David Beard

Members
  • Content Count

    2921
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by David Beard

  1. Seems they guy traveled a bit. Interesting. The Messiah is interesting. So much about it confirms it as an actually Strad. Yet, it stills seems to stand out as somehow different. I tend to think it is Strad, but with some sort of twist to the story. It seems most of all as if the final steps of finishing work are a bit different.
  2. With the back, wouldn't it make more sense to leave the center mass heavy, then attach to the sides, then tune the main resonance of the center mass?
  3. Don't forget the marketing value. It's something specisl and definite you can talk about doing.
  4. But it isn't too difficult a dynamic to understand. Some want fiddles that help by responding the most when given the most, others want a fiddle that helps by giving much without asking much.
  5. Thanks Marty, that starts to be interesting.
  6. All I know is I work a lot harder at recognizing my own. And spend a lot more time at it.
  7. I'm trying to understand the old methods as best I can. Time and again, this process as required recognizing and abandoning preassumptions that I had even relealized stemmed from our modern viewpoint. So, I think I mean all of us.
  8. This why I say hard to acknowledge. There is emotional resitance to admitting that copy work and innovative work are also automatically delinked from old Cremona work to some extent. How far a maker's work departs varies by maker. But still, it's there. There is resistance to acknowledge this at all. This is why I say it's difficult to acknowledge the extent of departure from old Cremona work, because their is a desire to deny that difference entirely
  9. Yes. As you say, not everyone.
  10. Vuillaume hailed from Mirecourt, as did his pal Chanot who wrote a dissertation on modernizing making which seens to have influenced Vuillaume. Vuillaume and the other French makers around that time were foundational in developing modern copying based making. No???
  11. Look, I'm not saying they were careless. This came up in the context of worrying about setting the FB projection at the moment you set the neck. That particular concern at that particular moment is big for modern styke making. But for the old makers, that concern wasn't relevant at the moment they set the neck. I beleive that when considering their old work it's valuable to be alert to places like this where their viewpoint was different. You're translating this very limited observation too broadly. I am not saying they weren't careful. Only that their care wasn't
  12. Is difference automatically negative? These are just general differences. And, maybe some new makers do those old things?
  13. Setting the FB angle at the time the set the neck. Tracing an outline to make a copy. Making the sides perfectly square. Damar Metal strings eating the fingerboard Graduating the top
  14. False. I'm saying the modern moment to care is when you set the neck. You have to get a good neck and a good FB angle at that moment. The old moment to care about the FB angle is later, when you set the wedge. You still need a good neck set, but some issues are different. Modern making is different. It gets its roots from industrialization. The orientation is to copy work, and the approach derives from efforts toward precision, repeatability, and control on the 'high effort' side of things and efficiency, speed, and low costs on the other hand. None of this has much
  15. And, the could have strung up without FB for a month before setting wedge. And, a wedge can be removed and replaced. However you slice it, a wedge is a more adjustable and less finicky way set FB angle. Too bad it isn't still the way.
  16. A modern maker has to get that angle for the fingerboard near perfect when setting the neck. The old system allowed the makers to set this critical fingerboard angle at a later time the neck setting. The wedge can be set at a later time, and gives the critical angle.
  17. Also. Neck angle a non issue for the old makers, since they used a wedge system.
  18. Considering that nesting frames within frames consistently gives us the underturns in historical examples, it's natural to wonder how far the approach can carry us in working the volute. We already know that for the rest of the way to eye, reductions by thirds will accurately give us the curve boundaries seen in classical examples. But the difficulty with reductions by thirds is that the method is flexible enough to also produce boundaries that somehow don't seem entirely classical in character. Perhaps also using frames can help us steer the volute shape more reliably? Why do 're
  19. Yes. Surely the first violin varnishes were simply the bowed string instrumented varnishes at the time and place the violin emerged. And, primarily an oral tradition known within the making community. But let's not dismiss what writen records can be found, because they are mostly just documentation of what was known in the oral tradition, for the weirdos that could read. So, if you want to be guided by those old ways, do what you can. Use the materials they talked about, uses the processes they talked about. And there arts were less differentiated. DaVinci worked on paintin
  20. I hesitate to resurrect this monologue thread, but my purpose was to show my research in full detail for at least one feature. But there are still a few points to consider to complete this look at classical Cremona design in the sideview of the head and scroll. First, there are limits to what the research can reveal. We can after all only observe what is left evident in the final work. And, when the work is complex, we can't always determine the order in which things were done. Only sometimes does the evidence tell us that one order of events works and another doesn't. Often
  21. French wine, Italian wine. But what about Australian wine, ir English? Is there Indonesian wine? Italian alpine spruce, and Italian or balkan maple. But use whatever wood you like. Koa, walnut, ash, maybe balsa. If you desire a non-traditional choice, then go for it. But don't ask traditionalists to affirm your non-traditionalism as traditional. Change a pinot noir enough and it becomes something else. If you like, you like. But if it's no longer pinot noir, call it something else.
  22. Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays.
  23. Seems very off course to use a real burl.
  24. Well.... For me, I believe one of the benefits of digging deeply into their historical geometey choices, and both into how the choices were consistent and how they varied, is you actually get to see specifically which knobs they moved and which they held steady in their traditional making. This approach skips the issues of why, but is quite interesting. Also, I believe the way the geometry relates some things and not others, and protects some things and not others, is all reflective what they learned over generations of trial and evaluation. It shows plainly which knobs they co