Salve Håkedal

Haha! "Party pooper" .. I saw that on translate.google.com, but I didn't quite like it and was afraid of writing something wrong. But thank you! I didn't want to interrupt anything. Just wanted to tune down the expectations about that fiddle a little. But that's never a pleasant thing to do.

Sorry that I'm trying to be a "festbrems" (that's a norwegian word that I don't know how to translate to english.. Magnus could maybe help me?). But apart from the woodworm I don't see no reason to believe that this fiddle is very old. Stavanger, I don't think many of the more knowledgeable people about old hardangerfiddles in Norway are on this forum. I don't mean to say that Magnus or american members on this forum - or me, for that matter - know little. But have you tried to make contact with pople like Ottar Kåsa, Bård Rise Hoel, Knut Opheimsbakken, Kjell Christian Midtgård or Bjørn Aksdal etc.? They could be able to give you quite helpful answers! (Eg kan hjelpe deg med å komme i kontakt med dei om du treng det.)

Perhaps. I think there has been some talk about semicircles on this forum. Others can maybe say something about Strad archings. I know a little about hardangerfiddle archings. Most are high and not pinced. With narrow fluting. I attach a photo of my latest which, on the contrary, is quite pinched seen from the side. Arching height is 16mm. Like most hardangerfiddles the table is quite thin but still I think it has ample high frequency response. Maybe due to the "pinched" arching?

Also, you can "pinch" the arching in (at least) two directions: Lengthwise: an early drop from the bridge to the end- and neck-block. Sidewise: from the center joint/line to the edges. The two "pinchings" will perhaps not have the same effect.

I do as Conor: purfling and edgwork after closing the box even though glueing the back on with the ribs still on the form. Then take out the form and glue in the linings for the top. I understand the attraction of constructing a fiddle with the method that Strad & Co. probably used. I guess that's why I DO purfle after closing the box. But reading this thread makes me wonder why it's so important to so many people to take the rib off the form before gluing it to the plates. What's gained with that? Strad & Co. probably did it to be able to hammer the neck on before gluing the back plate to the rib. But why do it on modern violins? And while I'm agitated..: Those collapsible forms are impressive, but they kind of defeat the down to earth simplicity of Cremona. Why not just do like me and Conor? (Strad would if he'd lived in our times.) Sorry! I love you all.

Unfortunately this family tradition was broken, so we don't know his method in detail. But you are probably right. I like your test, Jacob!

Here is the corner of a hardangerfiddle made by a 4th generation hardangerfiddle maker, Knut K. Stenkjøndalen in 1945.

It's debated. Me thinks there were folksy fiddles in norway for a long time like in rest of Europe. The experimetation with sympathetic strings around 1700 that led to i.e. the viola d'amore and the baryton, also led to the hardangerfiddle (with maybe Isak Botnen as the first maker). It spread from the west coast eastward during the 1700-hundreds. It's still spreading. Contrary to the viola d'amore and the baryton that more or less died out, the hardangerfiddle was manageable and created a strong folkfiddling tradition. The playing style connected with it slowly became distinct from norwegian folk music played on the violin. Here's a hardcore young man: Kjellbjørn Karsrud, Springar etter Jøger Sagahaugen and something experimental: Anne Hytta: Draumsyn (Dream vision) and something well recorded: Annbjørg Lien: Kjempe-Jo Kjempe-Jo (Big-Joe) was a brawler. And he was my great-great-grandfather. So beware!

More about that here: Comparing maple and alder

I don't have much of a plan for that work except that when I drill the (pilot)holes for the pegs while the wood is still a block, I also drill a hole at the mouth behind the rearmost teeth. Later, with a hand drill, I drill 3 small small holes into the front of the mouth where the tongue will come. Apart from this, I just carve away the best I can. I don't go to this work with a smile: it's rather difficult. A professionel sculptor would probably have more of a plan for it.

no jezz. I'm sorry I'm shaky enough with no camera on me. It's common to size the wood with thin glue. That makes the ink sit well. But it can't be removed in case of errors. I draw on the first clear varnish coat. In case of error, it can just be wiped of with a moist towel.

I put some in the gallery section.

Hardangerfiddles are rather lavishly decorated instruments. I try to cut down a little on it without loosing style. This one has alder (alnus glutinosa) back and ribs which is often used instead of maple for hardangers. It was made in tandem with one with maple to test the properties of the wood species.

Jim, there is an outside arch and an inside arch. Making one of them identical would in my opinion be wrong. So I made the one with svartor higher on the outside to have the inside of it not so different from the maple backs inside. The dancers interpretation is in accordance with my own impression. But I hesitate to put more prosaic words on it.

Maybe of interest to some.. Alnus glutinosa (norwegian: svartor) is often used for hardangerfiddles as an alternative to maple. I made 2 fiddles as identical as possible but one with rather heavy maple (SG 68g/dl) and the other one with svartor (SG 48g/dl). The tops were made from 2 pieces from the same trunk. The 2 spruce blanks were split in two and one half from each glued to one half from the other. The 2 tables were made to the same plate tone at the same weight. Medium arching height. The shape of the archings is definitely flatish towards upper and lower ribs. I always shape the fluting and edges after assembly, so exact weight (and platetones) are not measured. But before assembly: Maple back: 123g M5: 340Hz Alnus back: 103g M5: 355Hz I shaped the Alnus' arching 1.1mm higher because I knew it would end up much thicker than the maple in the center. (Final center thicknesses: M: 4.5, A: 6.0). The sound of the 2 fiddles is different. But the difference is difficult to describe. Which is "better" differs between players when I ask'em. I hope I will have a chance to record both fiddles played by a good player before sending them away. One dancer (hardangerfiddle music is dance music) described poetically the maple one as having a more solid floor to dance on with glitter up above..! My measuring method is rather amateurish. At least the high frequency amplitudes can not be trusted. But I believe that the difference in the resonance peak frequencies are reliable.