baroquecello
-
Posts
1266 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Articles
Store
Posts posted by baroquecello
-
-
That is very interesting! Congratulations on your find! I'm a pro that because of health issues has to play on a small 7/8 or large 3/4 cello. I know it is hard to find something with a history like this. Did your restorer comment on the projection and the neck overstand? They both look rather high to me; are they original? I'm asking because I often wonder wether acoustically a higher overstand and higher projection (compared to a 4/4) wouldn't be the way to go on smaller instruments. Are you keeping the Klengel end pin or are you replacing it? The tail piece (not the tail cord, obviously) could be original, will you keep it?
-
I'd say it says
"Martin Baur
Stuttgart 1839
für Max Bohrer's Sohn"
The last line translates as "for the son of Max Bohrer". Max Bohrer was a rather famous cellist in the first half of the 19th century. That is quite special, if t is true. May we see the rest of the instrument?
-
@ashleyxoxo I would simply be repeating my previous post. Yes, c# is highly unusual for a cello wolf tone on a 4/4 cello. Get the cello checked for anything that isn't glued up properly or doesn't fit well by a competent setup person and see what is left of your problems after that. Trying to fix your problem without the cello at hand is practically impossible when all you can give us is the problematic pitch.
-
-
All I know is it was a british brand run by an Eastern European cellist. The brand name was chosen to sound like Rostropovich, Starker and a third cellist I forgot. The brand advertised that they took special care in designing the tension within the set to be optimally calibrated. For me, the c string was not stable enough, and the a string rather too punchy, but they were well made strings, and were the most durable strings I've ever had.I think they didn't do enough publicity outside of the UK. I'd imagine brexit wasn't very helpful either, but what do I know. Sad to hear they are no longer in business, but I'm not very surprised.
-
If you are curious and feel like experimenting, what can make a huge difference on certain instruments is the addition or removal of screwed on fine tuners. Also changing the distance between the bridge and tail piece makes profound differences on certain instruments. (Some say to never stray from the rule of the thumb, which is 1/5 or 1/6 of the string length, depending on who you ask. My take is that it is the distance of the weight of the tail piece to the bridge is what is responsible for most of the differences) You can have lots of fun fiddling around trying to determine what you prefer.
-
Weren't problems like these the reason for inventing the sound post in bowed instruments? How do those fare in guitars, acoustically and structurally? It would be totally reversible to try out, wouldn't it?
-
If you want to open a workshop and earn your living party through repairs and setup work, do your market research and open your shop somewhere where recent demand has increased, or where there are few other makers. Costumers, especially the better players, are loyal to their lutiers if they do good work, and no matter how good you are, it is not going to work if you open up a shop in a place with lots of competitors already established. I've seen that happen a couple of times, and it is not good for anyone.
Internet presence is important nowadays, and a nice video can make a difference. I think much is dependent on your marketing skills and finding the right tone in that for your potential clients. Too much or too flashy and you will be viewed skeptical, too little and then you won't be known. I'm a musician by the way, not a maker, and to us marketing is increasingly important also.
-
For that amount of money you'll need to have a lot of luck to find something proper. I'd advise you to keep your eyes open, keep saving and be very patient. Another option would be to use the money to get the cello you currently own properly set up. A good sound post and bridge can make a world of a difference. You'd have to show the current cello to a good lutier to know if it can be done.
-
Troy that is not even what I'd call a playable cello. Where do you live and what is your budget? Maybe we can be of some help. It is better not to buy below a certain quality as you'll be buying a throwaway instrument instead of something you'll be able to sell at almost no loss later on. Better save up a few years longer and get something not terrible.
-
Try Guust Francois in Amsterdam
-
A student of mine, who is almost 80 yeears old, bought one. She had problems with her shoulder, and playing with this bow alleviated those. We tried several, but anything below number 6 didn't sound good to us. She went with a T6, it sounded and worked better than the M and S series. These bows are individuals so it could be a good idea to try several T model bows in order to find just that one. Always try before you buy. She owns a nice professional quality cello by Wolfgang Schnabl that has a large an projecting sound. That is all I can say.
-
One other possibility: relative humidity. Is this a cello with a high arch? Such cellos often react more severely to changes in relative humidity. That would mean you need two bridges changing them depending on the weather. Has this difference in string height changed over the two years period, or has it fairly recently?
-
Usually, when an instrument settles, the projection goes down a little, necessitating a shortening of the bridge. So this sounds a bit odd. Is the arching holding up? No sinking bass bar or treble f hole wing? No bulging out back plate?
-
Pavel Serbin plays a supposedly Dutch instrument with a rosette, that unfortunately is hidden from view by a modern fingerboard. It sounds pretty good.
-
Never tried a Lu-Mi. Did try a jay hyde baroque cello. It was ok. But if you are an amateur and you are having a ceelo restored that you will play once it is finished, why not just use any nice sounding modern cello with a woooden tail piece and baroque gut strings for a while? Practical and easy is also worth something.
-
11 hours ago, JacksonMaberry said:
It's my instrument, a 1982 Ken Bakeman, no. 36. His own model, a fusion of Nanette Streicher and Walther & Sohne ca 1805. Exceptional piano. Koa wood veneer, which I thought was very special considering I'm from Hawaii. I was very fortunate to get it. Good eye, more than half the people who walk through the door peg it as a harpsichord.
Edited: mistyped the year of style
Well, I am a baroque cellist, so I should know a harpsichord from a fortepiano.
Very nice indeed! One doesn't often see such instruments unless in a concert hall or at a fortepianist. I have a square piano from 1849. It was sort of restored 15 years ago, but unfortunately has its problems. I don't play it really, it is just there for when pianists visit.
-
On 5/3/2024 at 1:20 AM, JacksonMaberry said:
Had a nice visit with fellow Jackson, Jackson Chase, a luthier in Yakima WA. He brought five of his instruments to show me, and took a look at what I'm doing. Bought me lunch, too! Really good dude. Beautiful instruments, too.
And I see you own a historical piano! Nice! What model is that? Do you play it yourself, rent it out, or is it just for decoration?
-
Hans Salger, a violin maker working in Bremen, has personally measured these instruments, and regularly makes replicas. I buy my gut strings from him, and my impression is that he is practically always working on making replicas of these. He told me he thinks they were used instruments that were no longer considered good enough (because of being old fashioned). and estimates they were made in the middle of the 16th century. I believe they are sort of made using the BOB method. I don't remember if the bass bar is in the middle, and if they have a sound post or not.
-
12 hours ago, isadoren said:
What else would point to that other than LOB, which I've now updated to the more accurate ~360mm?
The outline is not like that of a regular violin. It is a little larger in all directions, but relatively more so in the bouts. To me, it looks as if the ribs may also be a little deeper than on a violin. For 3/4 violas, Strobel states that the measurements for a 3/4 viola are like a 4/4 violin, but often violas of that size nonetheless incorporate some viola characteristics, like broader/larger plates, f-holes further apart, deeper ribs, sometimes the plates are longer also but the neck relatively shorter to compensate (who wants violas playing higher than 3rd position anyway?), take your pick, in the hope that this will lead to a more viola-like sound. Such instruments are often mistaken for violins with weird measurements. Looking at this, I think it could very well have been intended as a 3/4 viola. Maybe you could measure some of the other aspects (upper f-hole eye distance and rib depth in particular) to see what you have here. In the end, you could just string it with 3/4 viola strings and see if it sounds satisfying that way, or if you prefer playing it as a violin. The string length can work for either.
-
7 hours ago, Aston4 said:
guess I'm wondering if I would be missing out on some important thing by going to a slightly smaller cello, like volume or tone, or... or I have no idea what I might be missing? Are 7/8 instruments usually not sounding as nice?
Smaller celli can sound very nice also. It may take a little longer to find one you like, because they are not as common, and usually not of the same quality of make as 4/4 cellos. Usually, they sound a bit more Tenor like, and the bass on good celli can project very well, but mostly doesn't make the "sound cloud" that a montagnana giant cello might have. I find that the biggest difference lies in how the strings feel under the bow. On a 4/4 cello playing feels a bit like driving a big Mercedes, while a smaller cello feels a bit more nervous and edgy, like driving a fiat 500. Each has its advantages. My 1770 Mittenwald cello that has 65 cm string length and 70 cm length of the back is a powerful instrument and I have to watch out not to be too powerful in string quartets.
-
1 hour ago, Aston4 said:
Someone told me once that a 7/8 cello is much easier to play when someone is an adult non-cellist like me. Is that wrong? I have never run across a 7/8 to experiment with.
If your Hand doesn't given you the necessary stretch naturally, then smaller will be much easier. I'm a professional cellist who played 4/4 cello for about 28 years, until I developed a problem in the left hand. I don't think I would have developed that problem, had I played a 7/8th cello. I now play celli with 65 cm vibrating string length, a big 3/4 or a small 7/8, dependingon if you are buying or selling. I sound much better than I did before.
-
On violins, the difference that tail pieces make are not as drastical as on cellos. The biggest factor is weight near the bridge. Your fine tuners add a lot of weight. Just take them off and see if you like the improvement. If you do, that means it makes sense to experiment. Which tail piece from what materials will sound best on your violin can only be determined by trial. If you need fine tuners, ConCarbo tail pieces are likely the best way to go.
-
It seems Mittenwald makers around 1800 made bridges without hearts. Look at the pics here. I don't know what that does to the sound...
I bit of help please
in The Pegbox
Posted
While this sounds plausible and even probable, if the Amati site is correct, Lüttgedorf sais a lot more than what you wrote: "In seinem 18. Jahr kam er nach Stuttgart zum Militär und wurde dort der Musik als Trompeter zugetheilt. Er zeigte schon damals so viel Interesse und Talent für die Wiederinstandsetzung gebrauchter Instrumente, dass König Wilhelm I. auf ihn aufmerksam wurde und ihn 1823 auf ein Jahr zu Thumhardt nach München in die Lehre schickte. Im Jahre 1824 zurückgekehrt, gründete er das erste Instrumentengeschäft in Stuttgart, wo seit langen Jahren kein Geigenmacher mehr ansässig war. Er fand sofort als Reparateur, namentlich für das Hoftheater, ausreichende Beschäftigung und verlegte sich später auch auf den Neubau von Geigen, die er mit Sorgfalt ausführte. Auch gute Bögen gingen aus seiner Hand hervor. Im Jahre 1870 übernahm sein Sohn Adolf das Geschäft, von dem es 1873 auf A. Sprenger überging. Martin Baur arbeitete von 1870 an erst noch für seinen Sohn und dann bis zu seinem Tode mit Sprenger zusammen."
Ofcourse, it wouldn't be the only entry by Lüttgendorf that isn't 100% correct, but it doesn't see impossible either.
And I'd agree that this could have been done to"sex up" the instrument, like Jacob proposes, but then would they really have chosen Bohrer, who after his death faded into obscurity rather soon? (I' kind of a freak, knowing him. He doesn't even have a Wikipedia entry)
While it looks rather standard in many ways, and the varnish isn't interesting, I think the woood choice for the ribs and back are really very good. One seldomly sees such beautifully evenly flamed wood of a narrow pattern on a 3/4 cello of that age.