La Folia

Members
  • Content Count

    2121
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by La Folia

  1. I wonder what the Germans were smoking? After all, it was made in Italy, and Italy is in the EU. So why do they think that's importing, or that duty might have been owed? Do you have to pay duty every time the thing is "reimported"?
  2. If you go to the Philadelphia mint, they give away free samples of money, so just think--you could make your own violin.
  3. This stuff shouldn't even show up by title. I'd have to say that's a forum bug. If it can't be displayed on the forum, the title shouldn't be displayed either.
  4. Apparently it's even better than I thought. It shows what I know.
  5. It seems like a very bad idea. To my (nonexpert) eye it looks like possibly a low-value cello even if it were in top condition. This, on the other hand, is in very poor condition. There's a high risk that you will waste all your money on it, for nothing. And restoration, even if by some miracle you can manage to do competently and without causing further damage, will cost you another pile of money and huge amounts of time to learn how. Sometimes I'm wrong about the value of instruments, but in this case I would certainly want strong evidence to the contrary before I risked any money on it. You said your current cello is good. There you go. If you really must have a better cello, I think you need to find a better way. EDIT: The ebay auction is here: https://www.ebay.com/itm/italian-4-4-CELLO-to-restore-TESTORE-old-violin-violon-violino/173769932457?hash=item28757ebea9:g:C2QAAOSwFSNcUfNS . I think we're not supposed to comment on ongoing sales, but this seems blatant. The description looks intended to deceive. It hints that you're getting a Testore for nothing, but there are very many obvious mistakes and contradictions, and few actual claims, so the seller can claim ignorance. It looks like low-end workmanship to me, and the instrument is a wreck. Keep in mind that I too can claim ignorance, but good luck finding an expert who thinks it's a good deal.
  6. Sometimes they don't even look at it. All they need is a piece of paper.
  7. I found these: 6W, 500 lumens https://www.amazon.com/Byingo-Crafting-Simplicity-Stepless-Adjustable/dp/B073TTJW1Z/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8 7W, 800 lumens https://www.amazon.com/Joly-Joy-Flexible-Gooseneck-Brightness/dp/B076LBYYFG/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8 12W, 1200 lumens https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07GPJJPHF/ref=ask_ql_qh_dp_hza All have adjustable brightness and color temperature. All are claimed to be flicker-free.
  8. I was asked to straighten a cello bridge that was almost folded in half (I'm only exaggerating a little--it was really warped). Since the student was supposed to play in a few minutes, I put a sweater under the tailpiece, gave the standard disclaimer (we don't want to be responsible for wrecking your cello) and pulled it back into position. The next week I saw it again, and it was like new. The student's father had taken it off and steamed it flat.
  9. The good news is that if they start to warp, the player can fix them just by standing them up straight.
  10. I see. So it's a climate thing.
  11. Aw, for gosh sakes, guys. Why don't you just install a humidifier on your furnace?
  12. If it cleans up OK, then I guess you can't ask for more. It doesn't show signs of wear. Most violins that have been played consistently over the years will show considerable wear on the varnish where it's contacted by the hand, and maybe by the shoulder.
  13. Yep, it's definitely an alligator. It's nice to look at as a decorative object, but it doesn't look very practical. It looks like it hasn't been used much.
  14. There was a violin maker in Seattle whose violins have extreme craquelure. I've seen several of them, and to the best of my recollection, they all look like that picture now.
  15. Yep. If it were mine and I wanted to use it, I would have it repaired, or outright refinished. It's really unsightly, and it would be embarrassing to play. I could sell it for next to nothing and buy another violin, or I could get a functional instrument out of it. There's not much to lose. False sentimentality seems misplaced.
  16. For what it's worth, this is how I would do it with what I have. This requires camera capable of saving RAW files (for linearity), but it doesn't require any funny electronics. This isn't a good measurement. It's just a demonstration of concept. This is a pencil wrapped with white paper moved fast through the field. It would need to be done a little better than this. It needs a uniform, black background, which can be measured and subtracted. (The background here is brighter than it looks.) A thinner, better lit object would give better resolution. It also needs to be held straight. For what it's worth, this was measured with ImageJ.
  17. Are you sure you can get a meaningful comparison? The way that's plotted, it doesn't look like you can even get the AC amplitude, because it's normalized to some arbitrary, small number. The software removes what little information there was. And without the DC component, you can't tell if you have 1% ripple or 50% ripple.
  18. You didn't say which one, but this one ( https://focusrite.com/usb-audio-interface/scarlett/scarlett-2i4 ) has a frequency response of 20Hz-20kHz, for example. It doesn't pick up DC at all. Without DC, you're ONLY looking at the ripple, and you have nothing to scale it against. You could be looking at a tiny ripple and scaling it incorrectly to 100% (or something). I don't believe you can make the measurements with this equipment. Unless you really know what you are doing and have some tricky way to do it, you can analyze the frequency components of the ripple, but you have NO information on amplitude, which you very much need. This company makes sound amplifiers. They're not designed for DC at all.
  19. The average sound equipment probably won't handle DC at all, so you could be mostly missing that. And I wouldn't rule out picking up a lot of 120 Hz hum from the LED. Without trying it I have no idea, unfortunately. Maybe someone with a lot of electronics experience can weigh in?
  20. You need to be careful that (1) you're not picking up 60Hz and 120Hz induced hum, and (2) all components can handle DC correctly. I would not expect the average sound card to or pre-amp to pass DC. I don't think this display will be very helpful in detecting and eliminating induced hum, and that could really fool you. Having said that, I did a slightly more careful measurement with a camera (with linear raw file output), and it appears that my lightbulbs may have a lot more ripple than I realized. If it were me, I would evaluate the waveform from your cell with an oscilloscope. Or lacking that, I would do a careful test with a camera. A careful test would include certain precautions such as checking the black point and linearity. Or you can just get a DC lamp or one of those bulbs.
  21. I don't really think so. Did you look at the graph I showed? Look at the numbers on the y axis. This isn't calibrated for brightness. Still, I don't think there could be more than 5 or 10% flicker at the most. The picture backs me up too (although I don't think I still have it). If I tested more carefully, I'll bet most lights would be pretty steady.
  22. I have a 12 Volt floor lamp from IKEA with a T6.35-base halogen bulb. When the 3-amp AC power supply failed, I just bought another (4 amps just to be on the robust side), which turned out to be 12.5 V DC. It works fine, and, of course it's ripple-free. The halogen bulb it uses more power than an LED, but it is incandescent and should have almost the same continuous spectrum as an ordinary incandescent bulb, with a color temperature of 3000 K. That's certainly an alternative solution, although the SoraA solution may be simpler and more economical.
  23. I don't doubt the frequencies you measured. I also wonder whether you have trouble with normal lighting, since I can't detect any hint of flickering with any lighting that I have at home. Like you, I also use fast-moving objects (e.g., a finger) to detect flickering. I did find this: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&ved=2ahUKEwibtuWBu9zfAhVrwYMKHRZxCVkQFjAGegQIAxAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ece.neu.edu%2Fgroups%2Fpower%2Flehman%2FPublications%2FPub2010%2F2010_9_Wilkins.pdf which claims that a peak-to-trough amplitude of about 35% is necessary to induce headaches at 100 Hz. What I measured is much less than 35%. Normal lighting will give a very slight flickering at 120 Hz, or possibly 60 Hz. The latter is barely within the problem area. Lower frequencies would be due to dimmers or to defects. I don't see why fairly ordinary LED bulbs would not be adequate. In any case a DC lamp would completely eliminate the problem. Unfortunately, small DC power supplies for lighting may not be designed for the purpose and are likely to give a large AC component.