baroquecello

Members
  • Content Count

    827
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

About baroquecello

  • Rank
    Enthusiast

Recent Profile Visitors

6724 profile views
  1. I've composed a little set of variations for beginners on twinkle twinkle little star. My pupils enjoy playing the piece a lot, I am happy with what they learn from it, and therefore decided to make it available online. There are several versions: solo cello, solo viola, solo violin, cello trio with optional double bass and viola trio with optional cello. I hope you will enjoy the piece and will consider playing it or using it as teaching material!
  2. @Wood Butcher the acoustic outcome of a repair this big is always a shot in the dark. If the work is done properly and the sound is not to my liking, this would of course not at all be the fault of the restorer. I would absolutely expect to pay full price for replacing such a bar with an ordinary one again without hard feelings.
  3. @Don Noon and @David Burgess thank you for the warning. I indeed understand that it is a matter of feeling lucky. And, if my lutier advises against it, I would not be stubborn; only if the lutier feels like trying out something new will I press on. The existing bass bar has to go for some arching correction, there is no way of saving it. The cello is rather light and had a prominent wolf note (it had a glued in wolf killer, only partly effective and not the best solution for the overall sound), so I think it could do with a sturdy bass bar. I do not believe in the gaps and would prefer a larger glueing surface to gaps, also because of the fact that the cello has lost arching before, I think sturdyness is important. But all of it is just a feeling. And as I said, I will not make my lutier do something that goes against his instincts, but rather go with his experience. In my experience, that usually gives the best result.
  4. @christian bayon Thank you for having been so informative so far on this innovation of yours. I'm having an old cello of mine repaired, and the top has sunken on the bass side and needs a bass bar replacement. I'm considering asking the lutier to change the style of bass bar to your triangular shaped bar, without the cutouts, as the sound has always been good on this cello, but string response was sluggish. Would you be willing to share your specifications (length, weight, thickness?) for a cello bass bar in this style? Thank you!
  5. Thank you for all your replies. Yes, ofcourse, a lack of standardisation. But in many cases, one can speak of a relative tendency (relative/contrasting to modern practise). for instance, bass bars. There existed bass bars as large as those nowadays, but there existed many shorter ones too, so the "average" bass bar would have been shorter. And graduation patterns: the average violin plate will have been thicker than the average modern state of old violins, as they can only have been made thinner in the centuries following their creation. Likely an averaged out instrument is something that never existed. It would be so interesting to know what combination of specs would have made an instrument that would have been considered successful. For instance, do a short bass bar and a thick top gradutation pattern go hand in hand? And if so, what way would they have made the bridge to work well with such a top? Do a short neck and a large cello pattern go hand in hand? etc. etc. @Mark CaudleOn a side note, I'm not convinced of the low bridge placement argument based on iconography, especially not starting the second half of the 17th century. I think the cause of placing the bridge too low is one of a mistake of perspective by the artists. I've read a very convincing article about this once explaining the phenomenon and showing more than enough 19th and 20th century examples of the very same mistake even by quite good painters. (Unfortunately I do not rememember where I read it.) I also do not believe that the f-hole nicks were ever intended as merely ornamental; if they were, they would have been celebrated more (and ofcourse one can find f holes where the nicks are "celebrated". But look at c holes, a whole different story and an earlier invention. No c hole nicks). I believe bridge placement invariably leaves permanent marks in the varnish, and I've yet to see a historical ful size instrument that shows marks of a (very) low bridge placement in the varnish. Do you know examples of that? Or do you possibly know of written sources? Regarding the domenico Galli cello, that certainly is interesting. It does look a small on the whole, is it full size? I can find a lot of images, but cannot seem to find a description.
  6. Bit of background: I've studied baroque cello at two concservatories in Germany (Bremen and Frankfurt) with prominent baroque players. I have quite some experience performing. I also have a keen interest in instruments, both historical and modern, and instrument making. So I'm not entirely new to the matter at hand. Recently I've come across a paper and a number or people that stated that the neck on most baroque cellos was shorter than the modern neck by quite a bit. This is something new to me. Ofcourse, the baroque neck was different, set at a different angle, with a wedged fingerboard that was shorter and often laminated etc etc etc. But I've never heard of the baroque neck being shorter than a modern one. It would make sense, I guess, on those large patter cellos, to have a shorter neck, so that the string length ends up almost like a modern standard length. I'm just really surprised I never heard of this before. Anyone care to comment with knowledge or opinion?
  7. Some people play with surgical tubing over the fron and leather, usually for obtaining a better grip. Maybe this was done with a similar idea in mind? Better contact between index finger and stick?
  8. That one should work, shouldn't it, @PhilipKT I just looked at the site and t really bothers me they couldn't be bothered to post pics. You don't know if these are nasty factory instruments from the 60ies with very thick ugly and irrepairable nitro varnish and plywood plates, or if there are some nice old saxon instruments amongst them.
  9. Has anything been changed lately? I'm thinking a different string brand, or maybe uninstalling fine tuners? I'd try a longer tail piece , or you can try out what happens when you install extra fine tuners.
  10. I've been thinking about this repair technique and am wondering about a few things I probably simply misunderstand, maybe someone can enlighten me. By the looks of it, like is often the case with old cellos, the bass bar side has been pushed inward, as most of the arching correction seems to take place there. Im just wondering, ba glueing these "suspended" bracings in, the wideness of the top becomes rigid, inflexible. So bulging the top outward at the bass bar will have as a result, that the arching on the treble side of the cello will go down (inwards), because the wood/material necessary to allow for a higher arching needs to come from somewhere, right? So is the restorer assuming that the treble side of the arching rose as the bass side of the arching fell? Is that the common pattern for such distortions? Is is not possible, that the distance between the c bouts in time got comparatively (to upper and lower bouts) wider due to the loss of arching and that a reasonable approach would be to somewhat bring those closer again, thus allowing for a higher arch on the bass side without lowering the treble side? In other words, will this kind of arching correction not lead to a more balanced arch, and therefore a better arching, but one that still is lower than it originally was?
  11. Is it not possible that it was made like this deliberately, as part of copieing a deformed original? With such a degree of deformation, I'd expect the projection to have dropped a lot, but it seems normal
  12. Your taste will likely change over time, so it is unlikely that you will keep liking the same thing. It is not inconceivable that you would dislike playing a high end Instrument. Some of the advantages these instruments have to high class players become apparent only when played very well and are not within the reach of normal mortals.
  13. I have to agree with @jacobsaunders on his idea that a book on old bridges would have been much more interesting. There is a sore lack of info available regarding the setup of early instruments. A rich catalogue of bridges from important centres of Instrument making, covering especially pre 20th century bridges is sorely needed. On your website, there is no info on thickness, tilt, and weight, which are very important factors for setup and the tonal character of a bridge. Are those included in the book?
  14. I recently, for fun, to "see what people used to play" (I'm not old enough to know) got a set of heavy Dominant strings for cello. They were not great (particularly a and d), but not terrible either (particularly g and c), and there was indeed something reminiscent of gut, though not enough. On an 18th century cello that I do not own, the dominant heavy g and c strings worked much better that Spirocore and Magnacore (which sursprised me a lot), so I donated them to the owner of that instrument. I wonder why no good string manufacturer nowadays tries to make a string with a synthetic core for cello anymore. I consider the Warchal experiments for cello to be a faillure, and the last ones before that were Obligato g and c strings. Those work well on some cellos, but definately do not have much in common with gut. I think the Dominant formula with a higher tension would be a great starting point for developing a new, gut like synthetic cello string. The low tension the set currently is very much a drawback.