baroquecello

Members
  • Content Count

    659
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by baroquecello

  1. I hope I will have helped you find strings you like. There are many different bow types around. The really short ones are usually good for music, where you Need to Retake you bow very often, like French orchestral Music. German and especially italian bows often were longer, so cantabile playing was easier to achieve. Mind you, you can hold a baroque bow very far away from the frog, or actually not that far away. I mainly Play a bow which is an "informed Interpretation" of a bow Held by Boccherini on a painting. It is relatively short and has a high frog, and a very light tip. I hold it practically at the frog. Nobody has ever judged me for it.
  2. Look at the info @stringking. Aquila gives recommendations, and until you develop your own Preference, I'd try out what they recommend as a medium set. All you have to decide it wether you prefer late or early baroque. Everything else is finetuning to your taste and can take place every time you renew your strings. I would recommend as a first improvemet to try a luxline d string from Kürschner, whom you can simply ask for the luxline equivalent of a given bare gut string.
  3. couldnt find the thread regarding the violin strings, so I thought I'd Reply here. Look at this site for good stringing (early vs late baroque stringing advise): https://www.pure-corde-shop.com/Violin-gut-strings-set This seller has the product descriptions from several respected manufacturers all together on one site, which is good for comparison. https://shop.stringking.net/category/violin_strings1 Here in Germany, many use a luxline d string from Kürschner: https://www.kuerschner-saiten.de/einzelsaiten-single-strings/luxline/ I'm a Cellist and mostly use Aquila (is available at the lutier around the Corner), but actually like Toro a bit better. My Partners choice for violin however is Aquila over Toro anytime for e, a and g, but Kürschner Luxline for d. That said, Pure corde seems to be the new Thing to do for a few years now in the early Music world, so next time I restring I will try that.
  4. I don't think it was a cut down viola, as the arching shape (high, steeply rising with a Long and Broad, relatively flat "Island" in the middle) is very common for that Region, and having a small "Island" on a big top plate would be much more unusual. Another Thing that could be taken as an indication for different makers of top and back plates is the arching, which is very different for top and back. Again, the top seems to follow Vogtland traditions, but the back doesn't at all, which makes mebelieve the top was a later repair done by a better craftsman than the original. I xan vividly imagine the conversation: "But really, repairing this is not worth it, ist a terrible Instrument" "oh but I love the Sound, and it used to belong to my grandfather" (Lutier suppresses eyeroll) "oh well, that will be XX Dukats please"
  5. I'm a Player with an interest in Instruments and do not Claim any of what I have to say has much validity at all. I like to comment only in order to see if there is anything to what I'm thinking. This is a weird violin. I'm wondering wether it may be a Composite Instrument (the replacement of part having taken place Long time ago). It doesn't look nearly as old to me as the Wood is. The f hole shape and the arching have a distinct germanic taste to me, and the method of Building (built on the back) is also consistent with that. The outline, especially of the c bouts is something I've never seen before. Is my Impression correct, that the purfling is a single Strip of light coulored Wood, and the black strips are formed from a blackened and hardened paste, like varnish or glue mixed with a dark colored substance? The back Looks like a non standard Wood (not maple), Maybe made of beech, and is not purfled. The scroll (Looks like a fruitwood?) does not seem to fit the wonky style of the rest, I'd say it is a later Addition, or was made by a different Hand. I also think the top and back do not look like they were made by the same Person, the back being very plain but the f -hole wings even have some fluting; Maybe the top is a replacement? So all in all, back and ribs original, at some Point Long ago something occurred and top and scroll got replaced, probably in saxony, using old Wood from a torn down barn around the corner, explaining the f holes and scroll that look not consistent with the outline. Sometime after 1850 the neck was replaced with a more modern style one.
  6. A friend of mine Needs a new Bridge for his Cello because it has warped and he wants a baroque model. He met up with a lutier who told him he can fit a baroque Bridge, but he will Need to bring buy it himself. As far as I know, usually you'd measure where exactly the bass bar is, look at how the Bridge feet would stand on that ideally, think symetrically and calculate the Bridge feet distance. Now, he doesn't have These skills, so all he could do is measure the distance between the feet of his current Bridge. The Question is: how should he measure it? from the outer Edge of the Bridge foot?
  7. @jezzupe Before the frog had an eyelet and screw, it was just wedged between the hair and the stick, nowadays known as a Clip-in frog to HIPP People. If you don't wedge it in properly, or the Little Ridge on the stick is worn out, it slides out of it, and "jumps" away just like a frog jumps away. Thats where the Name Comes from.
  8. Get a teacher. Ask him/her where to get an instrument.
  9. I recently (thought I) was in the market for a new cello, and talked to the maker of my current cello About getting a slightly smaller cello for the left hand made (68 instead of 69.5 CM Mensur makes a world of a difference to me, but only when playing steel. Gut 69,5 is fine.). He said that he has learned to somewhat manipulate the sound character in certain directions mainly by changing the distance between the f holes, and I believe I recall that he found especially the distance between the upper eyes important. We were Talking About Cellos, ofcourse. F-holes are a very important trait of a model; may they in fact be more important than the actual outline? I'm also thinking that Maybe this maker uses a kind of standardised graduation pattern, in order to monitor what the f hole distance does. Does that sound plausible? Any comments?
  10. all helicore is an ok cheap solution. All Kaplan is also not bad. Crown could also be in that catechory. With exception in particular cases though, these strings will sound less good than the standard Larsen/Spiro combo or the other ones I mentioned (btw I would say spiro Tungsten rather than silver is standard). I would estimate you increase the chance of selling your instrument quickly with other strings. On the other hand, if it is an inbetween solution before buying the perfect strings for it after you tried it out, then they are fine.
  11. NuWell, the forum and the Facebook page are two different things. I can't say I agree with atlvc, and I think the unfriendlienessvwas due to just a fee users, one in particular, that unfortunately were very active. As to the question, every cello is different, and over the last decade many new types were developed, so it is hard to answer the question. Most people still know the larsen solo and spirocore combo., so stringing it with that will make it easier to compare the behavior of the cello. Magnacore and recently magnacore arioso are very popular nowadays, as are perpetual and versum. All very good, middle of the road strings you could try. Most other strings are more exotic or not as good.
  12. My vote is a Saxon violin, second half of the 19th century. The wonky ouline looks like made without a mold, the rib corners extend till the plate corners which is consistent with a built on the back method of making. The scroll fluting probably stops at 6 o'clock.
  13. Well first of all, they don't Need to be made from the same type of Wood at all, from a structural Point of view, it is a purely aesthetic consideration. The stiffness of the neck supposedly influences the Sound and playing chacteristics. There are makers that improve the strength of the neck by adding dowels of various possible materials, including Carbon fibre, and report that the Sound and playing characteristics seem to improve. I believe some are here on the board. Stiffer seems better, I believe.
  14. @Jerry Pasewicz and @nathan slobodkin, I think this is highly interesting! I am a professional Player and as you can see from my comments, it is a Nathan sais, that I'm not Always sure what makes a certain Instrument easy to Play and others not. That said, my gut instinct here is with Nathan. I Change the Position of my knees relative to the Cello regularly, Change the length of my end pin regularly, sometimes even during one rehearsal. I also Play baroque Cello without an end pin and have several ways to hold a Cello there. Holding it the same way all the time is in fact not healthy for the back, which Needs a Little Change every now and then. I therefore cannot imagine the relation between the neck and the lower bout to be very important at all. What does have a very direct Impact on the ease of playing is how "far away" the a string is, bow wise, and how easy it is to get over the top shoulder of the instrument. On a low overstand, the top shoulder Needs a lot more working around it. I would guess that a higher overstand for the a string comparatively would help get the Hand Palm away from the shoulder of the Cello, making the required arm movement to get into the higher positions smaller.
  15. Well,this is where it gets interesting! the line (I'm assuming the pencil line) is clearly very tilted towards the c string. The tilt is so much I would expect the bridge height of the c and a strings assuming no distortion of the body) to be practically identical. Is that correct? I'm asking because I think I've only once in my life seen a cello that had sort of the same height for c and a strings, and I thought it was a mistake. I'm wondering wether this is something that is not done in Europe? I am a professional Player, by the way, so I do have some experience what cello is concerned...
  16. Thanks everyone for helping me understand this better. @Jerry Pasewicz from your last sentence I take it, there are indeed two kinds of ew York neck reset, meaning the name refers to two different practises at the same time, the one being the neck pull back and shim type, the other the more comprehensive one you Mention here, which seems to me to be nothing else but a "proper" reset, with all the necessary Adjustments (which I take it may include a clavette, a shim under the fingerboard for adding poiriette, possibly even a new neck or top block, if the situation requires it?). That does complicate Things, because now we cannot distinguish between the two. As to the poiriette, or neck tilt. Just to check if I understand this right. 1. We are Talking About the neck tilt that causes one side of the fingerboard to have a lower projection than the other. 2. this is done solely for the Purpose of playability, and not with the idea that it will, for instance, change the sound or response of the strings. 3. it is achieved by tilting the plane of the neck Surface to which the fingerboard is glued. You can see that easily if you measure neck overstand and compare the treble and bass side. 4. on violins, it is beneficial to tilt the fingerboard toward the treble side, so that the g string is more easily reached with the bow. On Cellos it is better to do the opposite, so that the a string can be more easily accessed with the bow, and the shoulder of the cello will be less in the way when shifting. Ine Thing I think is important for Players to know, is that the poiriette may not be apparent to you on first glance at all. On my own cello, the neck overstand at the treble side is About 21.5~22mm, and at the bass side 20~20.5mm the difference is About 1.5~2mm, yet the bridge is higher for the c than for a string. This is due to the lower string clearance over the fingerboard of the treble strings (on my cello 5 for the a string, 8 for the c string) compared to the bass strings, and possibly a small top Deformation (bass bar may cave in, in my case prob 1 mm, treble side may rise in time, in my case prob 1MM). On my cello, in spite of the poiriette, the bridge is 82 MM at the a string and 88MM at the c string, which to the Player makes it appear as if the tilt toard the a string is deliberate, whereas in fact a lot is done to minimise it. A question I have is how much poiriette is desirable. In the example of my cello, might a Little more be more comfortable or is this Pretty much ideal? I can imagine it also helps to get over the shoulder of the instrument to higher positions more easily, do you have any response on the part of Players regarding this?
  17. Thank you all for clearing that up! Glad to see it was my understanding that was correct. But a question remains from the conversation we had. The person I was taking to maintained that, for Cellos, it had to do with increasing neck overstand and increasing the projection of the a string relatively to the c string, so that the bridge would become more "centrered", equal in height for a and c strings. The idea behind this is that it would increase the load taken by the bass bar and decrease the load taken by the sound post (I find this unlikely). Supposedly this was developed by Morel. I've never seen or heard of this anywhere, can anyone shed a light on this?
  18. Recently I had a conversation with a fellow cellist and the Topic of neck reset came up. It turmed out, the other Player had a very different understanding of what the famed "new York neck reset" (I'm not even sure that is the way to call it correctly.) is, than I did. So I'm hoping to improve my undestanding of it. Can anyone comment on what this entails and why it is done, especially on Cellos (but info on violins is great too!). Thank you!
  19. I'm only an Amateur, and everyone here is really negative About your chances of repairing it. I don't really undertand why. All cracks look Pretty clean to me, so should be relatively easy to glue, but I'd think the bass does need to be taken apart almost completely, and all old repairs must be undone. I would not be surspsised however, if after cleaning it up (assuming it is all hide glue thatwas used), the cracks will be not that hard to glue together. They all seem to me like they are due to shrinkage of the top and back, which was under stress because the ribs and bracing didn't shrink along. You'll probably Need to replace the bracing, and shoten the ribs. It is a Long term Project, but if you have the space to store the Instrument while working on it, and it is a Hobby, then why not? it doesn't look impossible to me. But as I said, I'm only an Amateur and stil working on my first violin repair Job. I just hope my post will provoke some experienced People to react with advise.
  20. Stahlhammer are basically the same Thing, but they aren't what they used to be. Now they are made with carbon fibre rods, which may or may not sound as good as the old model. There are definite Advantages to this type of end pin. Personally, what I liked a lot when using it was that, because the pivoting point is closer to the Player, there is less weight on the chest of the Player than with a conventional end pin. I also liked the increased stability, as the pin is not so much prone to bouncing. So generally it makes playing the cello feel a lot easier, and as you know, such psychological Things can make a huge difference. I'm not a tall guy, but for tall People the effect will be even bigger. I do not currently own such a pin, but am contemplating installing one on my cello. I've heard good Things About the berlin sound-pin-system (google it, they have a german language site), but have not yet tried it out. It is very expensive but also has very convincing list of proponents. I do own their pin (the rod only) and use it wit a standard Bender bung, it is one of the best sounding Pins for my cello.
  21. Slightly dampen the inside, place it on a flat surface, place a weight just heavy enough to make the edges come down to the surface right on the highest part of the arch. Wait for two days. Every time I've seen such heavy distortion, it was with backs made of one piece, especially with unevenly figured wood. Joined plates seem more stable. Can anyone corroborate that impression?
  22. I agree with the Yita recommendation, but be sure to buy the M20 or T20. Much better Sound than the M/T19 ones. The Setup usually is ok, but a really good Setup with best grade Bridge will improve it still, however, you can wait with that if you are a beginner. You will Need a better set of strings, and the bow that Comes with it is also not good. the cheapest ok bow I know of are carbondix Carbon fibre bows.
  23. Well, actually, originally there existed the viola, which could either be da Gamba or da braccio, designating the Instrument Family. Then the word violino, small viola, came into use for the treble member of the da braccio Family, a word which then spread across Europe. Violone was a big viola and could be da braccio (a violin Family type Instrument, often something like a large Cello and tuned a whole step lower, w hich is what we nowadays refer to a bass violin, but h istorically there was not such a rigid, strict Systematic terminology ), or da Gamba, so a modern double bass is in fact a hybrid between the Gamba Violone (construction of the belly) and da braccio Violone (played without frets, strings tuned at only one interval apart). When solo Violone Repertoire started to come up after the Invention of wound strings, the small Violone, the violoncello had to be distinguishable by name also from its big brother. Violone started to be used more exclusively for 16-foot Register, but in orchestral Music the term Violone often still refers to big and small Violones till in the late 18th century. So a violoncello is a small big viola, not a small big violin. ; )
  24. Bass violin is a rather non-specific word used for mainly 8-foot register instruments before the term Violoncello appeared at the end of the 17th century. However, it was not uncommon even in the middle of the 18th century, depending on the language. So any instrument that nowadays called a cello was called a bass violin in earlier days. In other words, it doesn't help with the identification of the instrument. Btw, looking at it again, I doubt the f holes were enlarged.
  25. I just talked to a Violinist who was wildly enthusiastic. Any additional experiences with this since it ws last discussed?