rather than absolute perfection).
As the decoration likely does not improve the acoustics (although the best ouds of this kind likely sound pretty good), were these ouds made primarily
as costly presentation instruments - to be carefully protected from damage and admired mostly for their appearance?
No question that ouds traditionally carried a certain amount of decoration since very early times. Ibn al-Tahhan, writing in the 14th C about oud
construction says that "The best ouds are those which are uncarved and undecorated, and are made from one kind of wood. If it is desired that it
should be decorated with ebony, this should be as light and thin as possible, and sparsely used." He also says that the bridge "should not be weighted
by anything, and should not be made of ivory, ebony, gold or any precious thing, because it makes the sound of the oud dull. The decoration of the oud
is made from aloe wood, sandal wood or camphor tree wood, but this is simply for show." (G.H. Farmer translation - 'Studies in Oriental Musical
Instruments', 1939)
Ronny Andersson - 12-16-2007 at 08:15 AM
John, I have one oud with the entire back covered of small pieces of wood veneers, like you find on the rosettes on guitars. I attach a photo of this
oud that now is being repaired by Richard.
btw do you draw parallels with the European tradition with some highly ornamented lutes if they actually were used for musical performance or just a
fancy piece of decoration and what's your opinion about the ivory lutes?
jdowning - 12-16-2007 at 10:45 AM
Hi Ronny - the back of the oud looks as if it is covered with decorative veneer banding - ie applied in strips - to accomodate the curvature of the
bowl?
I am pretty certain that most of the surviving ivory lutes were likely costly instruments but intended to be used as working instruments. They likely
survive today because the bowls were made from (then) exotic materials like ivory. Ivory must have worked quite well acoustically (although I have
never heard a lute with ivory bowl being played). Ivory likely presented a few challenges for the luthier. For example, the ribs would have been made
very thin (about 1 mm thick?) and would have made the attachment of the soundboard to bowl a bit problematical. However, the hardness of ivory and its
thinness likely contribute to making it a satisfactory choice for a lute bowl (but don't try it today - although sadly some have!).
As an example I attach images of two well used ivory lute bowls dating from the 16th C originally made by renowned luthiers Wendelin Tieffenbrucker
and Marx Unverdorben. They are in the Charles van Raalte instrument collection in Dean Castle, Kilmarnock, Scotland where I examined them in detail
many years ago. Both of the lutes were converted to lute/guitars in the 19th C (Germany?) - another likely reason that they survive today.
The Tieffenbrucker bowl carries three original labels inside these being - "Wendelinus Tieffenbrucker, Dictus Venerius Fecit 1571", "Johannes Rossman/
lauten und Geigenmacher in Breslau, 1686" and "Christian Gottlieb Hoffman Leipzig Anno 1726". The bowl in now in quite poor condition after nearly 400
years of use and has seen at least three conversions from its original 16th C state. It must have been a good and respected instrument originally.
The Unverdorben bowl is in better condition and again dates from the late 16th C. The printed label inside states " Marc unverdorben in Venetia" The
'c' on 'Marc' has been altered to an 'x' with a pen stroke. This bowl is unusual in that the ribs are decorated with an applied arabesque design in
gold foil with foliage and floral elements picked out in red and green. This seemingly impractical method of decoration is visually very effective
although much has now been worn off through use over the centuries. Again a sure indication that it was a good instrument to start with.
Regards
John
antekboodzik - 6-22-2013 at 02:18 PM
Another work by Unverdorben, which impress me much. Full material is on the Museum webpage:
http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O154419/lute-body-unverdorben-max...
How it was constructed? I guess these triangles could be cut to exact size that match actual width of the "rib" quite easily, and glued to a plain
bowl.
Anyway, I have some more questions regarding construction of the bowl and soundboard of instrument, related not only to European lutes, but to any
bowlback instruments at all. May I hereby ask You for help post these issues in one topic?
