• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by baroquecello

  1. @Jerry Pasewicz I'm curious About the drawbacks/misunderstandings you see in this Sound post design. I have no personal experience with this type of Sound post, but I have a Violinist friend who is extremely sensitive to Sound and a very good Player, who has similar Sound Posts (Anima Nova) installed in all his Instruments now and swears they were a Major improvement, so I'm not automatically sceptical. Ofcourse I do not now how well the previous Sound Posts were fitted. I cannot understand how the changes that Wood goes through because of changes in relative humidity mkes wooden Sound Posts better. As the changes along the grain are almost negligable compared to the changes across the grain, a wooden Sound post does not offer an Advantage compared to this design, as it, like These modern Sound Posts does not shrink or grow along with the plates. If you mean that Players will be cranking up the post when the plates are loose and Forget to relax it when the plates become tight again, then I see the Point of your fears. Is that it? Otherwise the big difference I see in this Kind of design and the Standard wooden Sound post is the self adjusting surfaces that touch the top and back plates, Always making a good fit. Is there anything else I'm missing? Do you use the rigidness of These surfaces in your Sound Adjustments, so that you lose this as an Option for Sound Adjustment with such a Sound post? I've seen a lot of damage done by badly fitted Sound Posts by professional lutiers. In the last two years, I've seen one newly made violin with a Sound post crack beause of this and two Cellos with badly damaged tops so that Fitting a Sound post properly has become very difficult. I would say the Damage done by badly fitted Sound Posts is much bigger than the potential Damage through perfectly fitting, but overly tight Sound Posts, but what do I know, I'm only a Player.
  2. Nice! Got to Play a real Testore cello last Weekend. Repaired a hundred times, but truely gorgeous Sound. Now I feel so diappointed when playing my own Cellos. The Thing with an original Testore is that it is roughly made, not to perfection. I think that poses a Problem when you make a Testore inspired fidddle like this. I think you "cleaned up" and perfected the execution of the model, which is fine, but then I wonder, if one does that anyway, why not be consequent, and do that for everything on the violin? Why not for instance also continue the fluting of the scroll, if you've executed the pegbox geometry better than the original (which is what I think you did, from my limited experience with Testores, but Maybe I'm wrong?) anyway? I mean, not fluting it till the end was clearly a way of saving labout time, but this fiddle Looks so perfectly done that it clearly was not left out because of saving time, and that doesn't feel Right to me. So what I'm saying is, for me, what works is either a faithful attempt at copieing in all aspects, or an inspired, idealised Impression of an original, but something in between just doesn't feel Right. BTW I otherwise really like the scroll and pegbox model, I wouldn't add the "though" that Andreas added.
  3. That is something I have sometimes observed in small Cellos too! Do Need an Ultra short tail cord then
  4. No, it is still a Dream for the future. Maybe when my kid is a bit older and I have some spare time. Probably when I will retire though. But one Needs something nice to look Forward to, doesn't one?
  5. Our own @Húslař built some as you can see in his bench thread.
  6. I've yet to Play a good sounding old 1/4 Cello. I wonder if they were ever made. In any case 20th century stuff from before the late 90ies is usually terrible. Tank-like graduations and thick indestructible varnishes. The Music School I teach at has two Mastri 1/4 Cellos and two 3/4 Cellos. The 1/4, strung with helicore, are the best in that size I've ever played, both in Terms of Sound (loudness/projection and Quality) and playability. The pupils invarieably Play much better when learning on those Instruments, particularly bowing-wise. Of the 3/4 one is good, the other not so good, but still playable. If you ask me, that is the best 1/4th around. Maybe you'll be able to find some good chinese ones that are cheaper, but Looks don't say everything. I really think making smaller size Instruments is not just scaling down the big ones, but you have to know what choices to make. That however is not my field of Expertise.
  8. baroquecello


    Check for purfling coming unglued.
  9. I'm just a Cello teacher, but also respnsible for the rental Programme of the Music School I work at. Looking at all the old mainly Saxon violins, of which a considerable number have one piece backs, I get the Impression that joined backs are more stucturally stable than one piece backs, which often seem to warp more. I suspect that two joined bookmatched pieces of Wood will stabilise each other , as the tendencies for warping are in the opposite direction.
  10. I a from Europe, and I think it is true Europeans are not so picky when it Comes to non european Woods, as Long as acoustically and structurally they are in the ballpark of the Tradition. TW, that is a stunning piece of Wood, but I think Don is Right. Personally I associate such wildly figured Wood as you Show here with chinese Cello making of the better Student Level models. Many old Instruments have rather plain Woods, sometimes alternative Woods like Poplar or Willow but also plain maple. Have you thought of something like that? I personally like those woods especially with light coulored, "unpretentious" varnish. I may be mistaken, but I believe those Woods are susally somewhat cheaper to get. There would be no structural or acoustic disadvantage and it would stand out, be more of an individual, between what it usually produced. With just a quick search I found the site of a maker who copies (including 5 string Cellos!) with such plain Wood Instruments regularly. He writes which Instruments they are inspired on and if you like the idea I would suggest you to try and find pictures of the originals instead of the copies (I'd do it for you but don't have the time right now) Baroque cello copies
  11. Well, the Invention has been around since 2012, I think. I haven't seen anyone using this frog, and there are no endorsements by great or een semi-great Players to be found online, at least not with a quick net search. I'm sure Benoit Rolland is a great bow maker, and that the frog does ist Job, but I remain sceptical that it is in fact an improvement, particularly for Cello.
  12. I'm sceptical, especially About the Need for this solution, as I do not believe there is a Problem, at least not for Cello. I do not think it is hard at all to hold the bow in such a way that all the hair touches the string, and do that at times when I Need a lot of Sound. But most of the time, I do not want complete contact with the bow hair. My gut Feeling is that this Invention makes the Sound harder to influence, rather than easier to influence.
  13. I agree with Jacob, having witnessed the rebarring of a Cello owned by an enthusiastic Amateur. The Change was small,all Things considered, and it remained a tough-to-Play Instrument. She ended up wanting to sell it after all. I'm only a Cellist, so pardon me if I'm mistaking, but aren't there bridges with a Variety of waist and foot widths readily available from all the known suppliers, exactly for this reason? Edit note: Milo Stamm offers from 38 to 43 MM width
  14. I talked to someone who believed that the string length in the pegbox affects the elasticity of the string as a whole, so that the longer the string length in the pegbox, the more elastic the string should be. If true, (and I can imagine it could be true) this obviously will have an effect on how the string behaves. If the nut groove is Deep and worn, I can imagine that this would have a reducing effect on the elasticity of the string, because the string doesn't slide easily.
  15. I'm not sure why you want what you want. Things are all connected. A baroque Bridge sometimes is less high, and therefore in those cases is less curved, for the bow to stay away from the c bouts, which in turn makes it harder to Play, especially if you string it with Five strings. And the Bridge height is connected to the neck overstand, which usually is less high than on modern Instruments, so that in effect the string angle at the Bridge is not so much different from a modern Setup and the resulting pressure on the top similar. So from my Point of view, I'd either make a real baroque Cello with baroque neck, which will require one to be used to a baroque Instrument, or I'd make a real modern 5 string, with slender modern neck and modern neck overstand. You can shorten the fingerboard if you like (mostly different visually), but do not have to, and you can fit a baroque model Bridge in modern height, despiau has a good model. Then it will be easy for a modern Cellist to Play, and you could, if you would like to do so, at some Point fit it with steel strings too, (they do not usually Sound very good on real baroque Setups). As for your e string Problem, just contact a string maker, like Mimmo Peruffo at Aquila, give him your specs (Tuning pitch and string length), and he'll know what to recommend, it will be absolutely no problem.
  16. What I don't understand, if the original varnish coat did this by itself, why are there large areas that do not have the Craquelure, but Look very ordinary. Do you think it was a shaded varnish and only the darker parts had this tendency to form These dark "Drops"?
  17. I saw some People asked About strings, if I remember correctly, gut strings for the da spalla were developed by Mimmo Peruffo of Aquila strings. ah yes, here.
  18. I borrowed a violoncello Piccolo for a month or two when I was studieing baroque cello. I believe the string length was something like 67 CM, so just a Little under current Standard 4/4 Cello. I remember it used an extra thin gauge top d string for Gamba as an e string. I believe the brand was Aquila. It worked fine and sounded nice.
  19. I'm a Cellist and have a few Questions about this. 1. the height of the Bridge (projection) and ist relation to Sound have something to do with the pressure on the top, Right or wrong? 2. meaning, if the neck overstand is low, which often is the case on older Instruments, then, Sound wise, you can achieve the same effect with a lower projection as on an Instrument with more neck overstand and a higher projection, Right or wrong? 3. The angle of the strings over the Bridge is a better indication of what will happen, Sound wise, than the actual projection, Right or wrong? 4. if the projection is low because of a low neck overstand, if the wish exists to bring Things up to modern Standard, then the neck overstand is the first Thing that Needs to be corrected, Right or not? 5. assuming the neck overstand on this Instrument is low-ish on this Instrument and the projection corresponds to that, and the Cellist doesn't find the low overstand problematic, and there is enough bow clearance when playing the a and c strings, there is no Need for any correction, Right or wrong?
  20. I don't see how that would work. Du you think they used something similar to the mother of Pearl coated slide that they fixed by attaching it with a string?
  21. Yes, this is a Problem, and not only for bows.
  22. The title sais it all. I'm asking since a reputed bow dealer posted some Pictures of according to him completely original early Tourte bows, dated between 1785 and 1795, and the ivory frogs have ferrules. I would not have expected that, but I don't know when they appeared.
  23. On my screen it looks like a very neatly made violin. I think the corner blocks, linings an bass bar all look like they could be original. I see a hole in the top that seems to have belonged to a locating pin, doesn't that plead against BOB construction? It does look very german to me. Could it be one of those made by those mysterious Grossstadtgeigenbauer?