Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Don Noon

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About Don Noon

  • Birthday 03/20/1952

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Carlsbad, CA
  • Interests
    Violin construction
    Old-time fiddling

Recent Profile Visitors

52122 profile views

Don Noon's Achievements


Enthusiast (5/5)

  1. For a viola, the larger size drops the B1+ resonance (relative to violin) down around the open A. I don't know what's going on with a cello, but it's probably something else... or the same thing, an octave down. For my 15 3/4" viola model, I usually end up with the B1+ resonance somewhere above the open A, which I think is a good thing. I dislike strong resonances on open strings. Likewise, on violins, I prefer to have the B1- resonance below the open A, although it's not a big deal, and hard to make that happen on all body lengths. Heavy sidemount chinrests help, and also seems to make the CBR output a bit stronger.
  2. Yeah, I forgot about the chinrest effect. Definitely worth a try.
  3. That would most likely be the B1- body resonace, unless the graduations are extremely thin to where the B1+ has gotten that low (very unlikely). In either case, the resonance involves movements of large areas of the body, and moving the soundpost would have minimal influence (unless you move the soundpost over to the bass bar, which would have other, fatal problems). Maybe the plates could be regraduated to move the resonance down to G# where it might be less objectionable. And maybe that would do other things that ARE objectionable. I would say decide if you want to have the instrument as-is, including the resonance, and assume that's just the way it's going to be.
  4. Looks great, especially for a first effort. I think the back plate would work fine at 120g, and probably not that much different at 110g. For that large size, I'd want to keep it above 105g, but it depends on what kind of fiddle you want... tight and bright or more mellow. The top would be more sensitive to weight and stiffness, around 65g without bar would be a reasonable point.
  5. You could make a fiddle like that, and in 200 years it will be in relatively good condition since nobody will ever play it, or even take it out of the case for any reason.
  6. Nope. Unless your "tonal advantage" is a slightly longer ping when you drop the post on your workbench.
  7. In that case, weakness in the higher frequencies could well be a result of the soundpost in that highly abnormal location... although the overall construction is still suspect.
  8. You could measure the amplitudes of the low modes vs. the higher frequency output. It's easier to listen, though... if your reaction is "bleah", then it's thick, if you cringe and grimace, it's thin. Unless you're hearing is shot, then forget it.
  9. In this context, combined with the OP description of not having much "body", I would infer primarily a lack of the lower frequencies. I think that would be the usual interpretation. Middle frequencies would need more detailed descriptions, and even that would be iffy given that those decriptions could mean different things to different people. If you're describing "thin sound" meaning thinly graduated plates, things go the other way. But that's not the use here.
  10. There certainly is that. With the soundpost outside of the upper eye of the F, you lose the longitudinal grain stiffness for the post. That will cause the F wing to rise, and the treble F foot to sink... and it looks like that might be happening.
  11. This aspect of your violin would be my best guess for thin tone with little body. I don't think that a soundpost in the position shown would create the thin tone, although it might contribute... depending on details of the top and back graduations, etc. It might also get an even thinner tone if you install a new soundpost in the "correct" position.
  12. I'll go with an amateur conversion of a normal scroll. Any fast-working pro would turn out something that looked different.
  13. Am I correct in assuming that this is a fractional size violin? If so, I wouldn't sink much money into wringing the maximum performance out of it, when presumably it will need to be replaced anyway if your daughter continues playing. It is doubtful you could recoup any investment. It appears to be a fairly decent instrument, but still a generic copy. From my personal experimenting with bass bars, as long as there is some kind of bass bar that isn't wildly abnormal or damaged, getting an ideally made one (whatever that might be) I doubt is going to make a major improvement... particularly if it's a fractional where the upper potential is limited. It's hard to tell for sure from the photos, but the bridge looks somewhat on the heavy side, which would mute the instrument more than anything related to the bass bar. And what is that white thing on the heel?
  14. That would be 784 Hz. There is a fairly strong vibration mode right around there, measured at 839 Hz on the Titian and 811 Hz on the Plowden, or G#. Those are both somewhat small-bodied violins, so on your large 5-string body it might be lowered to G. You can see the mode shape in the Strad3D animation as shown below. It is strong movement below the soundpost, and you can easily adjust the strength of the coupling to the bridge by moving the soundpost North (closer to the bridge foot) to weaken it, and vice versa. Other things happen tonally as well, so you have to play it by ear. For new construction, assuming you want to weaken the resonance, I'd thicken the areas shown in red as well as the soundpost zone.
  • Create New...