Peter K-G

Some makers still distract themselves with it, but they are probably amateurs

http://www.thestradsound.com/ongoing/topbassbarinitiallytuned

I think planing and gluing joints is a skill that should be practiced before starting making violins. I also had to learn the hard way with a lot of failure

Ongoing top: http://www.thestradsound.com/ongoing/topbassbarinitiallytuned

Curly high dens maple can be quite strong and the glue joint breaks first even if strong enough.

Post not referring to previous Try use some of the other Booleans too, not just <-> Add a couple of &

In progress top (0.51 density, arch height 18 mm) As Evan wrote, it should be around 400 at that stage. You can't expect tuning to desired frequencies at the stage when hollowing out. You have to know the wood so you get the right height and shape first. Only then you can get what you want. Top weight M2 M5 117 262 459 110 236 451 105 220 442 100 209 434 95 193 416 90 178 403 85 166 387 80 157 365 75 153 355

Never mind the varnish (wich is impossible to see from images). look at the purfling work, unbelievably perfection! I have looked at some Amati images lately and they(Strad & dG) should have slowed down a little.

Casein (In the form of fresh cheese curd) and slaked lime makes an emulsion that you can add a little linseed oil and/or varnish to. There is a lot of possibilities. Applying it on tanned wood gives an instant reaction of golden old wood look. Intensity is depending on the mix (ph level) and how much tanning. Combined with some colored varnish it's possible to get a quite dark ground that is not stained.

The philosophy is that wood varies a lot in strength and density. Why would for ex. the height of two backs be the same, if one have a speed of sound of 3 700 and the other 4 500

Hmm.. Another trace of my own violins made without any kind of templates. Trace compared to Titian:

Well, that's another, much more interesting discussion. For me arching is not a matter of personal preferences, but a matter of copying sound. Just not in the mood to repeat that discussion for the nth time. I'm sure you have an idea what I'm doing by now - the wood's properties dictates the arching height and volume/appearance.

I meant the read side curves. I see nothing wrong with them, just that I go a little narrower and in general get straighter cross arch curves. I don't have a good enough tool to make examples from several cross arch positions. It's also time consuming to draw them to paper and trace with image software. More in this direction but just not that extreme

I like your approach and have tested the curves on my own violins -> Real violin vs. your curve at 31.8 I don't use templates though! IMO there is no need for templates, once you figure out how to, by eye and shadows. But your system is educative on how to make good arching. I would "optimize" a little more by adjusting the read lines in your system.

First post, in this thread, that makes sense. You are not strange to me, I notice what you notice.