baroquecello

Fractional size violins are often just that: made smaller in all dimensions. I'm responsible for a fleet of rental instruments (as the contact person between user and lutier, I 'm not a lutier ), and we've got one strange 1/4 violin, that has a very slender body, but comparatively large f holes that are comparatively far apart, and a 4/4 size bridge. This is the best sounding quarter size violin we have. So I believe just downsizing is acoustically not the best solution, but that it is best to downsize only those aspects needed for ergonomic reasons.

Well, I remember very well playing a duo programme with a colleague who has a cello with an absolutely lovely sound, particularly on the a string. This sound is there for any somewhat capable player to have. It is there when I play it also. When the audience noticed this difference, and started attributing this to her skills instead of the instrument, that is when I knew I had to upgrade mine.

It is not a good idea to inlay wood with metals, because wood is hygroscopic and metals aren't. Therefore, while wood will shrink and expand with relative humidity, metal won't, and in time the metal purfling will come loose. It may even crack the wood. I've seen a broadwood 1870ies piano with copper inlay along the edges, similar to purfling. The copper inlay kept springing out of the wood it was inserted in.

Joseph Klotz I was born in 1743, so can't have made a violin in 1730. In past centuries, it was very normal to glue fake labels into violins (quite possibly it still is more normal than we'd like to think). Without any further info, I'd say you have a 90 % chance that it is a saxon violin from 1850~1900.

Well , I 'm also in Europe, so if you let me know about your sources for tips here, even the threaded ones, that would be greatly appreciated!

No laughter here. You can find 10mm diameter solid rods at your local do-it-yourself store. I got aluminum, hollow brass and two types of steel rods for a total of 20 Euros or so. If you find one you like, you can order a pin to superglue onto the rod from saddle rider, and you are good to go.

I'm surprised to see cherry mentioned so often, I've never seen an instrument made of that wood in person. In cellos, I've seen poplar and beech used for backs and both worked very well acoustically. Especially beech is very plain, but that also has its charm. Both have historical precedents, even from italy. My impression is that in the bigger instruments (starting viola), woods other than maple can work very well acoustically, while for the violin it is hard to find something that works as good as maple. But I'm only a player.

In my experience, the combination of a larsen a and d string will result in a weaker d compared to the a string on many cellos. This is particularly the case for regular larsen strings, but also their other lines have this problem, although I do not know about their Cannone line. Most cellists are used to it and to some extent even use it artistically for coloring the sound. Regarding different brands, practically any other big brand string will be somewhat more balanced. The question is whether you like their sound or not. Try a set of rondo by thomastik, for instance. What balances the sound of strings somewhat on most cellos, is a carbon fibre tail piece like those by ConCarbo or Tonal. Again trial is the only way to know if it works for you.

@HoGo thank you for your elaborate answer!

Standard Larsen d strings are notoriously weak. Try a different brand.

sort of, the area between the f holes, yeah.

Off topic, but, this reminds me that I read somewhere regarding graduations, that a thicker centre and thinner along the outline for the top plate was called a German graduation schem, while the inverse was called an Italian scheme. I didn't believe it at the time, practically all graduation plans I've seen are of the German type, but of these three instruments the two big name Italian ones concur exactly with that notion. Any opinions on the matter?

Yes!

While this is true, the outcome shows first of all that, Yes, end pins do make a difference, and, secondly, in which direction one might want to try out. It is better than nothing.

Maybe this helps you?

Thank you blank face! It seems to show a "Forster, S. (London)" bridge. I think that would make is a Simon Andrew Forster bridge, which would make t a romantic bridge rather than a classical bridge, would you agree? The photo is a bit grainy. And the "Klotz" marked bridges are interesting. Not clear which Klotz it means, but they are practically a modern bridge without a heart cutout. What would that do to the sound, I wonder. And they seem to be the only bridges without any cutout; could that be a typical Klotz or Mittenwald thing? And maybe apply to cello bridges also? (speculation....) In the end it also comes down to the answer to the question how reliable the attributions are.

I don't think I agree. Instruments can sound radically different depending on where you stand (player or audience, latge or small hall etc etc). I know Instruments that are loud under the ear, but sound normal or even small far away, and vice versa. Sound color also widely varies under the ear and in the audience. In cellos, this can be very extreme. I've also played a couple of cheap rental violins with such loud e strings under the ear, that no sane person would want to bow them properly. Loudness, as in a boomy, full sound, as opposed to a brilliant (not shrill), slender sound, I think, is a bad trait if you want to play professionally. Of course, shrillness is also negative, but what is too shrill depends on the skill of the player also. Bad bowing can turn brilliance into shrillness easily. Too much room for subjectivity here. A good instrument is one that satisfies its player, and each player has different wishes.

Thank you, this is all very interesting and helpful!

I'm looking for information on cello bridge models from Mittenwald. preferably from the second half of the 18th century, but anything else is also interesting. A little background: I recently bought a Cello from Mittenwald ca 1770~80, and, as I'm interested in historical performance practise and am using it as a classical (as opposed to modern) cello, if possible, I'd like to get a bridge made as it could have been when the cello was first produced. I've been looking for information on Mittenwald setup everywhere on the net and enquired at several museums (Mittenwald, Markneukirchen, Germanisches Museum and Grassi/Leipzig), but nobody seems to know anything on the topic, and almost nobody seems to care (with onexaception, some anwers were downright rude, while others didn't reply at all. And one person actually asked why I would care). Does anyone here have ideas or information? Right now, the cello has a banks model bridge, which is a little early, english and rather exotic in its outline. I'm thinking of either a Forster cello bridge model (for which I have no historical example to copy yet), which isn't that different from a belgian model, or a Stadlmann (thank you @jacobsaunders bridge model copied. The problem with the later is that the original is about 8 CM wide, while I will need one that is 92 MM wide, so it is rather a different measurement that will require adjusting the feet. Neither of the two models have anything to do with Mittenwald, and the cellos they built look rather different from Mittenwald instruments. If anyone has any info on original cello bridges ideally from around 1770 ish, ideally from Mittenwald, but also from elsewhere, then I would be very grateful. Any thoughts on the topic, like where I could enquire for further informatio, are also highly appreciated.

@Shunyata I made the wood lye you described using fine ash from my pellet oven, which is as fine and burnt as it gets, when it comes to wood ashes. To be honest, I had no idea what a lye is. Upon touching, it felt soapy, so I washed it off. You wrote it is a gentle stain, but the english Wikipedia articles seem to suggest it is not that innocent a chemical at all. It did make wood darker, and it also dissolved a two days old shellac layer. So what exactly have I made, and how dangerous is it? Wikipedia even says certain lyes attack glass and are used for the dissolving of bodies...

Oh, the bung is of big importance, as I've written in an earlier post. A bad bung or a badly fitting bung makes the whole experiment useless. As is the length of the end pin remaining inside the cello, longer seems better, probably up to a point, but.... I have found heavier pins to work better for me, but I believe this has to do with stiffness rather than weight. I now use a hollow steel end pin that is not light, nor heavy and it works very well with a bender bung. Mitsuke worked a bit better but is terribly expensive.

While faster sound end pins may be nicely made, you may want to look for the recent thread here on the topic of the theory behind it. Why don't you just try a few? Your colleagues should have plenty to try out. You'll notice soon enough what will work for your cello and what won't. I predict weight will be of little importance.

Yes, I would agree with that, but I couldn't say what happens exactly. My impression is that stiffness is much more of a factor than weight, and that generally stiffer is better. But it it difficult to separate the effect of stiffness and weight as they correlate to a degree. My feeling is that flimsy CF end pins vibrate at a speed (rather slow compared to stiff materials) and amplitude (rather large) that influences the contact between bow and string in a negative way, because the whole cello starts wobbling. Again, no idea if that really is what is happening.

In regard to the sound, weight does not have the effect you describe at all, when it comes to end pins.

You'll have to experiment to know what works best for a particular instrument. And before you do, make sure the fit of the bung is correct, otherwise the whole exercise is useless. Some celli are very sensitive to the end pin, while others are not so much. In my experience, hollow CF pins always are the worst option, acoustically. They will make the sound superficial. All other types of end pins are potentially a good choice. Aluminum tends to brighten the sound, tungsten tends to darken the sound. I used to have a mitsuke triple brilliant which worked very well on my cello: dark with a brilliant side to it. But end pins generally have a smaller effect than, for instance tail pieces. (Where CF s a great material, acoustically speaking).