Jump to content
Maestronet Forums


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

JoeDeF's Achievements


Member (3/5)

  1. Thanks, Anders, The link wouldn't download for me. I'm speculating that perhaps they've updated the version number, because when I tried it without the version number, I was able to download it. Here's a link without the version number, in case anyone else has the same issue: https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/forests/forests-13-01004/article_deploy/forests-13-01004.pdf Very comprehensive--for me at least, it will require some head-scratching about the chemistry, etc.
  2. Not a bow guy, but yes. Often Loctite 410, a black, thickened super glue is used. If you are not a luthier or skilled woodworker, it might be best to bring it to a luthier for the repair. If you are skilled enough to want to undertake the repair, search this site for "loctite 410" to find a few tips.
  3. Blank face, My (amateur) understanding is that the “brick like” feature is a reliable indicator of pernambuco. Is that correct? The following closeup of a bow has both the brick like feature and some bright horizontal lines/flecks. A luthier I trust said it was pernambuco (he was not involving buying or selling the bow). What are your thoughts on the identifying features both in this pic and in general?
  4. This is cello, not violin, but cellist Clay Reude has done a few videos comparing the Frirsz (harp-ish) tailpiece with other "straight" tailpieces. In this case, I definitely hear a difference.
  5. Bow clearance is a big issue. They're why C bouts evolved on violin and viol family instruments. You could get around it by making the body tiny; the forearm and belly carve on an electric guitar could serve as a C bout alternative as long as the body is really small. You could also get around the clearance problem by using a taller bridge (generally not a problem with electric instruments), but it's questionable how the ergonomics would be. I would suggest making a mockup (a mockup is non-functional), no matter how crude, just to see what the bow clearance and general ergonomics would be like before committing to the project. You could use pine, or even cardboard for some of it, and you could save time by buying a cheap pre-made fingerboard (or maybe a local luthier would give you a junk one). Make the mockup the envisioned shape, add strings (even under barely enough tension to keep them in place) over a bridge proxy with the typical violin bridge top curvature, and pick it up and see how it feels to hold it with your LH, how it meets your shoulder/chin, and how the bow clears the body. Then build a testbed (an easily modifiable, possibly ugly, but basically functional version). Once you've mastered that, you could go ahead and build the actual instrument, which would be a good learning opportunity. Or, at that point, you could give the "tuned-up" testbed to a builder. Then they'd at least know a little bit more what you are wanting and what they're getting into. If you're paying for their time instead of by the job (many luthiers wouldn't touch such an open-ended job for a set price), you'll end up saving yourself a lot of money. It may be hard to find someone who will commit to making such a specific and untested design. I'd expect it to be costly, because even if you make the mockup and testbed, it won't be clear yet that all of your ideas will be feasible. A lot of experimentation, back-and-forth, and time (=$$$) will have to be spent just to finalize a design that will work. Building it yourself might turn out to be fun, and you could experiment to your heart's content without paying someone else by the hour.
  6. I agree with Melvin. This seems like it could possibly be a case of noticing “atypical structural detail A” and “unwanted musical effect X” and then assuming that A caused X. Correlation is not causation, as we all know. There are lots of red herrings in the musical instrument world — this could be one. I would guess that an unglued part is a likely culprit, as Melvin said. Unglued parts can cause all sorts of weird resonances and tonal problems, and the notes the OP mentioned are not in the typical wolf range.
  7. It’d be really hard to choose, but the one thing I’m pretty certain of is that the the older I get, the higher up the list go the magnifiers, light sources, and other visual aids.
  8. I’m no expert, but the rough quality of the woodworking is not a good sign.
  9. I guess you could plane it. It's pretty hard on tool edges, but sharpening should take care of that. As for letting it cure upside down, I'd think that most of the System Three stuff would run off; it's that thin. Not sure about the West System. It's an intriguing idea though. EDIT- mounting it horizontally on a rotisserie would probably give you the most even costing. If you already have one for a UV curing cabinet, it might be worth a try.
  10. In terms of System Three, I have used Clear Coat, but Mirror Coat is the most commonly used among electric bass luthiers I know. They both self-level, which might be a problem in a violin-family fingerboard, which has a much tighter radius than an electric bass fingerboard. You might have to put on either a bunch of thin coats or pour one very thick coat and sand forever (and I hate sanding epoxy excessively--the dust is bad for your lungs so use breathing protection). Here are a few threads about Mirror Coat: https://www.talkbass.com/threads/system-3-mirror-coat-epoxy-on-fretless-neck.882223/ https://www.talkbass.com/threads/epoxy-on-a-fretless-warmoth-neck-by-lewis-bass-and-guitar.710064/ I haven't done any measurements, but the West System seems more viscous, and thus might be better for a violin-family fingerboard, as it probably won't run to the edges as much as the System Three stuff would. You'd probably get a surface shape closer to your desired profile, rather than a flattish one that you'd have to sand forever. With West System, I use 105 resin with, more often than not, 206 hardener, to give a bit more working time. But 205 will work fine. With 205, you can give yourself more working time by applying it in a cooler space, or mix it in a flat plastic pan (take-out food container, etc), and place that on one of those thin flexible cooler gel packs; the cooler and more spread-out the epoxy, the longer the curing reaction will take. Even newly opened West System 105 with 205 or 206 will have a slight amber tint. Older hardener will have a stronger yellow tint. I still use it, and have had no problems with it. I don't tend to keep it for years and years though; I go through a fair amount of it. I'm not sure how much you'd notice the tint over ebony. They make a special clear hardener, 207, which I haven't used, but you could try that: https://www.westsystem.com/207-special-clear-hardener/ With either epoxy system, you could probably do several thin coats as long as you don't wait too long between coats; while the epoxy is not yet quite cured, I would think that the new coat and the old coat underneath should still cross-link, making one thicker coat. Neither system has exhibited amine blush in my usage; if you do get an amine blush with an epoxy, you'd have to remove the blush before the next coat, and the various coats might exhibit "witness lines" if you sand through them while attaining your final surface.
  11. In the fretless electric bass world, it is common to use either epoxy or water-thin CA glue to coat many of the wide variety of fingerboard woods that are used. I have coated bass fingerboards with System Three Mirror Coat epoxy, and also West System epoxy. Both worked well. After coating you sand down to a final surface using a radius block. With a thick enough finish, even a softer fingerboard wood should last pretty well. Keep in mind that electric bass strings, especially roundwounds, are much more abrasive than any violin, viola, or cello strings I have used, and are very heavy. So, I'd expect an epoxy coating on a violin family fingerboard to hold up pretty well. And if it does wear away after a time, you could easily recoat. I have used CA glue as a finish before, but never on a fingerboard, so I can't comment other than that the fumes are intense. When I use it in large quantities for other jobs, I wear an organic-rated respirator and swim goggles to keep it out of my nervous system, and I use ventilation. On a fretless bass, a low angle of departure for the stopped string is desirable; this causes a sitar-like interference between the string and the fingerboard called "mwah" that many fretless players like and indeed chase after. Think Jaco Pastorius. In my experience, an epoxy coated fingerboard will have more "mwah" than it did before coating. I mention this because it is possible that a very hard (harder than ebony) fingerboard could have an effect on tone, though I'd expect that effect to be less because of the greater angle of string departure from the fingerboard.
  12. There are two general ways to color nitrocellulose: pigments and dyes. Pigments are relatively large particles that, when used in large quantities, tend to obscure the underlying wood grain. A huge amount of pigment (as used in "toners") can practically turn into paint if you lay enough coats on. But pigments tend to be color-fast (they don't fade as much when exposed to light over time). Dyes are much smaller particles that are much more transparent, allowing the grain to show through. But they often fade over time with light exposure. Some newer dyes resist fading better over a period of decades, but I don't think any are as fade-resistant as many pigments. It's a trade-off. But if you only use a bit of pigment to tint your lacquer a bit, the grain will still show through pretty well. As always, try things on lots of scraps. Cover the half of the "finished" scraps with something light-fast, and leave them in direct sunlight for a few weeks or months. That's no substitute for decades, but it'll at least show you what combinations fade pretty quickly (assuming that longevity of appearance is important to you).
  13. I don't know anything about the tailpieces, but bakelite is pretty heavy….
  14. Just a guess at someone's thinking: As the pegbox wears and the peg holes enlarge, the string hole will move in progressively toward the far pegbox wall. Someone might have placed the holes that way so that the pegs could be used for as long as possible, and so that the pegbox could get by as long as possible before rebushing. Note--I'm not advocating for this practice….
  • Create New...